Bob Barr At CPAC: 'How Would You Like To Be Waterboarded?'

[Cal]

Bob Barr At CPAC: 'How Would You Like To Be Waterboarded?'

"There is nothing magical about a military tribunal," Barr said, as boos from the audience began cascading around him. "They don't have, necessarily, better lawyers than in a civilian sector. I think I have a lot more faith in our U.S. attorneys who are non political, than my colleagues on the other side of this debate do. We can try them. We should try them. That is precisely... what our law provides for. And if next time we are faced with a situation we say: 'Oh, you know, we want to have them go to the military. Let them torture them for a while. It's not enhanced interrogation techniques. Waterboarding is torture. How would you like to be waterboarded? Try that!"

Needless to say, Barr was alone with his sentiments. Following him on the dais was Viet Dinh, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and one of the authors of the USA Patriot Act.

Thoughts?

 

[L.K.Eder]

i think CPAC is a steady stream of hilarious entertainment.

 

[blu]

MAYBE YOU SHOULDN'T CRASH PLANES INTO BUILDINGS THEN!!!!!1!! one one one!!!

 

[MIPS]

Bob Barr At CPAC: 'How Would You Like To Be Waterboarded?'
"There is nothing magical about a military tribunal," Barr said, as boos from the audience began cascading around him. "They don't have, necessarily, better lawyers than in a civilian sector. I think I have a lot more faith in our U.S. attorneys who are non political, than my colleagues on the other side of this debate do. We can try them. We should try them. That is precisely... what our law provides for. And if next time we are faced with a situation we say: 'Oh, you know, we want to have them go to the military. Let them torture them for a while. It's not enhanced interrogation techniques. Waterboarding is torture. How would you like to be waterboarded? Try that!"

Needless to say, Barr was alone with his sentiments. Following him on the dais was Viet Dinh, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and one of the authors of the USA Patriot Act.

I agree with Bob Barr, water boarding IS torture, no if ands or pleasant sounding phrases about it.

However I disagree with his position regarding military tribunals, as enemy combatants being examined for acts of war it is only right and appropriate that these people be tried as such which means by the military.

It's a bit disappointing to read that CPAC gave such an discourteous listening to Mr. Barr's points of view since I have seen a putting aside of differences between traditional conservatives and libertarians over the past year and more of a willingness to focus on issues we agree on rather on those that we disagree on. The description of "as boos from the audience began cascading around him." is needless to say a bit discouraging.

 

[B L Zeebub]

I'm surprised the Japanese have not used it in a game show

 

[oreo]

Bob Barr At CPAC: 'How Would You Like To Be Waterboarded?'

"There is nothing magical about a military tribunal," Barr said, as boos from the audience began cascading around him. "They don't have, necessarily, better lawyers than in a civilian sector. I think I have a lot more faith in our U.S. attorneys who are non political, than my colleagues on the other side of this debate do. We can try them. We should try them. That is precisely... what our law provides for. And if next time we are faced with a situation we say: 'Oh, you know, we want to have them go to the military. Let them torture them for a while. It's not enhanced interrogation techniques. Waterboarding is torture. How would you like to be waterboarded? Try that!"

Needless to say, Barr was alone with his sentiments. Following him on the dais was Viet Dinh, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and one of the authors of the USA Patriot Act.

Thoughts?

Who in the heck is Bob Barr? Of course no one "wants" to be waterboarded. I am not a terrorist--so I would guess that my chances of being waterboarded are ZERO to NONE.-- When we have captured a high level operative -- like the mastermind of 9/11--who is reluctant to talk--I have no problem what-so-ever---getting his head wet to get information that will save other innocent lives.

As far as civilian courts. Why should the American taxpayer get stuck with a bill--defending terrorists--When a military tribunal would be much cheaper. Yes there are lawyers in the military.

Again--Bob Barr wants to treat foreign terrorists that try to massacre 100's of innocent American civilians--as some kind of American criminal instead of an enemy combatant.

"A terrorist will always seek the least path of resistance."

 

[MIPS]

Bob Barr At CPAC: 'How Would You Like To Be Waterboarded?'

"There is nothing magical about a military tribunal," Barr said, as boos from the audience began cascading around him. "They don't have, necessarily, better lawyers than in a civilian sector. I think I have a lot more faith in our U.S. attorneys who are non political, than my colleagues on the other side of this debate do. We can try them. We should try them. That is precisely... what our law provides for. And if next time we are faced with a situation we say: 'Oh, you know, we want to have them go to the military. Let them torture them for a while. It's not enhanced interrogation techniques. Waterboarding is torture. How would you like to be waterboarded? Try that!"

Needless to say, Barr was alone with his sentiments. Following him on the dais was Viet Dinh, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and one of the authors of the USA Patriot Act.

Thoughts?

Who in the heck is Bob Barr? Of course no one "wants" to be waterboarded. I am not a terrorist--so I would guess that my chances of being waterboarded are ZERO to NONE.--

As far as civilian courts. Why should the American taxpayer get stuck with a bill--defending terrorists--When a military tribunal would be much cheaper. Yes there are lawyers in the military.

Again--Bob Barr wants to treat foreign terrorists that try to massacre 100's of innocent American civilians--as some kind of American criminal instead of an enemy combatant.

"A terrorist will always seek the least path of resistance."

Bob Barr, former Federal Prosecutor & Republican Congressman (U.S. House) from Georgia, Libertarian Party Presidential Nominee in 2008.

IMHO From a philosophical standpoint he's sort of a cross between a traditional conservative and a libertarian.

 

[rightwinger]

Bob Barr At CPAC: 'How Would You Like To Be Waterboarded?'
"There is nothing magical about a military tribunal," Barr said, as boos from the audience began cascading around him. "They don't have, necessarily, better lawyers than in a civilian sector. I think I have a lot more faith in our U.S. attorneys who are non political, than my colleagues on the other side of this debate do. We can try them. We should try them. That is precisely... what our law provides for. And if next time we are faced with a situation we say: 'Oh, you know, we want to have them go to the military. Let them torture them for a while. It's not enhanced interrogation techniques. Waterboarding is torture. How would you like to be waterboarded? Try that!"

Needless to say, Barr was alone with his sentiments. Following him on the dais was Viet Dinh, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and one of the authors of the USA Patriot Act.

I agree with Bob Barr, water boarding IS torture, no if ands or pleasant sounding phrases about it.

However I disagree with his position regarding military tribunals, as enemy combatants being examined for acts of war it is only right and appropriate that these people be tried as such which means by the military.

It's a bit disappointing to read that CPAC gave such an discourteous listening to Mr. Barr's points of view since I have seen a putting aside of differences between traditional conservatives and libertarians over the past year and more of a willingness to focus on issues we agree on rather on those that we disagree on. The description of "as boos from the audience began cascading around him." is needless to say a bit discouraging.

I think there is a misconception about military tribunals. They are not the kangaroo courts giving automatic convictions like many think. In many ways, military courts can be more lenient than civilian courts. Defendands still have rights, they can still claim evidence was obtained by torture and have it thrown out

 

[Gadawg73]

I know Bob Barr well. Barr stood up to the religous kooks at the Georgia 1988 state convention when the Christian Coalition tried to take over our convention and put their God candidate Pat Robertson in. Bush won the state and had the most delegates but the Christian Coalition tried to steal it from us. Barr led the fight against them.
I supported Barr in the last election as the Libertarian candidate.
Barr is completely right.
Military tribunals are not courts, they are tribunals. No jury anywhere.
Credit CPAC for having Barr. No liberal organization would allow someone with that difference of opinion speak near any of their meetings.

 

[Polk]

Noting where he was, I'm shocked Barr wasn't treated to a demo for daring to mention that.

 

[mudwhistle]

Bob Barr At CPAC: 'How Would You Like To Be Waterboarded?'

"There is nothing magical about a military tribunal," Barr said, as boos from the audience began cascading around him. "They don't have, necessarily, better lawyers than in a civilian sector. I think I have a lot more faith in our U.S. attorneys who are non political, than my colleagues on the other side of this debate do. We can try them. We should try them. That is precisely... what our law provides for. And if next time we are faced with a situation we say: 'Oh, you know, we want to have them go to the military. Let them torture them for a while. It's not enhanced interrogation techniques. Waterboarding is torture. How would you like to be waterboarded? Try that!"

Needless to say, Barr was alone with his sentiments. Following him on the dais was Viet Dinh, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and one of the authors of the USA Patriot Act.

Thoughts?

Bob Barr is a faggot. That's my thoughts.

 

[rdean]

Now why didn't they set up a "water-boarding booth" at CPAC. Then Republicans could take that ride themselves to "prove" to the American public, once and for all, that water-boarding is not torture.

I think they missed a real opportunity.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Bob Barr At CPAC: 'How Would You Like To Be Waterboarded?'


Thoughts?

Who in the heck is Bob Barr? Of course no one "wants" to be waterboarded. I am not a terrorist--so I would guess that my chances of being waterboarded are ZERO to NONE.--

As far as civilian courts. Why should the American taxpayer get stuck with a bill--defending terrorists--When a military tribunal would be much cheaper. Yes there are lawyers in the military.

Again--Bob Barr wants to treat foreign terrorists that try to massacre 100's of innocent American civilians--as some kind of American criminal instead of an enemy combatant.

"A terrorist will always seek the least path of resistance."

Bob Barr, former Federal Prosecutor & Republican Congressman (U.S. House) from Georgia, Libertarian Party Presidential Nominee in 2008.

IMHO From a philosophical standpoint he's sort of a cross between a traditional conservative and a libertarian.

So it was his Libertarian side which supported (encouraged? Demanded?) his (first? second?) wife get an abortion? And his conservative side which persecuted (not prosectued) Clinton? And his Libertarian side which cheated on wife number two (with current wife number 3)?
I'm confused. Is hypocrisy a conservative value, or a Libertarian value?

 

[CMike]

Bob Barr is wrong

1) In a civilian court, all sides are entitled to all information. That is not possible in an intelligence war involving terrorism. Either the terrorist and his lawyers getting the information compromises national security or if they don't get that information they can't have a fair trial.

2) If a terrorist is caught Iin raq how are you supposed to get witnesses? Subpoena his cave mates from Iraq?

As Oreo said I agree who wants to be waterboarded? I don't want to be waterboarded? I also don't want to spend time in a prison.

However, in the waterboarding that was done only on 3 people, it was done because all other measures failed, and because it was needed to stop terrorist attacks.

It successfully stopped two: 1) A plane crashing into a Los Angeles Building and 2) A "dirty bomb" being built and exploding in Washington, D.C.

Also the waterboarding done to these terrorists was a lot milder than the waterboarding done to some of our CIA personnel during their training.

In the training the subject is completely immersed and the temp is below 41 degrees F

In the waterboarding done to the 3 terrorists, the subects were splashed with water, and the temp was never below 41 degrees F.

If they didn't want to be waterboarded they could have given the information required to stop the terrorist attacks, before it got to that point.

Instead when asked about terrorist attacks, they answered ominously "soon, you will know".

 

[rdean]

Bob Barr is wrong

1) In a civilian court, all sides are entitled to all information. That is not possible in an intelligence war involving terrorism. Either the terrorist and his lawyers getting the information compromises national security or if they don't get that information they can't have a fair trial.

2) If a terrorist is caught Iin raq how are you supposed to get witnesses? Subpoena his cave mates from Iraq?

As Oreo said I agree who wants to be waterboarded? I don't want to be waterboarded? I also don't want to spend time in a prison.

However, in the waterboarding that was done only on 3 people, it was done because all other measures failed, and because it was needed to stop terrorist attacks.

It successfully stopped two: 1) A plane crashing into a Los Angeles Building and 2) A "dirty bomb" being built and exploding in Washington, D.C.

Also the waterboarding done to these terrorists was a lot milder than the waterboarding done to some of our CIA personnel during their training.

In the training the subject is completely immersed and the temp is below 41 degrees F

In the waterboarding done to the 3 terrorists, the subects were splashed with water, and the temp was never below 41 degrees F.

If they didn't want to be waterboarded they could have given the information required to stop the terrorist attacks, before it got to that point.

Instead when asked about terrorist attacks, they answered ominously "soon, you will know".

links?

 

[RadiomanATL]

We need more conservatives like Bob Barr.

And less like Pat Robertson.

 

[CMike]

Bob Barr is wrong

1) In a civilian court, all sides are entitled to all information. That is not possible in an intelligence war involving terrorism. Either the terrorist and his lawyers getting the information compromises national security or if they don't get that information they can't have a fair trial.

2) If a terrorist is caught Iin raq how are you supposed to get witnesses? Subpoena his cave mates from Iraq?

As Oreo said I agree who wants to be waterboarded? I don't want to be waterboarded? I also don't want to spend time in a prison.

However, in the waterboarding that was done only on 3 people, it was done because all other measures failed, and because it was needed to stop terrorist attacks.

It successfully stopped two: 1) A plane crashing into a Los Angeles Building and 2) A "dirty bomb" being built and exploding in Washington, D.C.

Also the waterboarding done to these terrorists was a lot milder than the waterboarding done to some of our CIA personnel during their training.

In the training the subject is completely immersed and the temp is below 41 degrees F

In the waterboarding done to the 3 terrorists, the subects were splashed with water, and the temp was never below 41 degrees F.

If they didn't want to be waterboarded they could have given the information required to stop the terrorist attacks, before it got to that point.

Instead when asked about terrorist attacks, they answered ominously "soon, you will know".

links?

http://luxmedia.vo.llnwd.net/o10/clients/aclu/olc_05302005_bradbury.pdf

 

[Darkwind]

Bob Barr At CPAC: 'How Would You Like To Be Waterboarded?'

"There is nothing magical about a military tribunal," Barr said, as boos from the audience began cascading around him. "They don't have, necessarily, better lawyers than in a civilian sector. I think I have a lot more faith in our U.S. attorneys who are non political, than my colleagues on the other side of this debate do. We can try them. We should try them. That is precisely... what our law provides for. And if next time we are faced with a situation we say: 'Oh, you know, we want to have them go to the military. Let them torture them for a while. It's not enhanced interrogation techniques. Waterboarding is torture. How would you like to be waterboarded? Try that!"

Needless to say, Barr was alone with his sentiments. Following him on the dais was Viet Dinh, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and one of the authors of the USA Patriot Act.

Thoughts?

Non political US Attorneys?

Get back to Me when you find one of those.

 

[CMike]

We need more conservatives like Bob Barr.

And less like Pat Robertson.

Who is the "we"?

 

[RadiomanATL]

We need more conservatives like Bob Barr.

And less like Pat Robertson.

Who is the "we"?

Conservatives.