Torture Is Not an American Value

unfortunately for you, the legalities do in fact matter. also unfortunately for your POV is that you do not have all the specific facts and no matter how often you repeat your opinion, it does not make your opinion fact.

i guess you also don't believe that in america, people are presumed innocent until found guilty...

apparently the law is meaningless to you and you would rather have mob justice just because you feel you can ignore the law and form your own opinion....

Legalities matter in a debate board? Whose the judge?

What are you talking about presumed innocent and mob justice? Are you talking about Cheney and the inquisition boys? I didn't say anything about prosecuting them.

I am stating why IMO water boarding is torture.

ok, thanks for clarifying that...i thought we were discussing legalities as you kept bringing up the military tribunals as proof of their guilt...silly me for showing you wrong as to the tribunals

all you had to say was

i don't care about the law or facts, i am only talking my opinion and nothing else and i wouldn't have said anything further to you.
 
unfortunately for you, the legalities do in fact matter. also unfortunately for your POV is that you do not have all the specific facts and no matter how often you repeat your opinion, it does not make your opinion fact.

i guess you also don't believe that in america, people are presumed innocent until found guilty...

apparently the law is meaningless to you and you would rather have mob justice just because you feel you can ignore the law and form your own opinion....

Legalities matter in a debate board? Whose the judge?

What are you talking about presumed innocent and mob justice? Are you talking about Cheney and the inquisition boys? I didn't say anything about prosecuting them.

I am stating why IMO water boarding is torture.

ok, thanks for clarifying that...i thought we were discussing legalities as you kept bringing up the military tribunals as proof of their guilt...silly me for showing you wrong as to the tribunals

all you had to say was

i don't care about the law or facts, i am only talking my opinion and nothing else and i wouldn't have said anything further to you.

That wouldn't have been accurate. I do care about the facts. The fact is that the US Govt prosecuted waterboarding for the war crime of torture.

Whether that it legally binding or not on why the Inquisition boys is another matter. I admit I'm not a scholar on international martial or torture law. So maybe it doesn't have any precedence. I'd be surprised, however, if in considering whether waterboarding was torture a court did not consider the fact that folks were prosecuted by the US for that in WWII.
 
Last edited:
Legalities matter in a debate board? Whose the judge?

What are you talking about presumed innocent and mob justice? Are you talking about Cheney and the inquisition boys? I didn't say anything about prosecuting them.

I am stating why IMO water boarding is torture.

ok, thanks for clarifying that...i thought we were discussing legalities as you kept bringing up the military tribunals as proof of their guilt...silly me for showing you wrong as to the tribunals

all you had to say was

i don't care about the law or facts, i am only talking my opinion and nothing else and i wouldn't have said anything further to you.

That wouldn't have been accurate. I do care about the facts. The fact is that the US Govt prosecuted waterboarding for the war crime of torture.

yeah, and when i tell you that that fact is irrelevent and not binding in this situation, you then claim you don't care, all you care about is your opinion

you can't have it both ways
 
i guess you also don't believe that in america, people are presumed innocent until found guilty...

Never been accused of a crime you did not commit, have you? If you had, you would not make such a statement.

Immie

actually i have....

and i have worked with people who have

whats your point? are you saying the doctrine is wrong?

The doctrine is how we should be treating the accused, but that is not how the accused are treated. Although, maybe I should broaden that with the following statement. That is not how we treat people who are accused of certain crimes. Depending upon the crime and the "investigating Authority" some accused are treated as if they are guilty and they must prove their innocence rather than the other way around.

It all depends on how Politically Incorrect the "crime" is.

Immie
 
Last edited:
ok, thanks for clarifying that...i thought we were discussing legalities as you kept bringing up the military tribunals as proof of their guilt...silly me for showing you wrong as to the tribunals

all you had to say was

i don't care about the law or facts, i am only talking my opinion and nothing else and i wouldn't have said anything further to you.

That wouldn't have been accurate. I do care about the facts. The fact is that the US Govt prosecuted waterboarding for the war crime of torture.

yeah, and when i tell you that that fact is irrelevent and not binding in this situation, you then claim you don't care, all you care about is your opinion

you can't have it both ways

I never said the facts were irrelevant or I didn't care. I said semantic or legal technicalities were irrelevant.
 
Never been accused of a crime you did not commit, have you? If you had, you would not make such a statement.

Immie

actually i have....

and i have worked with people who have

whats your point? are you saying the doctrine is wrong?

The doctrine is how we should be treating the accused, but that is not how the accused are treated. Although, maybe I should broaden that with the following statement. That is not how we treat people who are accused of certain crimes. Depending upon the crime and the "investigating Authority" some accused are treated as if they are guilty and they must prove their innocence rather than the other way around.

It all depends on how Politically Incorrect the "crime" is.

Immie

you're right about that, but that is not going to stop me from saying that in america, you are presumed innocent until found guilty. whether people always abide by that belief is irrelevent to the truth of that axiom. it is said in virtually every single criminal case in the very beginning and the end.

thats like the people who say, america doesn't torture...and telling them, you wouldn't say that because americans have tortured
 
actually i have....

and i have worked with people who have

whats your point? are you saying the doctrine is wrong?

The doctrine is how we should be treating the accused, but that is not how the accused are treated. Although, maybe I should broaden that with the following statement. That is not how we treat people who are accused of certain crimes. Depending upon the crime and the "investigating Authority" some accused are treated as if they are guilty and they must prove their innocence rather than the other way around.

It all depends on how Politically Incorrect the "crime" is.

Immie

you're right about that, but that is not going to stop me from saying that in america, you are presumed innocent until found guilty. whether people always abide by that belief is irrelevent to the truth of that axiom. it is said in virtually every single criminal case in the very beginning and the end.

thats like the people who say, america doesn't torture...and telling them, you wouldn't say that because americans have tortured

Okay, I will concede that point.

Immie
 
The previous administration abandoned years of moral standings concerning torture. I believe that was one reason McCain lost. He was against and then he was for waterboarding. McCain prostituted his beliefs to pacify the GOP elite.
 
The previous administration abandoned years of moral standings concerning torture. I believe that was one reason McCain lost. He was against and then he was for waterboarding. McCain prostituted his beliefs to pacify the GOP elite.

mccain was for waterboarding? link....

i thought he was always against it
 
And again treaties currently signed effect POWS only. We have no POW's We have spies and saboteurs.

Geneva does not apply to such. Historically water boarding was the least spies and saboteurs could expect at the hands of the enemy. Had Washington laid hands on Benedict Arnold he would have been hung. Both British and American spies during the War of independence were hung the is how they have historically been dealt with.
 
If it worked for them, it will work for US. It's all about being too cowardly to keep our values.

Every schoolchild knows that Gen. George Washington made extraordinary efforts to protect America's civilian population from the ravages of war. Fewer Americans know that Revolutionary War leaders, including Washington and the Continental Congress, considered the decent treatment of enemy combatants to be one of the principal strategic preoccupations of the American Revolution.

"In 1776," wrote historian David Hackett Fischer in "Washington's Crossing," "American leaders believed it was not enough to win the war. They also had to win in a way that was consistent with the values of their society and the principles of their cause. One of their greatest achievements … was to manage the war in a manner that was true to the expanding humanitarian ideals of the American Revolution."

The fact that the patriots refused to abandon these principles, even in the dark times when the war seemed lost, when the enemy controlled our cities and our ragged army was barefoot and starving, credits the character of Washington and the founding fathers and puts to shame the conduct of America's present leadership.

Fischer writes that leaders in both the Continental Congress and the Continental Army resolved that the War of Independence would be conducted with a respect for human rights. This was all the more extraordinary because these courtesies were not reciprocated by King George's armies. Indeed, the British conducted a deliberate campaign of atrocities against American soldiers and civilians. While Americans extended quarter to combatants as a matter of right and treated their prisoners with humanity, British regulars and German mercenaries were threatened by their own officers with severe punishment if they showed mercy to a surrendering American soldier. Captured Americans were tortured, starved and cruelly maltreated aboard prison ships.

Washington decided to behave differently. After capturing 1,000 Hessians in the Battle of Trenton, he ordered that enemy prisoners be treated with the same rights for which our young nation was fighting. In an order covering prisoners taken in the Battle of Princeton, Washington wrote: "Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to Complain of our Copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren…. Provide everything necessary for them on the road."

John Adams argued that humane treatment of prisoners and deep concern for civilian populations not only reflected the American Revolution's highest ideals, they were a moral and strategic requirement. His thoughts on the subject, expressed in a 1777 letter to his wife, might make a profitable read for Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld as we endeavor to win hearts and minds in Iraq. Adams wrote: "I know of no policy, God is my witness, but this — Piety, Humanity and Honesty are the best Policy. Blasphemy, Cruelty and Villainy have prevailed and may again. But they won't prevail against America, in this Contest, because I find the more of them are employed, the less they succeed."

Even British military leaders involved in the atrocities recognized their negative effects on the overall war effort. In 1778, Col. Charles Stuart wrote to his father, the Earl of Bute: "Wherever our armies have marched, wherever they have encamped, every species of barbarity has been executed. We planted an irrevocable hatred wherever we went, which neither time nor measure will be able to eradicate."

In the end, our founding fathers not only protected our national values, they defeated a militarily superior enemy. Indeed, it was their disciplined adherence to those values that helped them win a hopeless struggle against the best soldiers in Europe.


For those who favor torture, you are................................

America's Anti-Torture Tradition

Edited to comply with copyright policy. ~ A-15

that was the old America....this is the new America baby !!!..embrace the change !

clowns to the left of me...jokers to the right.......

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLTqecGbdCc&feature=fvst[/ame]
 
Last edited:
Georgie didn't torture people?

I think you should ask the Mohawk nation about that before you get off that soapbox.

I know they are just injuns to you, but they do count as people.

Sullivan's 1779 campaign

Learn a little history before you spout off on what saints we were.
 
Last edited:
unfortunately for you, the legalities do in fact matter. also unfortunately for your POV is that you do not have all the specific facts and no matter how often you repeat your opinion, it does not make your opinion fact.

i guess you also don't believe that in america, people are presumed innocent until found guilty...

apparently the law is meaningless to you and you would rather have mob justice just because you feel you can ignore the law and form your own opinion....

Hmmm...Pot...Kettle...Black?
 
Georgie didn't torture people?

I think you should ask the Mohawk nation about that before you get off that soapbox.

I know they are just injuns to you, but they do count as people.

Sullivan's 1779 campaign

Learn a little history before you spout off on what saints we were.

Never mind that the prevailing opinion of the time held that native Americans were little more than untamed, sub-human savages. That's the first step in creating atrocities...De-humanizing the enemy. Thus any atrocity can be justified.
 
I find two things interesting.

1. That anyone still believes that torture is still a viable option in gaining accurate information.

2. That anyone believes anything Cheney says.
 
If it worked for them, it will work for US. It's all about being too cowardly to keep our values.

Every schoolchild knows that Gen. George Washington made extraordinary efforts to protect America's civilian population from the ravages of war. Fewer Americans know that Revolutionary War leaders, including Washington and the Continental Congress, considered the decent treatment of enemy combatants to be one of the principal strategic preoccupations of the American Revolution.

"In 1776," wrote historian David Hackett Fischer in "Washington's Crossing," "American leaders believed it was not enough to win the war. They also had to win in a way that was consistent with the values of their society and the principles of their cause. One of their greatest achievements … was to manage the war in a manner that was true to the expanding humanitarian ideals of the American Revolution."

The fact that the patriots refused to abandon these principles, even in the dark times when the war seemed lost, when the enemy controlled our cities and our ragged army was barefoot and starving, credits the character of Washington and the founding fathers and puts to shame the conduct of America's present leadership.

Fischer writes that leaders in both the Continental Congress and the Continental Army resolved that the War of Independence would be conducted with a respect for human rights. This was all the more extraordinary because these courtesies were not reciprocated by King George's armies. Indeed, the British conducted a deliberate campaign of atrocities against American soldiers and civilians. While Americans extended quarter to combatants as a matter of right and treated their prisoners with humanity, British regulars and German mercenaries were threatened by their own officers with severe punishment if they showed mercy to a surrendering American soldier. Captured Americans were tortured, starved and cruelly maltreated aboard prison ships.

Washington decided to behave differently. After capturing 1,000 Hessians in the Battle of Trenton, he ordered that enemy prisoners be treated with the same rights for which our young nation was fighting. In an order covering prisoners taken in the Battle of Princeton, Washington wrote: "Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to Complain of our Copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren…. Provide everything necessary for them on the road."

John Adams argued that humane treatment of prisoners and deep concern for civilian populations not only reflected the American Revolution's highest ideals, they were a moral and strategic requirement. His thoughts on the subject, expressed in a 1777 letter to his wife, might make a profitable read for Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld as we endeavor to win hearts and minds in Iraq. Adams wrote: "I know of no policy, God is my witness, but this — Piety, Humanity and Honesty are the best Policy. Blasphemy, Cruelty and Villainy have prevailed and may again. But they won't prevail against America, in this Contest, because I find the more of them are employed, the less they succeed."

Even British military leaders involved in the atrocities recognized their negative effects on the overall war effort. In 1778, Col. Charles Stuart wrote to his father, the Earl of Bute: "Wherever our armies have marched, wherever they have encamped, every species of barbarity has been executed. We planted an irrevocable hatred wherever we went, which neither time nor measure will be able to eradicate."

In the end, our founding fathers not only protected our national values, they defeated a militarily superior enemy. Indeed, it was their disciplined adherence to those values that helped them win a hopeless struggle against the best soldiers in Europe.


For those who favor torture, you are................................

America's Anti-Torture Tradition

Edited to comply with copyright policy. ~ A-15

*yawn*

Define torture. Oh yeah ... your threads.:eusa_eh:
 
I find two things interesting.

1. That anyone still believes that torture is still a viable option in gaining accurate information.

2. That anyone believes anything Cheney says.

The Bill Press Show had some guy on who seemed to be an expert on the details of what actually happened. He said, "The Republicans were smart to include the Democratic leadership in all the briefings because they knew that Pelosi/They didn't have the political or moral will to stand up to them and blow the wistle. So that is why Pelosi took impeachment off the table.

Remember, the GOP were trying to paint the Dems as soft on terror, weak on defense and they were saying that if the Democrats win, we will be hit again by terrorists?

The guy also said that the world is scratching its collective head wondering why we're not prosecuting now. We know that waterboarding is torture, we know that torture is a crime, and we know that the Bush team gave the order.

And we can't accept the CIA's excuse that they were just following orders.

And we would be honoring a law or treaty against torture that RONALD REAGAN himself signed, so Republicans can not complain if people are prosecuted.

I myself want to give everyone but the Bush team a free pass. Fuck prosecuting the pawns.

Anyways, don't expect the Dems to do anything about this because Pelosi is involved. :eusa_shhh:
 
Last edited:
If it worked for them, it will work for US. It's all about being too cowardly to keep our values.

Every schoolchild knows that Gen. George Washington made extraordinary efforts to protect America's civilian population from the ravages of war. Fewer Americans know that Revolutionary War leaders, including Washington and the Continental Congress, considered the decent treatment of enemy combatants to be one of the principal strategic preoccupations of the American Revolution.

"In 1776," wrote historian David Hackett Fischer in "Washington's Crossing," "American leaders believed it was not enough to win the war. They also had to win in a way that was consistent with the values of their society and the principles of their cause. One of their greatest achievements … was to manage the war in a manner that was true to the expanding humanitarian ideals of the American Revolution."

The fact that the patriots refused to abandon these principles, even in the dark times when the war seemed lost, when the enemy controlled our cities and our ragged army was barefoot and starving, credits the character of Washington and the founding fathers and puts to shame the conduct of America's present leadership.

Fischer writes that leaders in both the Continental Congress and the Continental Army resolved that the War of Independence would be conducted with a respect for human rights. This was all the more extraordinary because these courtesies were not reciprocated by King George's armies. Indeed, the British conducted a deliberate campaign of atrocities against American soldiers and civilians. While Americans extended quarter to combatants as a matter of right and treated their prisoners with humanity, British regulars and German mercenaries were threatened by their own officers with severe punishment if they showed mercy to a surrendering American soldier. Captured Americans were tortured, starved and cruelly maltreated aboard prison ships.

Washington decided to behave differently. After capturing 1,000 Hessians in the Battle of Trenton, he ordered that enemy prisoners be treated with the same rights for which our young nation was fighting. In an order covering prisoners taken in the Battle of Princeton, Washington wrote: "Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to Complain of our Copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren…. Provide everything necessary for them on the road."

John Adams argued that humane treatment of prisoners and deep concern for civilian populations not only reflected the American Revolution's highest ideals, they were a moral and strategic requirement. His thoughts on the subject, expressed in a 1777 letter to his wife, might make a profitable read for Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld as we endeavor to win hearts and minds in Iraq. Adams wrote: "I know of no policy, God is my witness, but this — Piety, Humanity and Honesty are the best Policy. Blasphemy, Cruelty and Villainy have prevailed and may again. But they won't prevail against America, in this Contest, because I find the more of them are employed, the less they succeed."

Even British military leaders involved in the atrocities recognized their negative effects on the overall war effort. In 1778, Col. Charles Stuart wrote to his father, the Earl of Bute: "Wherever our armies have marched, wherever they have encamped, every species of barbarity has been executed. We planted an irrevocable hatred wherever we went, which neither time nor measure will be able to eradicate."

In the end, our founding fathers not only protected our national values, they defeated a militarily superior enemy. Indeed, it was their disciplined adherence to those values that helped them win a hopeless struggle against the best soldiers in Europe.


For those who favor torture, you are................................

America's Anti-Torture Tradition

Edited to comply with copyright policy. ~ A-15

*yawn*

Define torture. Oh yeah ... your threads.:eusa_eh:

Ten Terrible Truths About The CIA Torture Memos (Part One) | Andy Worthington

Did you know all this? Prosecute you too. :lol:
 

Forum List

Back
Top