Bullypulpit
Senior Member
<center><h1><a href=http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/050214fa_fact6>Outsourcing Torure</a></h1></center>
<blockquote><center><b>Article 3</b></center>
1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. - <b>CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE</b></blockquote>
"Extaordinary rendition"...a polite euphemism for transporting detainees to third party nations which, by the way, are neither signatory nor parties to any treaty prohibiting torture. A favorite destination is Syria. The act of transporting persons to such nations for the purpose of torture is a violation of the UN Convention Against Torture. Now, I'm sure some sick bastard will say that the US is under no obligation to adhere to the provision of the Convention, and this is true since the US is only signatory to the Convention and has not, much to our shame, ratified the it. While not legally bound to honor the provisions of the Convention, as signatory to it, the US is <b>MORALLY</b> obligated to honor its provisions. You know...The moral issue was a big one for the Republicans in 2004. But hey, they were more concerned with keeping same-gender couples from getting married than from preventing some rag-head from being tortured. We gotta keep our priorities straight...Right?
Under the "Foreign Affairs Reform and Resturucturing Act of 1998", however, This activity is a violation of US law. Yet we now have as the Attorney General of the United States a man who worked to justify such activities, and as President we have a man who has sanctions these activities. These activities demand the appointment of a special prosecutor and, if sufficient grounds are found, the trial and impeachment of all who aided and abetted this violation of US law, international treaties and human decency.
For further information on this issue, I am providing the following links:
http://www.aclu.org/ImmigrantsRights/ImmigrantsRights.cfm?ID=16165&c=95
http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/050214fa_fact6 (the same link as in the header if it shouldn't work)
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/rl32276.pdf
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html
<blockquote><center><b>Article 3</b></center>
1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. - <b>CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE</b></blockquote>
"Extaordinary rendition"...a polite euphemism for transporting detainees to third party nations which, by the way, are neither signatory nor parties to any treaty prohibiting torture. A favorite destination is Syria. The act of transporting persons to such nations for the purpose of torture is a violation of the UN Convention Against Torture. Now, I'm sure some sick bastard will say that the US is under no obligation to adhere to the provision of the Convention, and this is true since the US is only signatory to the Convention and has not, much to our shame, ratified the it. While not legally bound to honor the provisions of the Convention, as signatory to it, the US is <b>MORALLY</b> obligated to honor its provisions. You know...The moral issue was a big one for the Republicans in 2004. But hey, they were more concerned with keeping same-gender couples from getting married than from preventing some rag-head from being tortured. We gotta keep our priorities straight...Right?
Under the "Foreign Affairs Reform and Resturucturing Act of 1998", however, This activity is a violation of US law. Yet we now have as the Attorney General of the United States a man who worked to justify such activities, and as President we have a man who has sanctions these activities. These activities demand the appointment of a special prosecutor and, if sufficient grounds are found, the trial and impeachment of all who aided and abetted this violation of US law, international treaties and human decency.
For further information on this issue, I am providing the following links:
http://www.aclu.org/ImmigrantsRights/ImmigrantsRights.cfm?ID=16165&c=95
http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/050214fa_fact6 (the same link as in the header if it shouldn't work)
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/rl32276.pdf
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html