Page 62 of 99 FirstFirst ... 1252606162636472 ... LastLast
Results 611 to 620 of 982

Thread: Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

  1. #611
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,868

    re: Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

    Quote Originally Posted by CMPancake View Post
    The simulation of drowning is torture. Sorry to burst your bubble, chief.
    John Yoo, who is now a law professor at UC Berkeley, and Jay Bybee, who last I heard was a California appeals court judge, studied that very question in great detail at the request of the Defense Dept. when they worked in the Justice Dept.'s Office of Legal Counsel. Ten or so enhanced interrogation techniques had been proposed for possible use on any detained members of Al Qaeda or the Taliban who had been trained to resist conventional interrogation, and the people who would be using them wanted to be sure they were legitimate. Memos on this issue by Yoo, Bybee, and other legal experts have been published online, and I have read them carefully. They analyzed every applicable law against torture and concluded that none of the enhanced interrogation techniques that had been proposed--included the waterboarding procedure--violated any of them.

    Torture was not traditionally a separate crime like burglary, arson, etc. The main U.S. statute on it, section 2340 of the U.S. Code, implements those provisions of the 1994 Convention Against Torture that U.S. negotiators had agreed to and the Senate had ratified. Because this statute only dates from the mid-1990's, there was no case law interpreting it for Yoo, Bybee, and the others who studied the question to go by. But it is revealing that the Justice Dept. itself argued in a case before the Sixth Circuit that, in a different context, that conditions like those the jihadists in question were exposed to were not torture under U.S. law.

    I will try to find the archived documents on this subject, which run into the thousands of pages, and post the link. They are not easy reading, but I think they are a valuable antidote to the propaganda the jihadists' defenders like to spread. Sorry to burst your bubble, but exhaustive, specific, well-reasoned legal research by highly skilled analysts carries a lot more weight with me than offhand cracks by people who don't understand the first thing about the issues.

  2. #612
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,868

    re: Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    The thing that procedure disregards is that leaders must lead. That requires taking the others with you.
    I agree. Mr. B. Hussein Obama has never explained to the American people why he wanted to give the mastermind of 9/11 a trial in federal court just like a U.S. citizen would receive, despite the fact the man had no legal right whatever to any such trial.

  3. #613
    Pragmatic Idealist
    upsideguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. High
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,151

    re: Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    They are unlawful combatants. They are not protected by the Geneva Conventions. They are not prisoners of war in the classic sense as they did not wear uniforms, have badges of rank nor a country. They should be wrung dry of any useful information and then tried, convicted and executed.
    Your moral flexibility is impressive!

  4. #614
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,869

    re: Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    John Yoo, who is now a law professor at UC Berkeley, and Jay Bybee, who last I heard was a California appeals court judge, studied that very question in great detail at the request of the Defense Dept. when they worked in the Justice Dept.'s Office of Legal Counsel. Ten or so enhanced interrogation techniques had been proposed for possible use on any detained members of Al Qaeda or the Taliban who had been trained to resist conventional interrogation, and the people who would be using them wanted to be sure they were legitimate. Memos on this issue by Yoo, Bybee, and other legal experts have been published online, and I have read them carefully. They analyzed every applicable law against torture and concluded that none of the enhanced interrogation techniques that had been proposed--included the waterboarding procedure--violated any of them.

    Torture was not traditionally a separate crime like burglary, arson, etc. The main U.S. statute on it, section 2340 of the U.S. Code, implements those provisions of the 1994 Convention Against Torture that U.S. negotiators had agreed to and the Senate had ratified. Because this statute only dates from the mid-1990's, there was no case law interpreting it for Yoo, Bybee, and the others who studied the question to go by. But it is revealing that the Justice Dept. itself argued in a case before the Sixth Circuit that, in a different context, that conditions like those the jihadists in question were exposed to were not torture under U.S. law.

    I will try to find the archived documents on this subject, which run into the thousands of pages, and post the link. They are not easy reading, but I think they are a valuable antidote to the propaganda the jihadists' defenders like to spread. Sorry to burst your bubble, but exhaustive, specific, well-reasoned legal research by highly skilled analysts carries a lot more weight with me than offhand cracks by people who don't understand the first thing about the issues.
    Well, gosh, if the people asked to find a legal rationale for torture somehow managed to place waterboarding in a legal not-torture box, then that's all that need be said. Why are we wasting time talking about moral and ethical issues at all, when the lawyers, hired by the people who wanted to torture detainees, found that, yes, you can do so, have spoken.

    You've got to be joking citing those two as evidence for anything.

    And I'll just note that you're all too willing to stridently disregard reasoned legal opinions of SC justices, but only when they don't come to conclusions you like, so I have no idea why you think this kind of argument is persuasive, especially in this context. Take any abuse of civil liberties or act of evil by ANY government. Almost by definition the abuse was placed into a box that made it "legal" at the time and place. We could quickly list 100 examples, here and abroad of "legal' but evil or morally repugnant acts.

    Bottom line is anyone with a loved one subjected to what Yoo and Bybee concluded was legal not-torture is lying or very adept at self delusion if they say they'd conclude their loved one was subjected to legitimate interrogation techniques and that the interrogators would be justified in relying on a single admission by them during or after they were tortured/subjected to EIT. If you were waterboarded and believed it would stop the waterboarding, you and me and everyone here would admit to ANYTHING - that you were a space alien from another planet, a secret spy for Putin, a FDR's reincarnated dog, whatever. That's what torture does. You don't get those kinds of guaranteed results from any kind of legitimate "interrogation."
    Last edited by JasperL; 12-14-14 at 01:59 PM.

  5. #615
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:41 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,424

    re: Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

    Quote Originally Posted by Amadeus View Post
    I like how a torture advocate tries to get the moral outrage high ground.
    I always enjoy people that cannot deal with complicated concepts and therefore cling to simplistically used words instead of trying to say things as they are.

  6. #616
    Chews the Cud
    Amadeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Benghazi
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,081

    re: Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    I always enjoy people that cannot deal with complicated concepts and therefore cling to simplistically used words instead of trying to say things as they are.
    Torture is a pretty simple concept. You seem unable to cope with the definition, so you're trying desperately to pass it off as something else (like a true Cheney disciple), while admonishing others for calling it what it is -- torture.

  7. #617
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:41 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,424

    re: Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    I agree. Mr. B. Hussein Obama has never explained to the American people why he wanted to give the mastermind of 9/11 a trial in federal court just like a U.S. citizen would receive, despite the fact the man had no legal right whatever to any such trial.
    If you bring him to court it will need robust evidence from other than enhanced interrogation.

  8. #618
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    re: Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    John Yoo, who is now a law professor at UC Berkeley, and Jay Bybee, who last I heard was a California appeals court judge, studied that very question in great detail at the request of the Defense Dept. when they worked in the Justice Dept.'s Office of Legal Counsel. Ten or so enhanced interrogation techniques had been proposed for possible use on any detained members of Al Qaeda or the Taliban who had been trained to resist conventional interrogation, and the people who would be using them wanted to be sure they were legitimate. Memos on this issue by Yoo, Bybee, and other legal experts have been published online, and I have read them carefully. They analyzed every applicable law against torture and concluded that none of the enhanced interrogation techniques that had been proposed--included the waterboarding procedure--violated any of them.

    Torture was not traditionally a separate crime like burglary, arson, etc. The main U.S. statute on it, section 2340 of the U.S. Code, implements those provisions of the 1994 Convention Against Torture that U.S. negotiators had agreed to and the Senate had ratified. Because this statute only dates from the mid-1990's, there was no case law interpreting it for Yoo, Bybee, and the others who studied the question to go by. But it is revealing that the Justice Dept. itself argued in a case before the Sixth Circuit that, in a different context, that conditions like those the jihadists in question were exposed to were not torture under U.S. law.

    I will try to find the archived documents on this subject, which run into the thousands of pages, and post the link. They are not easy reading, but I think they are a valuable antidote to the propaganda the jihadists' defenders like to spread. Sorry to burst your bubble, but exhaustive, specific, well-reasoned legal research by highly skilled analysts carries a lot more weight with me than offhand cracks by people who don't understand the first thing about the issues.
    You are using intelligence and facts against emotion and self loathing. It's an uphill battle.

  9. #619
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,343

    re: Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Just so I'm clear, this is how we're counting this.

    If I hit you in the face, wait a minute, hit you again, and do that 36 times in one day, then that counts as ONE? But if I hit you in the face 17 times on Monday, and 18 times on Tuesday, that counts as TWO in right wing land. That's great.

    And if Person A gets hit 1 time on Monday, and person B gets hit 35 times on Monday, A and B have each been beaten only once! I am pretty sure B will be surprised his treatment counts on the "Right Wing 'We do NOT torture'" scale the same as what A got, after all he was struck 35 times versus only once....
    Well, first I'd love to see you try to hit me once much less 35 times...Second, that is a different situation. There is an agenda to counting every time water was spilled in the room as a separate time. And that is to demonize the CIA, when all they were doing in acting on the direct intent, INCLUDING Feinstein, who told them they were legal in doing such...Now they want their heads on pikes....

    What do you think will happen the next time, and there will be a next time, that America is attacked, and a CIA interrogator is told to get information from someone...?
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  10. #620
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,869

    re: Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    I just wanted to know, what I was talking about and had it done to me a little harsher than proposed in the legal brief. We do not want the police treating citizens suspected of crimes that way. But to call it torture in that relatively light form is absurd, makes mock of the meaning of the word and especially of the victims of the real thing.
    Several things - what makes something 'torture' versus not-torture?

    You went through it in a very controlled environment, done to you by fellow soldiers or other friendlies. I'm unclear why that you lived through it and have by your account not suffered any long term harmful effects is a good measuring stick. Just as an example - thousands at least police officers have been tased as part of their training, and they lived through if fine, I'm sure it was painful or unpleasant. But it seems obvious that if a suspect was in a room being interrogated at the police department, and was tased 183 times over five sessions, suffered induced hypothermia, was forced to stand in their cell for hours or days with their hands shackled over their head, during questioning, we'd conclude that he or she was tortured or we're great at self delusion.

    So I'll accept you have an informed opinion on it, but you can't say it's "absurd" for e.g. those who have also gone through it, in fact designed the program and participated in hundreds of waterboarding sessions, to conclude it is obviously torture. This person's opinion is more informed by experience than yours and considers how the 'technique' affected hundreds of individuals. And it's consistent with how we've labeled the technique for a century or so when our personnel haven't been doing it with the blessing of our government, and consistent with the views of those who endured the technique when done to them by our enemies.

Page 62 of 99 FirstFirst ... 1252606162636472 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •