Page 30 of 31 FirstFirst ... 2028293031 LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 301

Thread: Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

  1. #291
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    There are people being held at Guantanamo Bay who were NOT captured on a battlefield holding weapons. In fact, there have been people held at Guantanamo Bay who were completely innocent.
    You must wait until you get to the part where I say there are gray areas.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Interesting. And did the prisoners have a chance to prove their innocence?
    No, getting caught on the battlefield holding a weapon pretty much eliminates the need for a trial, since the purpose of a trial is merely to establish guilt and innocence. Since that one fact makes them guilty, off the to tank and the cloth and the pitcher.

    Terrorists deserve no friggin' mercy, none at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Did they have a lawyer?
    Who cares? This isn't a legal matter, it's a military matter.

    They're prisoners not covered by the Geneva Convention. They decided to wage a war without a national state standing behind them, they get to enjoy the fruits of their choice.

    Why does anyone care?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Did they have the right to appeal their detention?
    They sure did. But instead of deserting, they chose to stay on the battlefield and engage the real soldiers of a real nation with a real government.

    The purpose of appeals is to correct mistakes.

    The mistake is the choice to allow the terrorist to be born.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    For someone who claims to favor small government, you certainly don't have much of a problem with the government detaining people and doing horrible things to them, without so much as a trial.
    OH! You're discussing "people". I'm discussing terrorists. Get back to me when you're on the same page I am.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Just in case you're unclear on this, the good guys are also not the people who hold innocent people for years on end without giving them a trial, and who torture prisoners who pose no immediate threat to anyone.
    No one's been tortured.

    Waterboarding isn't torture.

    The knowledge those people would have withheld had a positive impact on preventing further acts of terrorism. Oh, and that knowledge...makes the interrogation subject guilty of conspiracy at a minimum.

    As I stated, there are gray areas. Clearly the few people not caught on the battlefield should be treated slightly different. Maybe use Evian water for their interrogation, or something, that's a little softer than the typical tap water, right?

    Of course, jeez, it's amazing this has to be said over and over and over, complicity has to be established before dismantling occurs. Duh. Why waste the resources on a dry well, right? But once they're determined to be terrorists, disassemble them, feed the pieces to the pigs, feed the pigs to the other inmates.

    DON'T coddle terrorists. That species should never be placed on the any of the EPA's Endangered Friends of Anti-Americans lists.

  2. #292
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    There are accepted & binding Laws of War that violation of, can (& have) resulted in the death penalty to the violator.

    Laws of war - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

    Wikipedia can start you off, but Nuremberg, Geneva Conventions & many others all apply. To say that once conflict begins, all rules disappear is just flat wrong.
    GC doens't apply to terrorists not supported by an identified nation-state. They're international criminals and perfectly suitable unwilling volunteers for medical experimentation.

  3. #293
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    What are YOUR credentials for disagreeing with Holder?
    Well, I didn't tell The Rapist President to accept Marc Ritchie's bribe for a pardon.

    And I wasn't stupid enough to vote for The Messiah President.

    I'm better qualified than Holder already.

  4. #294
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Terrorist attacks, regardless of how huge & heinous they may be, are simply criminal acts & need to be treated that way. The invocation of Constitutional ....Presidential "War Powers" has gotten us into the mess we now face.

    What I think needs to happen, is our Congress has to accept a new reality:
    That we now live in a world where we face terrible dangers from groups who do not neatly fit into our outdated rules of war or criminality. These groups fall somewhere between criminals & combatants & we need to face that reality & draft new laws to accept it.
    Nope. The attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 was orchestrated by a nation's appointed military commander in chief. That was an act of war, not a criminal act, and that military leader would face a military court, not a criminal court, and he would be subsequently sentenced to death for his unwarranted attack, if caught.

    The mistake of the Rapist President, and those before him, was to treat acts of war as crimes, not acts of war. Carter should have attacked Iran's invasion of it's sovereign territory and it's arrest of US citizens in that territory. Carter being the Idiot President and the Gutless President, couldn't figure that out, and couldn't do anything anyway because his irresponsible military cuts left the US with a military that couldn't accomplish the mission.

    They're not "criminals", they're terrorists. They use babies to kill babies. Got it? They're beyond the law and deserve nothing but a very large bullet tumbling at 3000 fps into their anus and out their cranium. If you want to give them a lawyer, fine. I hope he's holding their head in their lap.

  5. #295
    Professor
    WillRockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    07-10-10 @ 09:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,950

    Re: Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Nope. The attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 was orchestrated by a nation's appointed military commander in chief. That was an act of war, not a criminal act, and that military leader would face a military court, not a criminal court, and he would be subsequently sentenced to death for his unwarranted attack, if caught.

    The mistake of the Rapist President, and those before him, was to treat acts of war as crimes, not acts of war. Carter should have attacked Iran's invasion of it's sovereign territory and it's arrest of US citizens in that territory. Carter being the Idiot President and the Gutless President, couldn't figure that out, and couldn't do anything anyway because his irresponsible military cuts left the US with a military that couldn't accomplish the mission.

    They're not "criminals", they're terrorists. They use babies to kill babies. Got it? They're beyond the law and deserve nothing but a very large bullet tumbling at 3000 fps into their anus and out their cranium. If you want to give them a lawyer, fine. I hope he's holding their head in their lap.

    I agree with your premise that terrorism is an act of war, but then why did you support the DumbAsAPost President, who did not pursue the commander of the 9/11 attack and minimized the importance of his capture? Did we let Tojo or Hitler escape and say "I really don't care where he is"?

  6. #296
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Were the 2 North Hollywood bank robbers (who tried to rob a bank in LA in 1997) "unlawful enemy combatants"......waging war on the U.S., or criminals? Some criminals want money others have other agendas but they are ALL criminals using unlawful means to achieve their purpose.
    Your arrogant stating of your opinion that "Terrorists are unlawful enemy combatants, not criminals" does not make it a fact, no matter how emphatic you get.

    My problem with using the concept that we are at war with these criminals is that a state of war, triggers our Constitution"s vast "War Powers" authority upon the President which, if we have an unintelligent or ill-intentioned President (like Bush) can & did lead us to the brink of catastrophe.

    Ummm....they were "bank robbers".

    Ever run across that phrase before?

    Their goal was ...ummmm...robbing a bank.

    Most places that's a crime that doesn't require military intervention to address.

    In Los Angeles....the military stayed home, the cops eventually dealt with it....using weapons available to the general public they themselves were not issued. Thank goodness for the Second Amendment. Too bad the passengers of four airplanes on one September morning had been denied their Second Amendment freedoms.

    The nation's steadfast REFUSAL to admit that a state of war has existed between the United States and radical elements of Islam for over twenty years is what led to the attacks on September 11th, 2001.

    The steadfast refusal by the left after September 11th that a state of war existed has prolonged the conflict, caused the unnecessary deaths of US servicemen thereby, and been instrumental in forming negative world opinion of the US and it's efforts to reduce the menace of international terrorism.

  7. #297
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    I agree with your premise that terrorism is an act of war, but then why did you support the DumbAsAPost President, who did not pursue the commander of the 9/11 attack and minimized the importance of his capture? Did we let Tojo or Hitler escape and say "I really don't care where he is"?
    Since you don't have the faintest clue what and who I've supported, rephrase you post.

    If you have evidence to substantiate your claim, post it.

    And, since you're apparently not aware of this, Hitler committed suicide, and soon there after Germany surrendered. Tojo, once we got our hands on him was fairly tried and then fairly executed.

    Can you imagine what those losers on the left would be saying if we captured Obama sin Laden? How many of those idiots would be out there blaming the United States and demanding his release? A friggin' lot of them.

    Why?

    (Imagine Sam Kinnison) They're STUPID.
    Last edited by Scarecrow Akhbar; 04-29-09 at 06:21 AM.

  8. #298
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Last Seen
    07-18-09 @ 04:56 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,041

    Re: Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

    I have long wondered what some will do (esp the Far Left) in the event its proven Osama bin Laden was killed say in March 2005 by an airstrike specifically ordered by President Bush under the belief that Osama was in the location at the time.

    They have really dug themselves a hole which utterly requires Osama to have been alive until Bush left office.

  9. #299
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Masschusetts
    Last Seen
    03-01-14 @ 10:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,512

    Re: Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

    Quote Originally Posted by GySgt View Post
    You continue to voice your opinion as if you are defining the global event. It just doesn't matter what you consider. It's the same attitude that Westerners have when they preach their Geneva Convention rules and become confused when those who don't recognize such things behave badly.

    You see, those we fight are very much engaged in what they very much consider a "war." They have been engaged in this war for years and years and years. Even after obvious attacks upon Americans, in and out of uniform, we refused to engage them properly. If only they knew that only a 9/11 scenario would force us to recognize their war they could have gotten us in a lot sooner.

    This is their war. Not ours. We merely accepted the invite.

    But the trouble people continue to have is that they think a "war" is an event between nations. It is no longer true. hell, in our politicially correct weakened culture, we were ahead of this game. Over time, our war against Germany turned into a war against Nazi Germany. Well, the world has evolved into an environment where no nation would dare attack us. In our haste to alleviate responsibility from whole nation populations and to define our enemies as merely the governments....we have seen the world actually reflect our wishes to seperate governments from people in an ironic way. Now, we have to deal with the enemy tribes or elements within nations as their governments shrug and offer condolensces. Now, we have to embark into other nations or bomb sites within from afar because governments don't take responsibility for their creations.

    You may not want to call this a "war," but this is the war of the 21st century. Embrace it or deny it.....it will be treated as such. And since Geneva lays down the rules of war as we once knew it (when Europeans waged war upon each other and Jews were the target of slaughter)....we must now redefine the legal combatant as a uniformed and non-uniformed enemy.
    My problem with calling this a war is the triggering of Presidential "War Powers" (under our Constitution) which acts to PERMANENTLY confer too much power on the Executive over the Congress with the devestating results we've seen under Bush/Cheney.

  10. #300
    King of Videos
    dirtpoorchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    WA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,028

    Re: Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    You must wait until you get to the part where I say there are gray areas.



    No, getting caught on the battlefield holding a weapon pretty much eliminates the need for a trial, since the purpose of a trial is merely to establish guilt and innocence. Since that one fact makes them guilty, off the to tank and the cloth and the pitcher.

    Terrorists deserve no friggin' mercy, none at all.



    Who cares? This isn't a legal matter, it's a military matter.

    They're prisoners not covered by the Geneva Convention. They decided to wage a war without a national state standing behind them, they get to enjoy the fruits of their choice.

    Why does anyone care?



    They sure did. But instead of deserting, they chose to stay on the battlefield and engage the real soldiers of a real nation with a real government.

    The purpose of appeals is to correct mistakes.

    The mistake is the choice to allow the terrorist to be born.



    OH! You're discussing "people". I'm discussing terrorists. Get back to me when you're on the same page I am.



    No one's been tortured.

    Waterboarding isn't torture.

    The knowledge those people would have withheld had a positive impact on preventing further acts of terrorism. Oh, and that knowledge...makes the interrogation subject guilty of conspiracy at a minimum.

    As I stated, there are gray areas. Clearly the few people not caught on the battlefield should be treated slightly different. Maybe use Evian water for their interrogation, or something, that's a little softer than the typical tap water, right?

    Of course, jeez, it's amazing this has to be said over and over and over, complicity has to be established before dismantling occurs. Duh. Why waste the resources on a dry well, right? But once they're determined to be terrorists, disassemble them, feed the pieces to the pigs, feed the pigs to the other inmates.

    DON'T coddle terrorists. That species should never be placed on the any of the EPA's Endangered Friends of Anti-Americans lists.
    If someone gets caught with a gun in there hand I assume they get shot to death. Now drawing up lists of common names to apprehend and blowing a hole in the side of a hose and ripping all the adult males out of the house is what prolly gets the innocents there.
    I'm Finding it Harder to be a Gentleman, White Stripes ~ "You think I care about me and only me. When every girl needs help climbing up a tree."

Page 30 of 31 FirstFirst ... 2028293031 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
  •