• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

UN torture envoy: US must prosecute Bush lawyers

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
VIENNA (AP) - The U.S. is obligated by a United Nations convention to prosecute Bush administration lawyers who allegedly drafted policies that approved the use of harsh interrogation tactics against terrorism suspects, the U.N.'s top anti-torture envoy said Friday.

Earlier this week, President Barack Obama left the door open to prosecuting Bush administration officials who devised the legal authority for gruesome terror-suspect interrogations. He had previously absolved CIA officers from prosecution.
UN torture envoy: US must prosecute Bush lawyers

Yeah, we're gonna go the third world route??

Hell we didn't even try Robert E Lee after the Civil War! Nixon didn't go after LBJ, Ford didn't go after Nixon, Reagan didn't go after Carter...

But no, Mr. Hope and Change, this is what you people really want? It's over folks, if we start prosecuting previous administrations...
 
UN torture envoy: US must prosecute Bush lawyers

Yeah, we're gonna go the third world route??

Hell we didn't even try Robert E Lee after the Civil War! Nixon didn't go after LBJ, Ford didn't go after Nixon, Reagan didn't go after Carter...

But no, Mr. Hope and Change, this is what you people really want? It's over folks, if we start prosecuting previous administrations...

Can anyone really be surprised by the events unfolding here?

The recent decision to release photos showing prisoner "abuse" in Afghanistan and Iraq will just wrench open more wounds and divide this nation and anger some in the Middle East even more.

Forget the FACT that the abusers were subject to court martial and prosecuted. It begs the question why? The answer is obvious for anyone with half a brain.


:roll:
 
UN torture envoy: US must prosecute Bush lawyers

Yeah, we're gonna go the third world route??

Hell we didn't even try Robert E Lee after the Civil War! Nixon didn't go after LBJ, Ford didn't go after Nixon, Reagan didn't go after Carter...

But no, Mr. Hope and Change, this is what you people really want? It's over folks, if we start prosecuting previous administrations...

Yes, that is absolutely what we want. No question about it. Should we torture? No. Did we torture? Yes according to both standing US and international definitions and law. Should the people who ordered it be tried for war crimes? Yes. We are America, we are better than those we are fighting but unfortunately some of you don't act like it.
 
Yes, that is absolutely what we want. No question about it. Should we torture? No. Did we torture? Yes according to both standing US and international definitions and law. Should the people who ordered it be tried for war crimes? Yes. We are America, we are better than those we are fighting but unfortunately some of you don't act like it.

Yes, we will be so much safer now telling our enemies that; (1) we will never invade another country as long as we live regardless of their actions because we don't believe in Democracy or Nation Building; (2) In the event we actually catch you, we will provide you with Constitutional rights that are non-existent in your own nations; and (3) we will coddle you and never use any "mean spirited" methods to extract information you do not wish to share.

You see, we are now the beloved Community Organization of the United States and with our newly minted morality towards terrorists; everyone will now love us and tell us just about anything we want to know. But heck, with all this newly discovered respect, we won’t have to worry about terrorists, despots, tyrants or Dictators because they will either respect us, or realize we are completely helpless and irrelevant to do anything to them.

Liberals and Democrats now OWN the future and possible loss of life that will result from these idiotic, naive and completely foolish notions about Human behavior and REALITY.

You cannot fabricate the level of ignorance currently infesting our Congress and the White House.

Carry on. :roll:
 
Yes, that is absolutely what we want. No question about it. Should we torture? No. Did we torture? Yes according to both standing US and international definitions and law. Should the people who ordered it be tried for war crimes? Yes. We are America, we are better than those we are fighting but unfortunately some of you don't act like it.

Well, let's start talking about prosecuting Obama for his use of airborne drones dropping missiles on civilians in Pakistan.

After all we are America, we are better than that.

Get ready Obama you ***damned war criminal.
 
Last edited:
So, even if we assume laws were broken here . . .

A lawyer who advises a criminal may be prosecuted for it?

Do you people have any idea what kind of backwards, slack-jawed, anti-intellectual, illiberal idiocy you're spewing? Seriously?

I guess that means the right to counsel is out the window. And you people love to jabber about "shredding the Constitution."
 
Yes, that is absolutely what we want. No question about it. Should we torture? No. Did we torture? Yes according to both standing US and international definitions and law. Should the people who ordered it be tried for war crimes? Yes. We are America, we are better than those we are fighting but unfortunately some of you don't act like it.

Do you have any care of the implications this sort of behavior will have as we move forward?

Sure, you can stick your head in the sand and assume that it means "we'll never torture again!"

But let's be realistic. Some future issue arises, the WH seeks legal advice on certain actions it feels, at the time to be appropriate. Would ANY lawyer in the world advise them either way and risk being jailed by the next admin?

This isn't the way people. This has nothing to do with political parties and everything to do with keeping the integrity of our Republic alive. We go down this road...
 
So, even if we assume laws were broken here . . .

A lawyer who advises a criminal may be prosecuted for it?

Do you people have any idea what kind of backwards, slack-jawed, anti-intellectual, illiberal idiocy you're spewing? Seriously?

I guess that means the right to counsel is out the window. And you people love to jabber about "shredding the Constitution."

I'll put it simply, for simple minds: The people who should be prosecuted are those who break the law. It's really that simple.

That means if someone (President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense, etc) authorizes an illegal policy - he can be prosecuted.

If a lawyer gave advice, contrary to our laws there are ways to deal with him also. Prosecution is only one of them. i.e. (that means "for instance") It is against the law to lie under oath. If a lawyer advised his client to lie under oath he himself could be prosecuted. He could also be prosecuted if he even knew his client was going to lie because he is an "Officer of the Court".

Do you really think your name calling intimidates anyone? Do you think it gives any credence to your argument?
 
Then you support prosecution of Obama for war crimes for his ordering attacks on civilians in Pakistan? ACES!
 
...Would ANY lawyer in the world advise them either way and risk being jailed by the next admin?

Well, that's just what Bush's lawyers did. They assumed they were untouchable because they worked for the President. WRONG! Talk about balls! Water boarding has been illegal since before 1900, I believe. Yet, they arrogantly thought they could word policy to do it. It boggles the mind!

No man is supposed to be above the law. Whether they are prosecuted for their crimes is another matter.
 
I'll put it simply, for simple minds: The people who should be prosecuted are those who break the law. It's really that simple.

A lawyer giving a legal opinion DOES NOT BREAK THE LAW.

You people are so poisoned in your anti-Bush fervor that you DO NOT CARE what the consequences are; you want to "get him" at any cost -- even if that cost is the complete abandonment of any semblance of due process, the rule of law, liberal principles, and common fairness -- which is what you accuse Bush of.

Which is not only sickening, it's so unbelievably hypocritical that I don't even know where to begin.

So yes, I find this line of argument abhorrent, repugnant, and disgusting.
 
A lawyer giving a legal opinion DOES NOT BREAK THE LAW.

You people are so poisoned in your anti-Bush fervor that you DO NOT CARE what the consequences are; you want to "get him" at any cost -- even if that cost is the complete abandonment of any semblance of due process, the rule of law, liberal principles, and common fairness -- which is what you accuse Bush of.

Which is not only sickening, it's so unbelievably hypocritical that I don't even know where to begin.

So yes, I find this line of argument abhorrent, repugnant, and disgusting.

Don't let ADK get you too upset Hawshaw. He tends to be VERY emotional, and the fact that there is a huge difference between legal opinion and braking the law is immaterial to him.
 
Last edited:
Well, let's start talking about prosecuting Obama for his use of airborne drones dropping missiles on civilians in Pakistan.

After all we are America, we are better than that.

Get ready Obama you ***damned war criminal.

Stunning irony isn't it? :rofl
 
Well, that's just what Bush's lawyers did. They assumed they were untouchable because they worked for the President. WRONG! Talk about balls! Water boarding has been illegal since before 1900, I believe. Yet, they arrogantly thought they could word policy to do it. It boggles the mind!

No man is supposed to be above the law. Whether they are prosecuted for their crimes is another matter.

And Pelosi et al should be tried as accessories to the crime because they knew of it and said/did nothing.
 
I'll put it simply, for simple minds: The people who should be prosecuted are those who break the law. It's really that simple.

That means if someone (President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense, etc) authorizes an illegal policy - he can be prosecuted.

If a lawyer gave advice, contrary to our laws there are ways to deal with him also. Prosecution is only one of them. i.e. (that means "for instance") It is against the law to lie under oath. If a lawyer advised his client to lie under oath he himself could be prosecuted. He could also be prosecuted if he even knew his client was going to lie because he is an "Officer of the Court".

Do you really think your name calling intimidates anyone? Do you think it gives any credence to your argument?

I don't think it is “name calling” if it is merely an honest description of the arguments being made. But you claiming he is "simple minded", that is a personal insult.

Amazing how Liberals never seem to actually get it.
 
A lawyer giving a legal opinion DOES NOT BREAK THE LAW.

Hmmm, who's getting a wee bit emotional here? :3oops:

You chose to ignore my examples, per usual. That's ok. Notice how you now use the word "opinion".

I was responding to your question:
A lawyer who advises a criminal may be prosecuted for it?

And don't worry, we won't hold it against you that Mr Vichio is in your corner. Even rock stars can't control their groupies.
 
I don't think it is “name calling” if it is merely an honest description of the arguments being made.

That would call for an opinion, a biased opinion.

But you claiming he is "simple minded", that is a personal insult.

Show me where I "claimed" he was simple minded. However, to argue like you do, would it be an insult... if it were true? :mrgreen:
 
That would call for an opinion, a biased opinion.

Show me where I "claimed" he was simple minded. However, to argue like you do, would it be an insult... if it were true? :mrgreen:

Well ADK it is a stretch to presume you could argue like I do; you would have to make sense, use facts in your assertions and not fabricate a contrived reality for purely partisan political purposes, all things I believe you are incapable of. :mrgreen:
 
Moderator's Warning:
Alright. How about everyone stick to the topic instead of seeing which side can belittle the other the best
 
Hmmm, who's getting a wee bit emotional here? :3oops:

It's 100% factual. The method of expression is tailored specifically to the recipient's needs for understanding.


You chose to ignore my examples, per usual.

I chose to ignore them because a) you're either just repeating that giving legal advice can be prosecuted, and b) you're describing nothing about what actually applies here.

The fact is, you simply do not care about the implications of this. You simply want to tarnish Bush as much as you possibly can and you don't care what the method is. If it's against Bush, you're on board, anything else be damned.

There's nothing honorable about that. Not the slightest.


That's ok. Notice how you now use the word "opinion".

Now? That's what lawyers do. That's what these lawyers did. They gave their legal opinions, which was their job.

But, obviously, you don't care as long as you can "get Bush."
 
Last edited:
And Pelosi et al should be tried as accessories to the crime because they knew of it and said/did nothing.

I'm ok with this. I'm all for throwing all those bums out. If there is any wrong doing it must be investigated, if there is wrong doings found there must be prosecution. No ands ifs or buts about it. Yes, you have to be careful not to start into a witch hunt. But there MUST be some amount of responsibility held to the government for its actions. I don't care what your party is, you are expected to behave in certain ways and to restrict your actions to that which only the Constitution grants you. Any politician acting outside of this should be held responsible for their actions.
 
There are proper ways of going about it. Prosecuting attorneys for doing their jobs is not one of them.
 
No man is supposed to be above the law. Whether they are prosecuted for their crimes is another matter.
Indeed, the question of prosecution seems driven solely by political inclinations.

So how goes the Revolution, Comrade?
 
But no, Mr. Hope and Change, this is what you people really want? It's over folks, if we start prosecuting previous administrations...

How would it be over exactly? We all hate each other now, have been for years, 9/11 brought one day of unity then after 9/12 it was business as usual.
 
Indeed, the question of prosecution seems driven solely by political inclinations.

So how goes the Revolution, Comrade?

It's coming, sweetheart. It's coming. Just keep watching the news.

After almost 8 years of torturing people, mostly innocent ones at that, and all the reports that must have been written on their torture results Cheney has only two, 2!, reports he can show to us to prove his point. And they are probably worthless, old stuff we've already heard about his 2 most famous prisoners.

I hope all you Bush ars kissers enjoy watching him and Cheney and Rummy and Addington and maybe even Rove, if we're lucky, testify as to their crimes and then cry their remorseless tears as they're led to the paddy wagon. :2razz: I will certainly be thinking of you and your ilk.

Ooooooh, I'm getting all tingly! :2wave:
 
Back
Top Bottom