Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 88

Thread: Lawyers Showed Photos of Covert CIA Officers to Guantanamo Bay Detainees

  1. #21
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:02 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,316
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Lawyers Showed Photos of Covert CIA Officers to Guantanamo Bay Detainees

    Quote Originally Posted by LowRevs View Post
    I reread it. Still have the same opinion only now I see how one sided and embarassed the article was. Ohhh, the bad CIA and the courageous ACLU. 180 degrees from the truth. It's not entirely the fault of the reporter. As you well know, responsible officials are not permitted to make any comment regarding a classified matter. This report is simply spin from the executive branch.
    I certainly did not see the bias you claim to see, but that may just be both of us coming from different sides. I still think it is, at the very least, premature to call people criminals when they have yet to so much as be charged, and no one has actually specified which laws may be broken. If laws have been broken, then I won't have any problem with them being tried and convicted and sentenced severely.

  2. #22
    Walk with me in hell.
    stekim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Atlanta
    Last Seen
    09-21-10 @ 12:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,106

    Re: Lawyers Showed Photos of Covert CIA Officers to Guantanamo Bay Detainees

    Well, I think we need to take a little step back.

    The Washington Post could not determine how many and which CIA personnel were photographed, which photographs were shown to detainees, or when.
    So here's what we know to be fact: Nothing.
    Wow. Am I awesome or what?

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Lawyers Showed Photos of Covert CIA Officers to Guantanamo Bay Detainees

    Quote Originally Posted by stekim View Post
    Well, I think we need to take a little step back.



    So here's what we know to be fact: Nothing.
    Well, all that information is classified, so...

  4. #24
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,444

    Re: Lawyers Showed Photos of Covert CIA Officers to Guantanamo Bay Detainees

    Quote Originally Posted by JakeFromWI View Post
    I say we look to our Constitution and to International law for an answer. It is understood that it's easier said than done. Thank you kindly for the clarifications though.
    Sure, just look at The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (Pub.L. 97-200, 50 U.S.C. 421426) and you'll see that this clearly a violation of the law.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  5. #25
    Walk with me in hell.
    stekim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Atlanta
    Last Seen
    09-21-10 @ 12:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,106

    Re: Lawyers Showed Photos of Covert CIA Officers to Guantanamo Bay Detainees

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Well, all that information is classified, so...

    Well yes. So it's a little hard to defend the ACLU or condemn them. No one has any clue what actually happened. I think we're a bit quick to judge based on absolutely no credible information. I'm not saying anyone did or did not do anything, but based on this article you sure as hell cannot reach any conclusions.
    Wow. Am I awesome or what?

  6. #26
    Student JakeFromWI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Stevens Point, WI
    Last Seen
    10-13-10 @ 05:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    282

    Re: Lawyers Showed Photos of Covert CIA Officers to Guantanamo Bay Detainees

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Show me the exact text to which you're referring.

    Also, I noticed you omitted any Constitutionally-based argument; wise choice.
    Sorry, Article 3...

    "In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
    (1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
    To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
    (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
    (b) taking of hostages;
    (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
    (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. . ."
    and so it goes...

  7. #27
    Student LowRevs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Downeast in NC
    Last Seen
    07-12-12 @ 04:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    272

    Re: Lawyers Showed Photos of Covert CIA Officers to Guantanamo Bay Detainees

    Quote Originally Posted by dragondad View Post
    Best legal practices! That's funny. The Supreme Court effectivley but the kabash on these illegal show trials...

    Do you know anything about the Law or Constitution?
    What follows is a quote from the NPR site paraphrasing Justice Stevens in the finding that the Bush administration exceeded its authority:

    "The president, Stevens wrote, is required both by the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Conventions to use regularly constituted military courts, not special courts with special rules, to try accused war criminals."

    "The court said that military commissions have historically been conducted within the confines of the rules laid down under the Uniform Code of Military Justice -- the UCMJ. The glaring exception to this rule, the court noted, was the trial of Japanese General Tomoyuki Yama****a after World War II for failing to control his rampaging troops."

    "Partly because of the subsequent criticism of that trial, the court said, the UCMJ was expanded to cover those who, like Yama****a, are accused of war crimes. Thus, war crimes trials must be conducted under the same rules as courts martial, with some flexibility permitted to meet exigent circumstances."

    So, as you can see, it was a structural and technical issue, not totally bogus. It's okay to have tribunals but they have to be structures like courts martial with some flexibility. Well now, that's perfectly clear.
    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

  8. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Lawyers Showed Photos of Covert CIA Officers to Guantanamo Bay Detainees

    Quote Originally Posted by JakeFromWI View Post
    Sorry, Article 3...

    "In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
    (1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
    To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
    (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
    (b) taking of hostages;
    (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
    (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. . ."
    Non-uniformed combatants do not garner recognition from the GC.

  9. #29
    Student JakeFromWI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Stevens Point, WI
    Last Seen
    10-13-10 @ 05:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    282

    Re: Lawyers Showed Photos of Covert CIA Officers to Guantanamo Bay Detainees

    In accordance to Article 4, you are correct however Article 3 pertains to exactly what were talking about, non-uniformed combatants and civilians...
    and so it goes...

  10. #30
    Student LowRevs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Downeast in NC
    Last Seen
    07-12-12 @ 04:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    272

    Re: Lawyers Showed Photos of Covert CIA Officers to Guantanamo Bay Detainees

    Here's some comment, again from NPR, on the dissenting opinions from that Supreme Court finding. I don't think they thought their counterparts were being judicial rather than political.

    "Dissenting were Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Scalia and Thomas each delivered impassioned dissents from the bench, castigating the court majority for substituting its judgment for the president's."

    "Chief Justice John Roberts did not participate in the decision because, as a lower court judge, he joined a decision upholding the military commission trials. That decision was reversed by Thursday's ruling."

    Open and shut...no doubt!
    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.--Thomas Jefferson

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •