• 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!

Justice Dept. Report Advises Pursuing C.I.A. Abuse Cases

How is it applicable? What similarities do you see, I am very interested to hear your position in detail (Not sarcasm).

You can't be serious???

Nazi's used torture & killed many people with no proof that they were guilty of anything.

We now have credible reports that CIA contractors, acting for the United States government....MAY HAVE tortured prisoners, threatened them with drills, dogs & mock executions & we are not supposed to investigate/prosecute those war crimes IF THEY ARE PROVEN?

Should we also not investigate/prosecute the higher ups who gave these illegal orders?

(members of our military/intelligence orgs are required to disobey illegal orders....period.
 
Last edited:
(members of our military/intelligence orgs are required to disobey illegal orders....period.

That's why you have foreign governments, the CIA or contractors do it. They were a clever bunch, those crazy neocons.
 
That's why you have foreign governments, the CIA or contractors do it. They were a clever bunch, those crazy neocons.


Good point! ("Daddy get me out of serving in Vietnam please"...Bush & "Seven Deferment" Cheney never saw the ugly face of war, so they were more than happy to send other family's kids off to die for them!)
 
Last edited:
Good point! ("Daddy get me out of serving in Vietnam please"...Bush & "Seven Deferment" Cheney never saw the ugly face of war, so they were more than happy to send other family's kids off to die for them!)

Bush decided to stay at home and protect Alabama from attack by the Viet Cong. And, once again, he kept us safe because Alabama was never attacked. Cheney was kept home because his aim was terrible. They were afraid he'd shoot some American GI in the face.
 
Lets face reality a bit.

Prosecuting CIA officers would tear the US apart. it would inflict a wound that the US may take a long time to recover from.

Obama can't favour the prosecution of the CIA, even if he wants to. Which is why he is still opposed to it, regardless of what Holder wants.

But it is also a reality someone has to be sacrificed.

So, I've come up with a solution that should please everyone.

Vehemently prosecute the private contracters who are caught up in the same crap. But leave the CIA out of it.

That way, someone pays for it, and you avoid ripping apart the CIA.

Since, lets face it, no one gives a hoot about what happens to the private contracters, errr mercenaries.

That should make the Gods of Justice happy.
 
Last edited:
Bush decided to stay at home and protect Alabama from attack by the Viet Cong. And, once again, he kept us safe because Alabama was never attacked.
I think you're right!! (I don't believe a single Viet Cong aircraft made it past Omaha!!):lol:

Cheney was kept home because his aim was terrible. They were afraid he'd shoot some American GI in the face.
More likely General Westmoreland himself.......In the face with a 12 gauge!;)
 
Lets face reality a bit.

Prosecuting CIA officers would tear the US apart. it would inflict a wound that the US may take a long time to recover from.

Obama can't favour the prosecution of the CIA, even if he wants to. Which is why he is still opposed to it, regardless of what Holder wants.

But it is also a reality someone has to be sacrificed.

So, I've come up with a solution that should please everyone.

Vehemently prosecute the private contracters who are caught up in the same ****. But leave the CIA out of it.

That way, someone pays for it, and you avoid ripping apart the CIA.

Since, lets face it, no one gives a hoot about what happens to the private contracters, errr mercenaries.

That should make the Gods of Justice happy.

I have a better idea:

Let's just blame the whole thing on Pvt. Lynndie English....... again!!
 

Attachments

  • 092605-lynndie-england-abu-ghraib.jpg
    092605-lynndie-england-abu-ghraib.jpg
    20.8 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
Lets face reality a bit.

Prosecuting CIA officers would tear the US apart. it would inflict a wound that the US may take a long time to recover from.

Obama can't favour the prosecution of the CIA, even if he wants to. Which is why he is still opposed to it, regardless of what Holder wants.

But it is also a reality someone has to be sacrificed.

So, I've come up with a solution that should please everyone.

Vehemently prosecute the private contracters who are caught up in the same ****. But leave the CIA out of it.

That way, someone pays for it, and you avoid ripping apart the CIA.

Since, lets face it, no one gives a hoot about what happens to the private contracters, errr mercenaries.

That should make the Gods of Justice happy.

If you're going to advocate ignoring law breaking then please spare is the complaining when Government keeps ignoring the law in the future.

Everyone complains about how corrupt this Country has become but when a clear and cut case comes around where an investigation is needed they argue against it.....
 
Last edited:
If you're going to advocate ignoring law breaking then please spare is the complaing when Government keeps ignoring the law in the future.


I'm just trying to be practical.

Its a fair compromise.
 
I'm just trying to be practical.

Its a fair compromise.


Diminishing the Rule of Law is not a compromise. It's the very foundation of what this Country was built on. You are protecting the political elite in this country from fear of real justice should they break the law in the future.

A btw Obama is illegally carrying out these same policies so I'm all for nailing his ass should Congress grow some balls.
 
My opinion is that Obama wants to forget the past for purely political reasons, but he will not be able to. When facts start to emerge abouit the extent of torture, etc that was done in our names......Public outcry will demand investigations & then prosecutions. I don't see how Obama can stop the avalanche that is starting to roll downhill.
 
The duty of any Government worker/member of the military is to uphold the Rule of Law in the pursuit of critical information from "suspected" terrorists.. You also advocate torture which is against the law.

The duty of the goverment and its military is to defend and protect the people of the United States first and foremost. This has been proven both by Lincoln and FDR.

You are an Authoritarian....plain and simple.

thank you for that opinion.

Oh you'll jump up and down when "those" other people break the law but you ignore the law and even encourage breaking the law when your "side" is doing it

"those" people didnt simply break the law, they endagered the United States and its people. I dont care if they dont wear uniforms and employ insurgent tactics, I do care that we do everything we can to stop them.
 
Diminishing the Rule of Law is not a compromise. It's the very foundation of what this Country was built on. You are protecting the political elite in this country from fear of real justice should they break the law in the future.

A btw Obama is illegally carrying out these same policies so I'm all for nailing his ass should Congress grow some balls.

Well, I am not a "rule of the law," guy like you are.

It would be utterly ridiculous to employ such an unrealistic goal.

I think the spirit of the law should reign supreme, not the rule of it.
 
Nazi's used torture & killed many people with no proof that they were guilty of anything.

So did many goverments including our own previously, but how specifically are the these actions like the Nazis. Give me a some detail instead of one line brush offs.


We now have credible reports that CIA contractors, acting for the United States government....MAY HAVE tortured prisoners, threatened them with drills, dogs & mock executions & we are not supposed to investigate/prosecute those war crimes IF THEY ARE PROVEN?
Thats not what I asked.

Should we also not investigate/prosecute the higher ups who gave these illegal orders?

depends, but it has nothing to do with what I asked.
 
The duty of the goverment and its military is to defend and protect the people of the United States first and foremost. This has been proven both by Lincoln and FDR.



thank you for that opinion.



"those" people didnt simply break the law, they endagered the United States and its people. I dont care if they dont wear uniforms and employ insurgent tactics, I do care that we do everything we can to stop them.


I answered your question. Could you please answer mine:

You can't be serious???

Nazi's used torture & killed many people with no proof that they were guilty of anything.

We now have credible reports that CIA contractors, acting for the United States government....MAY HAVE tortured prisoners, threatened them with drills, dogs & mock executions & we are not supposed to investigate/prosecute those war crimes IF THEY ARE PROVEN?

Should we also not investigate/prosecute the higher ups who gave these illegal orders?

(members of our military/intelligence orgs are required to disobey illegal orders....period.
 
Well, I am not a "rule of the law," guy like you are.

It would be utterly ridiculous to employ such an unrealistic goal.

I think the spirit of the law should reign supreme, not the rule of it.

Exactly! The GOP is over run with your type....Authoritarians...no respect for the Law and ultimately the Constitution....

The ends justify the means.
 
Last edited:
Exactly! The GOP is over run with your type....Authoritarians...no respect for the Law and ultimately the Constitution....

The ends justify the means....LOL


Ummmm, I'm not in the GOP, and I am far from a conservative and not a Liberal.

I am a pragmatist.

A Canadian one to boot.

And last I checked, the rule of law guys are the authoritarians.
 
Last edited:
Ummmm, I'm not in the GOP, and I am far from a conservative.

I am a pragmatist.

If you don't believe in the rule of law...then you are also not a real American, imo.
We Americans love our Constitution & live by the law.
 
Last edited:
If you don't believe in the rule of law...then you are also not a real American, imo.

Thats absolutely correct, because I am a Canadian.

I am a pragmatist through and through.

I like to stay in the real world, and not play out my days in ideological fantasies.
 
Thats absolutely correct, because I am a Canadian.

I am a pragmatist through and through.

I like to stay in the real world, and not play out my days in ideological fantasies.

OK then you are not an American but.....Don't Canadians believe in living by your laws?
 
OK then you are not an American but.....Don't Canadians believe in living by your laws?

Yes, but its not like we zealously believe in following it.

The spirit of the law, not the rule of it.

I mean if you murder someone, you're going to get prosecuted, but when it comes to national issues, well, there is a provision in our constitution called the non(or not)-withstanding clause.

It basically means the government can anything it wants, if pragmatism calls for it.

Thats the Canadian way.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but its not like we zealously believe in following it.

The spirit of the law, not the rule of it.

Thats the Canadian way.

I see....Then who exactly defines the "Spirit" of the law???

You?

Each Canadian individual?



("I went through that red light officer..... because it goes against the SPIRIT of Canadian law"):lol:
 
Well, I mean, you're gonna get a ticket.

If you got the gift of gab, then yea, I guess its possible to get out of it.

But I thought we were talking about national issues here, not traffic tickets.
 
Back
Top Bottom