• 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!

Guardian piece on Senate CIA torture report

Nope. Teach me.

Ex post facto law is specifically illegal, per The Constitution.

By your logic, the Nuremberg convictions should all be overturned.
 
Ex post facto law is specifically illegal, per The Constitution.

By your logic, the Nuremberg convictions should all be overturned.

Check your history on law, new law was made and accepted by the world.
Do you disagree with this?
 
Check your history on law, new law was made and accepted by the world.
Do you disagree with this?

Ex post facto law is illegal. Do you agree with that?
 
They terrorists don't rate protection under any law.

The nazis that were tried at Nuremberg weren't POW'so, either. They were tried under ex post facto law. Roosevelt and Churchill wanted to execute them all.


They would rate protection under law if they went to court. That’s another reason they’re not being prosecuted.

Thanks for the correction that the Nazi’s were not POW’s. They were prosecuted as war criminals. Roosevelt and Churchill’s brief dalliance with executing all the leaders was overcome by their own better judgement and advice from others. Still, the status of unlawful enemy combatant is different than the war criminal status of the Nazis, where they are considered innocent until proven guilty. Once a Gitmo detainee enters court, he’s considered innocent. Ay, there’s another rub.
 
So...................we waterboarded animals that wanted to kill us.

In USA tens of thousands of prisoners are tortured for years by Solitary Confinement -- Supermax prisons.
 
Terrorists aren't protected under international law, nor United States law.

Every human is protected from Cruel and Unusual punishment.
 
They would rate protection under law if they went to court. That’s another reason they’re not being prosecuted.

Thanks for the correction that the Nazi’s were not POW’s. They were prosecuted as war criminals. Roosevelt and Churchill’s brief dalliance with executing all the leaders was overcome by their own better judgement and advice from others. Still, the status of unlawful enemy combatant is different than the war criminal status of the Nazis, where they are considered innocent until proven guilty. Once a Gitmo detainee enters court, he’s considered innocent. Ay, there’s another rub.

Again, the terrorists don't rate protection under any formal law. There's no legal precedent requiring the presumption of innosence. Just like there was no legal precedence requiring that the Nuremberg defendents be given every protection and consideration, under the law.
 
At the end of WW2, the Shutzstaffel was designated a criminal organization so that SS troops could be denied protection under The Geneva Convention.

Like I said, super convenient. And this is a power you think Hillary Clinton should have.
 
Again, the terrorists don't rate protection under any formal law. There's no legal precedent requiring the presumption of innosence. Just like there was no legal precedence requiring that the Nuremberg defendents be given every protection and consideration, under the law.


Wrong as to the Gitmo detainees not rating any protection under any formal law. And of course there’s no legal precedent. All this was precedent setting. Go to the “Legal Issues” section of the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp

Same thing with the Nuremberg defendant. Although I agree that not “every” protection be given. The following is an excerpt from the reference given further below:

“Under the Nuremberg Charter, each defendant accused of a war crime was afforded the right to be represented by an attorney of his choice. The accused war criminals were presumed innocent by the tribunal and could not be convicted until their guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In addition, the defendants were guaranteed the right to challenge incriminating evidence, cross-examine adverse witnesses, and introduce exculpatory evidence of their own.”

Nuremberg Trials legal definition of Nuremberg Trials

The Nuremberg defendants also had a right to a public trial.
 
They nazis got exactly what they deserved. We sure as hell didn't let them walk on a technicality.

You mean a highly select few of the MILLIONS of Nazis who fought and killed THOUSANDS of Americans...

3 did walk on what many ranters of today would call 'a technicality'...

But Nuremberg wasn't a wholesale round-up of Nazis and those locals accused of being Nazis... don't over reach, you don't do it very well... :peace
 
You mean a highly select few of the MILLIONS of Nazis who fought and killed THOUSANDS of Americans...

3 did walk on what many ranters of today would call 'a technicality'...

But Nuremberg wasn't a wholesale round-up of Nazis and those locals accused of being Nazis... don't over reach, you don't do it very well... :peace

Actually, the SS, the SD, the Reich Cabinet, the SA and the entire nazis party leadership were declared criminals.

There were more that 24 defendents.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsequent_Nuremberg_trials

It's the Nuremberg trials (plural).

Before posting snide comments, you should do a little research. This is the hazard of assuming you're smarter than everyone and that you know everything.
 
Tell that to the terrorists.

Even terrorists and worst criminals are protected from unconstitutional punishments in every civilized nation.
 
Even terrorists and worst criminals are protected from unconstitutional punishments in every civilized nation.

These terrorists aren't. They've been classified as criminal gangs, a designation that revokes any legal protections. Even The Geneva Convention says that criminals aren't protected.
 
These terrorists aren't. They've been classified as criminal gangs, a designation that revokes any legal protections. Even The Geneva Convention says that criminals aren't protected.

They are protected under Eighth Amendment.
 
Whom? I have never heard about it?

You didn't know that German troops died from starvation and exposure in Allied prison camps after WW2? They were redesignated, "disarmed enemy forces", and the rules suddenly didn't apply.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinwiesenlager

That isn't including the millions that were taken to Russia, to be used as slave labor. Most never returned.
 
Back
Top Bottom