• 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!

Nonpartisan review concludes Bush knowingly ordered torture

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
A nonpartisan group led by a former top Bush administration official concluded a two-year review on Tuesday that finds the former president and his top advisers knowingly ordered interrogation techniques that U.S. officials have previously referred to as torture.
“After conducting our own two-year investigation, weighing the credibility of all sources and studying the current public record, we have come to the regrettable, but unavoidable, conclusion that the United States did indeed engage in conduct that is clearly torture,” former Rep. Asa Hutchinson (R-AR), who served as undersecretary of the Department of Homeland Security during the Bush administration, said in an advisory.


Read more @: Nonpartisan review concludes Bush knowingly ordered torture | The Raw Story

****ing criminal.
 
Maybe he should be, and this is a racial thought, prosecuted for this. People talk about wanting to impeach Obama for attempting to support legislation that they feel conflicts with the second amendment. How about punishing a president for directly giving the order to violate the eighth amendment?
 
Bush and Cheney brought complete shame on the US and tainted our claim to supporting the rule of law for decades to come.
 

Ummm, sorry, but the "torture" which is included in the link doesn't exactly meet the same level as pulling out fingernails, high-voltage electric shocks, and other methods of interrogation typically considered torture. From the link:
Although Bush administration loyalists said at the time that “enhanced interrogation tactics” like stress positions, waterboarding, mock executions, sensory deprivation and prolonged diapering were not torture, this report aims to specifically and finally emphasize that these activities meet the clinical definition of “torture.”
 
Nonpartisan.... lol :lamo


Funny joke. Sorta like virgins on Hollywood Boulevard, unicorns, and "unbiased reporting".
 
Questioning the source....I thought that was the refuge of a desperate leftist. I never figured Goshin and Bronson for desperate leftists....
 
Questioning the source....I thought that was the refuge of a desperate leftist. I never figured Goshin and Bronson for desperate leftists....

Waterboarding is not torture

The NYT is a radical left wing fishwrap

Nothing to see here move along
 
I think a lot of that is torture in my book. "I really don't care that much because you want to kill us" is the name of my book though so me feathers are not ruffled.

I think with most things Bush lawyer shopped around Justice until he found some nobody wanting to please the Prez to write a memo saying whatever they wanted to do that was questionable was legal so he could cover his butt if the Justice Dept came after him--"Hey, you were the ones who said it was legal. See I have a memo from your department."
 
Waterboarding is not torture

I think we should test this claim by waterboarding conservatives to see if they might have any information about the Boston Marathon bombing.

Meanwhile, conservatives can only question the source (not the facts) and deny what everybody knows -- waterboarding is beneath the dignity of the US, which is why conservative relish it.
 
Waterboarding is not torture

Lol, you can't logically argue that it's not. It is be every definition.

That's not really the question. The question is whether it's right to do so.
 
Was there any doubt?

Here is a question.

There is a number of people in this world that would seek to do the people of this country harm. I know, I know, their justification is the reckless abandon the US military takes with civilian casualties in their countries, so they feel it is only right for them to seek out and target innocent civilians of the United States. What's good for the goose...

Now seeing as we just had a bombing in Boston, killing some and maiming many, many more, my question is this -- Is it not the duty of the US government to protect the citizens of these United States from aggression? That being asked, is it not justifiable to torture a few miscreants who were unfortunate enough to get caught being involved in this dirty business?

Would not a few fingernails being yanked not be worth the price of saving a few dozen people from losing their legs? A little water over the face not be worth that 8 year old's life?

Do you think these people who commit these acts are simply misunderstood? That they can be talked to? Coddled? and all will be better?

Bush commited unpardonable sins during his administration but "knowingly ordered tortured" isn't one of them.
 
I think we should test this claim by waterboarding conservatives to see if they might have any information about the Boston Marathon bombing.

Meanwhile, conservatives can only question the source (not the facts) and deny what everybody knows -- waterboarding is beneath the dignity of the US, which is why conservative relish it.

Waterboarding is not torture

Let's see, what should we be more outraged by

A sitting President who is pals with known terrorists, (Obama and Ayers/Doehrn) who has allowed multiple terrorists attacks to occur on US soil since he was elected. Ft Hood. Boston, ect. and who also allowed our ambassador and 3 other Americans to be murdered with yet another terrorist attack in benghazi on our embassy and has yet to bring the perps to justice. He still won't call Ft Hood a terrorist attack either.

Or

A President who waterboarded known terrorists to extract intelligence which not only assisted in the killing of OBL but also prevented further terrorists attacks on US during his watch

The NYT and the radical left's attempt to get on their moral high horse here is laughable. Nothing more needs to be said.

Lol, you can't logically argue that it's not. It is be every definition.

That's not really the question. The question is whether it's right to do so.

Waterboarding is not torture
 
Waterboarding is not torture

Repeating it does not make it true.

Let's take a look at the definition of torture, shall we?

Here we go:

"tor·ture (tôrchr)
n.
1.
a. Infliction of severe physical pain as a means of punishment or coercion.
b. An instrument or a method for inflicting such pain.
2. Excruciating physical or mental pain; agony: the torture of waiting in suspense.
3. Something causing severe pain or anguish."

Now, does water boarding cause mental pain/anguish?

Let's ask Mr. Hitchens: [WARNING: WATER BOARDING VIDEO]



Now, skip to the 4:05 mark to hear Htichen's words.

Now, let's try another: A conservative "Mancow" Muller



So yeah.
 
Repeating it does not make it true.

Let's take a look at the definition of torture, shall we?

Here we go:

"tor·ture (tôrchr)
n.
1.
a. Infliction of severe physical pain as a means of punishment or coercion.
b. An instrument or a method for inflicting such pain.
2. Excruciating physical or mental pain; agony: the torture of waiting in suspense.
3. Something causing severe pain or anguish."

Now, does water boarding cause mental pain/anguish?

Let's ask Mr. Hitchens: [WARNING: WATER BOARDING VIDEO]



Now, skip to the 4:05 mark to hear Htichen's words.

Now, let's try another: A conservative "Mancow" Muller



So yeah.


Waterboarding is not torture. It doesn't cause permanent injury.

If Obama waterboarded Rush Limbaugh the Left would rationalize it and justify it. They would applaud it.

Hitchens and Mancow? :lol: gtfo
 
Waterboarding is not torture. It doesn't cause permanent injury.

The torture does not require permanent injury to be classified as torture. And even so, it's easy to argue one will never forget the feeling of being water boarded.

If Obama waterboarded Rush Limbaugh the Left would rationalize it and justify it. They would applaud it.

No, they would not. You're desperate.

Hitchens and Mancow? :lol: gtfo

Why? Mancow, who had the guts to actually walk the walk? And Hitchens, one of the most brilliant minds in the past few decades?
 
The torture does not require permanent injury to be classified as torture. And even so, it's easy to argue one will never forget the feeling of being water boarded.

There isn't even an immediate health risk associated with it


No, they would not. You're desperate.

Of course they would. Look at the cheering at Thatcher's death. If a prominent conservative was waterboarded, people like you would laugh and cheer


Why? Mancow, who had the guts to actually walk the walk? And Hitchens, one of the most brilliant minds in the past few decades?

:lol::lol::lol:gtfo
 
There isn't even an immediate health risk associated with it

It's called mental health broski.

Let me google that for you


Of course they would. Look at the cheering at Thatcher's death. If a prominent conservative was waterboarded, people like you would laugh and cheer

No, they wouldn't. and Certainly not me. I don't hold a passionate despise for those on the other side, unlike you.




:lol::lol::lol:gtfo

No rebuttal. Just weave, dodge, and ignore. You're getting predictable.
 
It's called mental health broski.

Let me google that for you

Oh please

Poor little terrorist might get PTSD or something :lol:

No, they wouldn't. and Certainly not me. I don't hold a passionate despise for those on the other side, unlike you.

Sure you would. The Left has no class. They always cheer when a Conservative dies or gets seriously injured. If Rush Limbaugh was waterboarded they'd make it a pay per view event

No rebuttal. Just weave, dodge, and ignore. You're getting predictable.

There was nothing to rebut. Your premise is a joke. :lol:
 
Oh please

Poor little terrorist might get PTSD or something :lol:

(God I've been waiting a while to do this) Dodge noted.



They always cheer when a Conservative dies or gets seriously injured.

I would not, nor have I ever. Try again.


Your premise is a joke. :lol:

As are your debating skills.
 
(God I've been waiting a while to do this) Dodge noted.

What did I dodge?

You can't show waterboarding causes permanent injury because it doesn't

I would not, nor have I ever. Try again.

Sure you would. The Left would applaud Limbaugh getting waterboarded. It's beyond refute.

As are your debating skills.

Oh you're hurting my feelings :lol:
 
What did I dodge?

You can't show waterboarding causes permanent injury because it doesn't

You can't even prove that torture needs to cause permanent injury to be considered torture. Try again, this time with a little less fail.



Sure you would.

No, I would not. I know more about myself than you do.

Oh you're hurting my feelings :lol:

Good.
 
You can't even prove that torture needs to cause permanent injury to be considered torture. Try again, this time with a little less fail.

Waterboarding is not torture. There were physicians on scene making sure there was no immediate health risk

No, I would not. I know more about myself than you do.

I have no doubt you would pay to watch Limbaugh waterboarded. The Left cheers and laughs whenever a Conservative dies or gets seriously injured.


You're happy you're causing me psychological harm man. I thought you knew yourself better than I do? :lol::lol:
 
Just to be clear, what is the criminal act that a President would have committed by ordering such "enhanced interrogation tactics" as approved by President Bush?

It's my understanding that Bush was advised by several legal sources that the terrorist detainees rounded up in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq, are not covered by the Geneva conventions and thus were not subject, legally, to the restrictions therein. Therefore, there is a counter-argument to anyone who claims "war crimes" and besides, the US is not a participating member of the world court.

I do find the left's outrage here particularly galling and hypocritical since these same people champion Obama's murder of bin Laden using the fruits of these enhanced interegation tactics as well as being big time supporters of Obama's use of drones to kill suspected terrorists, even in countries where the US is not at war, and with no concern for the unlimited number of innocent victims caught up in the blast, basically just an unfortunate loss of faceless life with no moral qualms
 
Back
Top Bottom