We didn't torture to protect America from attacks, we tortured
to try to get Intel linking Saddam to 9/11. Your premise is wrong
so your argument is flawed. Beside Bush said repeatedly we did
not torture, he lied!

On Apr 22, 10:11 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote:
> As I suggested, in your POV thousands killed IS AN ACCEPTABLE price
> for no "torture"...   That is not the POV of most...  You argue for a
> consistent AND inhumane RULE OF LAW...    At one time Slavery was
> supported by RULE OF LAW....  Would you have then supported Southern
> Slavery in 1860???
>
> On Apr 21, 5:05 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > No, it is EXACTLY the same.... when arrested the accused nterrorists are
> > simply people with no ID and no proof.... wrong place wrong time.... torture
> > is used to sort them out.
>
> > Torture is NOT acceptable on any level, I would not care whose child or
> > family is at risk, including my own. The is and MUST remain without emotion.
>
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 2:47 PM, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > NOw you are mixing apples and oranges...  NO ONE is arguing for a
> > > universial application of torture...   The argument here is about
> > > using non lethal means to extract critical life saving information
> > > from PROFESSIONAL terrorists --- a very limited and far greater
> > > specified application than what you are seeking to argue...
>
> > > On Apr 21, 3:19 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > So the various police forces in the US should return to the day of the
> > > > rubber hoses ?? And when your son/daughter/family member does not "rat
> > > out"
> > > > its ok to "save the many" by using it ??
>
> > >  > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 1:16 PM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > The Left does not understand mental torture/extraction of information.
> > > > > Mossad does, evidently.//I don't think the ME terrorists have arrived
> > > > > at the mental category of interrogations which the Left assumes. The
> > > > > Left is a victim oriented mentality to begin with- pass the Band-Aids.
> > > > > As unemployment and crime rises in their cities and their experience
> > > > > first hand challenges them, we will see.
>
> > > > > On Apr 21, 1:46 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > One question NOT debated is "If these methods did save hundreds of
> > > > > > lives, is it justified??? If one takes the position of no, then you
> > > > > > place yourself into the position of saying "not torturing 1 man is
> > > > > > more important than hundreds of lives".... To date the Left ignores
> > > > > > this question with the unproven claim the "torture will never give
> > > you
> > > > > > any worthwhile information"...
>
> > > > > > On Apr 20, 10:46 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > I start out where I left off last night.
>
> > > > > > > That I am attempting to understand and comprehend the facts of 
> > > > > > > what
> > > > > took
> > > > > > > place with our treatment of prisoners. The thirty detainess that
> > > have
> > > > > > > been specifically referenced by Bybee, Bradbury and to a degree 
> > > > > > > Yoo
> > > and
> > > > > > > Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's "Working Group 
> > > > > > > Within
> > > The
> > > > > > > Department of Defense"; these thirty detainees were subjected to
> > > > > enhanced
> > > > > > > interrogation tactics, which by Department of Defense and CIA
> > > > > classification
> > > > > > > were either level I, II or III categories of enhhanced tactics,
> > > (Level
> > > > > III
> > > > > > > being the most alarming and disconcerting) and according to
> > > recently
> > > > > > > released information, only three detainees were ever subjected to
> > > Level
> > > > > III
> > > > > > > tactics.
>
> > > > > > > I don't think anyone can deny that of these thirty individuals, 
> > > > > > > all
> > > > > were
> > > > > > > undoubtedly intent on destroying our very way of life, and the
> > > United
> > > > > States
> > > > > > > as we know it. Obviously, with the more information that is
> > > released,
> > > > > > > the better to understand and comprehend the facts. As I said last
> > > > > evening,
> > > > > > > if I sound like I am playing "devil's advocate" it is only my own
> > > means
> > > > > > > and personal mechanism to comprehend and understand the facts, as
> > > we
> > > > > (with
> > > > > > > unclassified security clearances) know them to be. I make no
> > > > > argument
> > > > > > > here. Instead, I am only trying to ascertain two distinct issues:
>
> > > > > > > (1) "Whether the CIA interrogators', (or other American 
> > > > > > > "authorized
> > > > > > > interrogators' ") use of enhanced interrogation tactics 
> > > > > > > constituted
> > > > > > > "torture"; and
>
> > > > > > > (2) "Whether the United States somehow avoided or evaded 
> > > > > > > principles
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > Geneva Accords, as well as the Convention Against Torture and 
> > > > > > > Other
> > > > > Cruel,
> > > > > > > Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; (e.g.; "Cat") and
> > > other
> > > > > > > international treatise of which the United States is a signatory;
> > > thus
> > > > > > > making the actions of the Bush Administration unconstitutional.
>
> > > > > > > ** Not only did I send my initial message predominately regarding
> > > > > Steven
> > > > > > > Bradbury's May 10, 2005 and May 30, 2005 Memorandums to
> > > PoliticalForum,
> > > > > but
> > > > > > > I also sent it to several attorney friends of mine, one here in
> > > Tampa
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > one in Washington, D.C. who specializes in International Law. I
> > > > > also
> > > > > > > sent my message to another attorney in Gainesville Florida who I
> > > > > believe
> > > > > > > forwarded my message to other attornies, or at least she forwarded
> > > the
> > > > > > > message to individuals who seem to have given these issues a good
> > > deal
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > thought. Surprisingly, (with a couple of exceptions) most of the
> > > > > replies
> > > > > > > by counsel have been very much colored by partisan politics, which
> > > was
> > > > > a bit
> > > > > > > of a shock to me. It would appear that their cognitive and 
> > > > > > > critical
> > > > > > > thinking skills and abilities are so clouded by their apparent
> > > hatred
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > the previous Adminstration, that they can no longer see this issue
> > > from
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > rational, non-partisan standpoint.
>
> > > > > > > A couple of thoughts that keep coming to mind:
>
> > > > > > > If a prisoner, say in any United States jail or prison is a danger
> > > to
> > > > > > > himself, or to others that may very well effect the safety or
> > > security
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > the prison, because of this prisoner's mental disability, and the
> > > > > prison
> > > > > > > officials or his jailers administer psychotropic drugs upon the
> > > > > prisoner
> > > > > > > against his will in order to maintain safety and security in the
> > > > > prison,
> > > > > > > does this constitute "torture" to the prisoner?
>
> > > > > > > I know that this question, "dodges the bullet" so to speak, but
> > > > > assuming
> > > > > > > that Bradbury's May 10th Memorandum's facts are correct, (as well
> > > as
> > > > > Yoo's
> > > > > > > March 31, 2004 Memorandum) and in fact, the enhanced interrogation
> > > > > tactics,
> > > > > > > whether they constituted torture, or whether they didn't, 
> > > > > > > prevented
> > > > > hundreds
> > > > > > > of thousands of lives lost by a dirty bomb going off in Washington
> > > > > D.C., or
> > > > > > > another skyscraper being hit in Los Angeles, or any other
> > > metropolitan
> > > > > area
> > > > > > > in the United States, or in Western Europe, were the enhanced
> > > > > interrogation
> > > > > > > techniques sustainable and justified?
>
> > > > > > > There are allegations that if true, are deeply disturbing. Joseph
> > > > > > > Margulies who was lead counsel in *Rasul v, Bush*, 542 U.S. 466
> > > > > (2004) has
> > > > > > > made allegations that admittedly he never witnessed first hand,
> > > that
> > > > > he
> > > > > > > alleged took place at Gitmo and Baghram, but nevertheless, I
> > > believe
> > > > > would
> > > > > > > be hard to get around 18 U.S.C. 2340 *et. seq.* *See* *Also*
> > > > > "Guantanamo
> > > > > > > and the Abuse of Presidential Power"; Margulies, Jos. (2006).
>
> > > > > > > Attached is a a list from the January 15, 2003 Memo written by
> > > > > Rumsfeld's
> > > > > > > "Working Group Within The Department of Defense". Do you consider
> > > > > these
> > > > > > > enhanced interrogation tactics as "Acts of Torture"??
>
> > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Lobo <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > MARK
>
> > > > > > > > I'm not trying to defend Clinton's actions (or Bush Senior's or
> > > > > Ronald
> > > > > > > > Reagan's). I agree that those renditions were illegal in most
> > > cases.
>
> > > > > > > > But there are degrees of illegality and of moral wrongness, and
> > > to
> > > > > say
> > > > > > > > that there is no difference between delivering a kidnappee with 
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > legal outstanding warrant to a foreign court to stand trial, and
> > > > > > > > delivering one (who might simply be the victim of a bad rumor, 
> > > > > > > > or
> > > an
> > > > > > > > anonymous tip by someone collecting a bounty) to foreign
> > > torturers...
>
> > > > > =======================================================================
> > > > > > > > On Apr 20, 8:19 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > There is NO difference.
>
> > > > > > > > > Kidnapping is kidnapping........ There is no justification for
> > > the
> > > > > US to
> > > > > > > > act
> > > > > > > > > on a warrant unless the suspect is on US soil.
>
> > > > > > > > > Imagine what an uproar would take place if other nations went
> > > into
> > > > > the US
> > > > > > > > > and started taking people they had issued warrants for...
>
> > > > > > > > > Rule of law without following the rules is not rule of law.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Lobo <[email protected]
>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > There is a big difference between our government kidnapping 
> > > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > very
> > > > > > > > > > limited number of people-- people against whom there were
> > > > > outstanding
> > > > > > > > > > foreign arrest warrants -- in order to deliver them to 3rd
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to