64 Senators Support Torture

[Ned]

Originally posted by Ramo

I was gonna comment on the stupidity of the thread title (and all it implied), but why bother.

Was going to comment on the stupidity of your post, but, ... yeah, I think I'll do it.

Gonzales has said that the President is not limited by the Constitution, the Federal Anti-Torture Statute, the Anti-Torture Conventions, and the Geneva Conventions. Voting to confirm him is tantamount to condoning torture.

That is not right. I think G. said that al Qaeda does not have these protections. That is a whole different kettle of fish, is it not. For if the pres was not restricted as you say G. said, everyone, including you and me, would be subject to "torture."

Also, even though al Qaeda was not subject to the protections of any of these documents does not ipso facto mean that he advocated "torture" or that the Senators who supported him also voted for torture. That is nonsense.

[Kidlicious]

Ned,

The US govt is no longer standing up against torture as a whole. In fact, they are torturing people. Why are you trying to make this seem like it's something that it's not?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Ned,

The US govt is no longer standing up against torture as a whole. In fact, they are torturing people. Why are you trying to make this seem like it's something that it's not?

Define torture.

[Mr. Harley]

Ned, we've been over this in another thread (thank you Ted for posting the most germane point). Gonzales was not Bush's private counsel, he was the White House counsel. He weaseled around the torture accords we have signed, instead of trying to explain to Bush why it was wrong. If you and Giancarlo are right, than why did the JAG's, for heaven's sake, get an independent outside opinion when faced with this travesty? They are not exactly Democratic liberals, now are they? Ned, while Giancarlo doesn't understand, I know you are smarter than this.

Plus, as I've mentioned before, the man is a public relations moron, and the War on Terror is also a battle for the minds of the everyday man in the Moslem world. First, he put it in writing? He really thought that is would stay secret, as many federal employees as have been screwed over by the Bush Administration? (an entire additional thread - I've worked in Air Traffic for 23 years, and the Reagan years pale to the way the Bush appointees treat career employees).

Even worse are the indications are that he really believed it, backpedaling not withstanding. The man is an idealogue, and a dangerous one at that. That or a whore, selling his principles for access to power - lawyers take an oath I believe to uphold the LAW, not churn out bogus opinoins to justify what their boss wants. No wonder Putin and Bush get along so well, guided democracy here we come.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned


Define torture.

I'm not one to define torture. Doing so is a bit suspicious if you ask me. I know torture when I see it.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I'm not one to define torture. Doing so is a bit suspicious if you ask me. I know torture when I see it.

Well, the definintion of torture is the whole issue, is it not? Torture is NOT defined anywhere in international law. That is what the G. memo's were saying.

[Ned]

Shawn, see my reply to Kid.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned
Well, the definintion of torture is the whole issue, is it not? Torture is NOT defined anywhere in international law. That is what the G. memo's were saying.

Lucky for men like him. Now would you like to tell us why he should be our Attorney General.

[Ted Striker]

According to Gonzales, the following picture is NOT torture. Yay for Torture Lite!

[Kidlicious]

I say torture should be defined as what a reasonable person thinks is 'extreme' pain. I really think that's why a word like 'extreme' is written into the law. Too bad our Senators and our dear Neddy are not reasonable.

[Mr. Harley]

Ned, I've got to go to sleep, I'm have to get up in under six hours for my next shift. The quote about anything short of damage that cause organ failure or death - come off it. Want me to break out my PDF's of the memos? While one can legitimately argue over abuse versus torture, this memo justifies torture. Period.

The JAG's knew it too, and unlike those poor dumb enlisted fools at Abu Graib, they knew exactly what they were being set up for and covered their butts. If they did not have serious doubts, then why did they get the hundred plus page legal opinion over the implementation of Gonzales memo? As far as I know that is the FIRST TIME in the history of our military. Ned - would you be willing to be held and treated by a foreign police force under the standards Gonzales set forth. Eletric shocks, maiming, cigarette burns, pulling out nails or teeth - every one of them is legal according to that memo.

It's like our Hiroshima argument, with me taking the pro-bombing side. Until we found the smoking gun, when the scientists went to the future Secretary of State wasn't it? Ned, the Gonzales memoes are indefensible. It has done terrible harm to the War on Terror, becoming a recruiting tool for the Moslem extremists. Gonzales betrayed the entire system of jurisprudence dating back to the foundation of our country. That has been what set us apart, to borrow the phrase, made us the shining light on this hill. Gonzales has helped the Bush administration shutter that light, and the success of terror may very well have caused us, the people of the US, to be complicit in putting it out.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
Ned, I've got to go to sleep, I'm have to get up in under six hours for my next shift. The quote about anything short of damage that cause organ failure or death - come off it. Want me to break out my PDF's of the memos? While one can legitimately argue over abuse versus torture, this memo justifies torture. Period.

The JAG's knew it too, and unlike those poor dumb enlisted fools at Abu Graib, they knew exactly what they were being set up for and covered their butts. If they did not have serious doubts, then why did they get the hundred plus page legal opinion over the implementation of Gonzales memo? As far as I know that is the FIRST TIME in the history of our military. Ned - would you be willing to be held and treated by a foreign police force under the standards Gonzales set forth. Eletric shocks, maiming, cigarette burns, pulling out nails or teeth - every one of them is legal according to that memo.

It's like our Hiroshima argument, with me taking the pro-bombing side. Until we found the smoking gun, when the scientists went to the future Secretary of State wasn't it? Ned, the Gonzales memoes are indefensible. It has done terrible harm to the War on Terror, becoming a recruiting tool for the Moslem extremists. Gonzales betrayed the entire system of jurisprudence dating back to the foundation of our country. That has been what set us apart, to borrow the phrase, made us the shining light on this hill. Gonzales has helped the Bush administration shutter that light, and the success of terror may very well have caused us, the people of the US, to be complicit in putting it out.

As Powell adamantly tried to protest, that this is the first time in the history of the US military that the Geneva Conventions were knowingly circumvented.

Powell had the same arguments as those JAGs, that not only are there moral problems involved, but that it makes things more dangerous for our troops worldwide, and it is like a public relations miracle for the terrorist extremists.

[Ned]

Since I actually haven't read the memo, but have only heard about what it said, I think G. was saying that torture would include bodily harm and death. This does not mean that anything short of that is NOT torture. That leap is illogical.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious
I say torture should be defined as what a reasonable person thinks is 'extreme' pain. I really think that's why a word like 'extreme' is written into the law. Too bad our Senators and our dear Neddy are not reasonable.

Actually, that is what the memo said as well. I just read it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/dojinterrogationmemo20020801.pdf

[Ned]

Shawn, your reading of the memo is wrong.