Let the Torture Prosecutions Begin?

[Vervaria]

Surely you're familiar with something called the "rule of law"?

These two(Parthenon and Brogavia) believe the law is irrelevant to the US torturing who it pleases.

I imagine they draw the line at American citizens, but foreigners and especially enemy combatants are fair game.

Yeah, I just edited my post as you posted that to clarify a bit.

[Scarsaw]

I find Naomi Wolf's book The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot explains how the United States use other legislation like the Military Commissions Act of 2006, along with a vague/changed definition of torture and treason, to get around their previous laws to never allow torture. Guantanamo Bay also helps, as apparently the American government feels their morals should only be confined to their soil. Anything they do not on their soil isn't subjected to their morals and so are okay

[Grave_n_idle]

The US has treated waterboarding as torture when it's been used on our soldiers, so I don't see the slippery slope.

Perhaps more to the point, the US military has used it to try to train people 'how to resist torture' - and it was THAT training that our 'enhanced interrogation' program was BASED ON.

And this is an excuse for them??? I know they mentioned this, but it still doen seem fit!

No, it's not an excuse - it's actually the greatest condemnation of it as torture that there is.

You can't sit there copying passages from the 'book of things that are torture' and maintain an intellectually honest position on the 'it's not torture' platform.

[Scarsaw]

Perhaps more to the point, the US military has used it to try to train people 'how to resist torture' - and it was THAT training that our 'enhanced interrogation' program was BASED ON.

And this is an excuse for them??? I know they mentioned this, but it still doen seem fit!

Many nations torture their elite task force to train them to withstand the pain, and in those scenarios I don't see it as something to condemn or even called torture. People being tortured is a fact of life that we may not like, but it is something that people can survive through, so it makes the most sense that soldiers who are most likely to be captured and tortured should undergo training to better help their survival rates. Also, using torture in this way, is not really torture as we are talking about voluntary soldiers.

What I do approve of is the use of torture on non-volunteered soldiers or people (especially civilian). It's been shown many times that torture does not work for even extracting information or intell, as people will usually say anything the torturer wants to hear in order to end the pain. For example, in the Witch trails, people admitted to using spell craft after being tortured even though we know today that it is impossible/improbable for them to really have done it.

[Jahka]

The were enemy combatants. Thus, they are sources of intel.

Being sources of intel doesn't mean the US can ignore the law whenever it pleases.

Yes it does.
American Lives > Foreign Lives

I am an VFW.

Your post is quite nationalist. It's scary that some of my fellow Americans think like that.

[Voltairian Prospects]

Being sources of intel doesn't mean the US can ignore the law whenever it pleases.

Yes it does.
American Lives > Foreign Lives

I am an VFW.

Your post is quite nationalist. It's scary that some of my fellow Americans think like that.

I have to agree with Jahka with that one. Considering that all men and women, regardless of race are indeed, when all material possessions are removed, equal. Are they not? It's time you took that into consideration, and embraced your brothers and sisters instead of putting them down as you do. You are no better or worse than they are, no one is.

[Iron Chariots]

Being sources of intel doesn't mean the US can ignore the law whenever it pleases.

Yes it does.
American Lives > Foreign Lives

I am an VFW.

Your post is quite nationalist. It's scary that some of my fellow Americans think like that.

Here is quite the conundrum for somebody with his beliefs:
I am a dual citizen: I am a citizen of The United States and I am a citizen of Denmark.

So, how much is my life worth? Am I valued at the level of an American? Or that of a Dane? Perhaps the average of the two? Perhaps the two added together?

So what is the exchange rate on Danes to Americans, anyway? Or any other country? Are there other factors? Are Christians more worthy of life than Buddhists? Are white people better than black people? Straight people more valuable than gays? I wouldn't be surprised if he believed those, too.

My mother is still not an American citizen. Should I love her less than I do my father? After all, she is a foreigner, and thus, according to Parthenon, a less valuable/worthy person.

Ah, xenophobia at its finest.

[Muravyets]

"Torture Memo" author (and unbelievably shitty lawyer) John Yoo is going to have to answer for his involvement in Bush's torture program because the lawsuit against him, brought by former "enemy combatant" Jose Padillo, is being allowed to go forward by decision of a judge appointed by George W. Bush.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archiv ... 018610.php

Apparently, war doesn't count, according to this judge.

[Tonaga]

"Torture Memo" author (and unbelievably shitty lawyer) John Yoo is going to have to answer for his involvement in Bush's torture program because the lawsuit against him, brought by former "enemy combatant" Jose Padillo, is being allowed to go forward by decision of a judge appointed by George W. Bush.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archiv ... 018610.php

Apparently, war doesn't count, according to this judge.

As such this is a positive signal, but do we have to expect something from it? We don't think so, wasn't there some "Executive Order" that would protect that guy and the others? If this judge (who is most likely practising CYA) overruled that then it's "Goodbye My Sweet Someone, Goodbye..." for the whole bunch! I won't hold my breath, though.

IMO: War never counts for those who commit the atrocities, those involved and others may have an entirely different pov on this.hough!

[Lunatic Goofballs]

I think it's really awesome that the torturers might finally have their day in court while the tortured still wait for theirs.

Maybe we can put the torturers in Gitmo and make them wait their turn.

[Xin Han]

I want to get water boarded.

[Ravea]

I want to get water boarded.

I'm pretty sure you really don't.

[The Tofu Islands]

The were enemy combatants. Thus, they are sources of intel.

They were people who had been accused of being enemy combatants. No proof was involved.

I'm pretty sure you really don't.

Ey wont want to after it's happened (if ey does get waterboarded).

[Muravyets]

"Torture Memo" author (and unbelievably shitty lawyer) John Yoo is going to have to answer for his involvement in Bush's torture program because the lawsuit against him, brought by former "enemy combatant" Jose Padillo, is being allowed to go forward by decision of a judge appointed by George W. Bush.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archiv ... 018610.php

Apparently, war doesn't count, according to this judge.

As such this is a positive signal, but do we have to expect something from it? We don't think so, wasn't there some "Executive Order" that would protect that guy and the others? If this judge (who is most likely practising CYA) overruled that then it's "Goodbye My Sweet Someone, Goodbye..." for the whole bunch! I won't hold my breath, though.

IMO: War never counts for those who commit the atrocities, those involved and others may have an entirely different pov on this.hough!

Executive Orders do not actually trump the law. Bush said they did, and everybody for some reason thought it was in their best interests to piss their pants whenever he said anything, but that doesn't make it true. Regardless of what Bush or Cheney or Nixon, or any of that ilk say, the president is not above the law and is not allowed to make up new law with so-called "orders."

The only thing we lack in this country is the will to enforce the law, and that, as it turns out, counts more than anything else in the world. If opening this matter up to civil lawsuits ends up leading to a series (dare I hope for a flood?) of suits by victims of the torture program against its perpetrators, and if even some of such cases are decided in favor of the plaintiffs (victims), then I think it would get harder and harder to avoid criminal investigations, as one judgment after another finds liability. And where there is liability for torture, can culpability be far behind?

And what possible A could that judge be CYing? I am not aware that he has anything at stake in this matter -- and if he does, then he should have recused himself. No, I think it more likely that the matter was judged on its merits, and the argument that Yoo should be immune from lawsuits because he was working for the government at the time did not hold water for this judge, based on his understanding of the law, which is what judges are supposed to do -- judge the merit of cases/arguments according to the law.

EDIT: Oh, and the poster who first used the words "war counts" was claiming that war is an excuse for torture that lets the perpetrators off the hook for their crimes. I was being sarcastic about that when I used the words.

[Robustian]

Since there seems to be so much resistance (especially from Conservatives) to prosecuting members of the Bush Administration for authorizing torture, it might be worthwhile to consider what the founding father of the modern Republican Party had to say about it when he signed the UN Convention Against Torture. Here's 40th US President Ronald Wilson Reagan:

"The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the [1984 UN Convention Against Torture]. It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express the United States' opposition to torture -- an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.

"The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called 'universal jurisdiction'. Each state party [to the Convention] is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution." [emphasis added]

The Gipper Hath Spoken. So where are the trials? Is there some loophole to this Convention that Cheney and Rumsfeld and the Gang can dance through? Can they really spit in the face of The Great Communicator? What says NSG, if anything?

It's real simple.

You have no idea what TORTURE is.

I suggest you study WWI, WWII, the Korean War, and Vietnam. There were CLEAR policies of using TORTURE.

To politicize this, and call it "torture" is to belittle what real torture is. REAL torture broke many bones in John McCain's body. Real torture killed, maimed, and otherwise disabled many of our men who were captured. I'd say, give people some ability to decide what is and isn't TORTURE, instead of just tossing the lable on everything you think might be unpleasant.

[Robustian]

The were enemy combatants. Thus, they are sources of intel.

They were people who had been accused of being enemy combatants. No proof was involved.

I'm pretty sure you really don't.

Ey wont want to after it's happened (if ey does get waterboarded).

Enemy combatants are people who are caught fighting...

I'm see you're into calling everyone in the military a liar, just for your own stupid ends...

[Iron Chariots]

Since there seems to be so much resistance (especially from Conservatives) to prosecuting members of the Bush Administration for authorizing torture, it might be worthwhile to consider what the founding father of the modern Republican Party had to say about it when he signed the UN Convention Against Torture. Here's 40th US President Ronald Wilson Reagan:

"The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the [1984 UN Convention Against Torture]. It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express the United States' opposition to torture -- an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.

"The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called 'universal jurisdiction'. Each state party [to the Convention] is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution." [emphasis added]

The Gipper Hath Spoken. So where are the trials? Is there some loophole to this Convention that Cheney and Rumsfeld and the Gang can dance through? Can they really spit in the face of The Great Communicator? What says NSG, if anything?

It's real simple.

You have no idea what TORTURE is.

I suggest you study WWI, WWII, the Korean War, and Vietnam. There were CLEAR policies of using TORTURE.

To politicize this, and call it "torture" is to belittle what real torture is. REAL torture broke many bones in John McCain's body. Real torture killed, maimed, and otherwise disabled many of our men who were captured. I'd say, give people some ability to decide what is and isn't TORTURE, instead of just tossing the lable on everything you think might be unpleasant.

Heh. You do know that after WWII, we executed enemy soldiers for torture, right?
Guess what a number of the people who were executed did?
Hint:

It rhymes with "gotterboarding"

[Non Aligned States]

Real torture killed, maimed, and otherwise disabled many of our men who were captured.

Ahh, so long as it does not kill, maim, or disable, it is not torture?

Excellent. I shall prepare the hot poking irons, electrodes, car batteries and submersion chambers.

I am certain you would be quite willing to submit yourself to my ministrations with the aforementioned tools and certify that their use, so long as they do not kill, maim or disable you, are not torture.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

The were enemy combatants. Thus, they are sources of intel.

They were people who had been accused of being enemy combatants. No proof was involved.

I'm pretty sure you really don't.

Ey wont want to after it's happened (if ey does get waterboarded).

Enemy combatants are people who are caught fighting...

I'm see you're into calling everyone in the military a liar, just for your own stupid ends...

You might have a point if all of the enemy combatants were actually caught fighting. Many weren't.

How are the military any more trustworthy than the police, the district attorneys or any other person? Nevermind lying, people also make mistakes. This is why we have courts. Because it takes more than the word of the faceless military who is a criminal and who isn't.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Real torture killed, maimed, and otherwise disabled many of our men who were captured.

Ahh, so long as it does not kill, maim, or disable, it is not torture?

Excellent. I shall prepare the hot poking irons, electrodes, car batteries and submersion chambers.

I am certain you would be quite willing to submit yourself to my ministrations with the aforementioned tools and certify that their use, so long as they do not kill, maim or disable you, are not torture.

Don't forget sensory deprivation. That's good stuff.

[Daistallia 2104]

We should not bother with giving people that want to take away our rights and lives, treatment worthy of normal people.

And thus make ourselves their equivalants?

The were enemy combatants. Thus, they are sources of intel.

The Geneva Protocols and the courts have made it quite clear that there are no gaps. One falls under (in this case) either protocol 3 (POW) or protocol 4 (civilian).

[Daistallia 2104]

Speeking of torture, I don't see whats so wrong with water boading.

You don't see what's wrong with taking a civilian protected by laws, strapping him to a board, and starting to drown him? Really?

Waterboarding is not a simulation. Unless you have been strapped down to the board, have endured the agonizing feeling of the water overpowering your gag reflex, and then feel your throat open and allow pint after pint of water to involuntarily fill your lungs, you will not know the meaning of the word.

Waterboarding is a controlled drowning that, in the American model, occurs under the watch of a doctor, a psychologist, an interrogator and a trained strap-in/strap-out team. It does not simulate drowning, as the lungs are actually filling with water. There is no way to simulate that. The victim is drowning. How much the victim is to drown depends on the desired result (in the form of answers to questions shouted into the victim’s face) and the obstinacy of the subject. A team doctor watches the quantity of water that is ingested and for the physiological signs which show when the drowning effect goes from painful psychological experience, to horrific suffocating punishment to the final death spiral.

http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2007/1 ... ure-perio/

[Muravyets]

Heh. You do know that after WWII, we executed enemy soldiers for torture, right?
Guess what a number of the people who were executed did?
Hint:

It rhymes with "gotterboarding"

The thing I find most annoying about all these torture apologists is all their revisionist BS. Waterboarding has been defined as a torture since the fucking Inquisition, but now, some gaggle of neocons pulled some crap out their asses by which they just Made. Up. some "standard" that says, "if we don't call it torture, then bing! it's not torture and we can do it and not get into any trouble." And magically, the fact that the United States government tried, convicted, and executed Japanese officers for WAR CRIMES because they TORTURED prisoners by WATERBOARDING just never happened. And the fact that as recently as the 1980s law enforcement officers in the US were tried, convicted and sentenced to years in prison because they TORTURED prisoners by WATERBOARDING them, that didn't happen, either.

Waterboarding was only torture for hundreds of years because everybody said it was. But if you don't say it is, then it isn't. Do these people think the whole world is dumb?

[Non Aligned States]

Don't forget sensory deprivation. That's good stuff.

Perhaps, but it's unreliable. We had a batch of LG-lites with the last experiment. We need less of you, not more, even if they were cheap knockoffs.

[Daistallia 2104]

Yes it does.
American Lives > Foreign Lives

Such attitudes put me and every other US citizen abroad at direct risk. Bad show.