Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by otago, Feb 11, 2011.
Do you think the people responsible should be convicted of torture?
Well, if they are shooting at you, you can know.
That said, I agree basically with this. This is the main reason I oppose it, they were never proven guilty.
Ajidica seems to be the most likely to benefit from this tidbit, though budding lawyers (or people with legal hobbies) might also want to know that Georgia State University put their lectures on International Law (you know, what they teach law students) onto iTunes for free download.
It's a free course, in what lawyers pay great $$$ to learn.
You will be missed.
Unlike the non-enemy non-combatants.....
Well, by your own definition it doesnt unless it inflicts severe physical or mental pain.
My point is simply uncontrollable fear =/= severe mental pain.
No links, but just the simple fact offered that GWB was indeed advised of it in that way. I assume we can both agree those advising the President can be labeled 'professionals'?
I never said it was 'no worse than', I merely said the fear response stems from the same place - a fear of drowning. Do you disagree?
At least be accurate in quoting me please. Thanks.
Yeah, one of my children tried to tell me that. Guess its going around with the kids these days.
Seriously, lets run with this a little. I've spent a lot of time over the last few years actually trying to verify this and haven't really been able too. All I find on the issue is punditry.
Do we have specific case citations anywhere regarding this? Can anybody provide an element of truth to this "throughly disproven" notion in the halls of American judicial history? I'm sure we can find case history which might have included waterboarding among other forms of "torture", but can we actually prove waterboarding is torture, right here?
I would really like some clarification from you guys, because I haven't been able to find a concrete example anywhere. Only punditry and "scholarly interpretation".
Isn't there something about not resorting to things "cruel and unusual"? That's waterboarding down pat. The US probably never before has resorted to it, so a precedent might need to be established? Which so far has been successfully dodged it seems?
You mean like the Japanese soldiers who were hanged for those very war crimes in WWII, the US solider who was court-martialed in the Philipines in 1902, the US soldier who was court-martialed in Vietnam, and the Texas sheriff and his deputies who were tried and convicted of waterboarding? Those sorts of specific cases?
Interrogation =/= punishment for a crime.
So, you are trusting attorneys who have no medical or psychological experiance and who were instructed by Bush to find a way to waterboard?
Could you also be accurate in quoting me?
Anyhow, what is the point of asserting that the fear stems from the same place? That is like asserting that the fear of lacerations comes from the same place you get scared of papercuts from. Not relavent and hardly enlightening.
Two people asserting the exact same thing? Shouldn't take a genius to understand the implications.
What's wrong with that? Isn't that typically how major corporations violate the law with little or no consequences?
Sorry. That's a one-way street going the other way.
That is just an allegation. There is no way you can prove that US government officials severely cut that detainee's genitals multiple times in a secret CIA facility. All that video tape has mysteriously disappeared.
That isn't proof either. It could be a conspiracy.
From The Guardian
Who does not think the person responsible for sending this person here for this to happen should not be tried for torture.
I'm sure he was just hallucinating all that to make the US look bad. He may have even cut his own penis numerous times to frame us. Do you have any sort of proof that any of this actually happened, instead of having to take the word of a suspected terrorist?
He could have been playing water polo and someone dropped a razor blade in the pool.
Alright in retrospect I sounded kinda like a jerk back there. Still I'm not gonna hang around since your worldview is simply not compatible.
Absolutely. If something is too harsh to be considered legal punishment, it should surely be deemed to harsh to be considered legal interrogation.
Where is the evidence Bush instructed them to find a way to waterboard? Thats a first I havent heard before.
I have been and I expect the same in return.
The point is simply that its tied to an uncontrolable response.
@Siluran: so you simply accept all that as truth on its face without a shred of evidence to substantiate it?
Compatible with what? We are just taking the law, and the real world into account and coming to an informed decision about one of the most reprehensible periods in America's history.
But it is clearly contrary with reactionary USA#1 dogmatism to do so. The only thing left to do is to apparently deny the mountain of facts which exist that clearly shows otherwise. At least that seems to be the only argument presented in this thread in rebuttal so far.
One thing that is pertinent I think to this thread.
You all do know that insurgents are trained to allege torture and mistreatment even if none occurs correct? Its an attempt to exploit what they see within us as weakness, and they know full well that there will be many that will believe any allegation, regardless of how wild it is. This is at its root simply disinformation meant to discredit the very people we depend upon to protect our nation. Either you buy into it based upon simple allegation...or you dont.
Also, I am not saying that the case in every instance. I dont pretend that our people are angels either, and that assuredly people cross lines. But such allegations are meant to over-hype such issues and cripple our ability to effectively counter them.
Separate names with a comma.