Comments on: CIA Off The Hook For Past Waterboarding
Obama Won't Prosecute CIA Officials Who Used Harsh Interrogation Techniques During Bush Administration
Add a Comment See all 393 Comments
- "See you just listed the deffense of everyone involved in this, all this is a legal grey area and just becsause some bleeding heart lib calls this torture does not make any of it torture. In your words it is a legal grey area and Bush can use that same deffense." Posted by stimporksuks
Yo, failed neo, read this, it is not "some bleeding heart lib" calling it torture, it is a treaty to which we are signatories, thus constitutionally obligating us to observe.
".. Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions." ? UN Convention Against Torture, Article 1.1
No "grey area", as you put it, anyone with a junior high school reading comprehension can understand it. - Reply to this comment
- Help understand this logic you becasue you just sounded like Bush with the spin you put on this. You putting them in isolation becasue they caused and problem and to prevent tehm from cause more pronlems but you not doing it to punish them.
So I guess we put people prison becasue they broke the law and to prevent them from breaking the law again but we are not punishing them for breaking the law. WHew we my head is spinning on that one help to understand, you really need to visit Oreily so the spin can stop right there.
Posted by stimporksuks at 7:49 AM : Apr 17, 2009
Man alive...... They don't exist to punish the inmates.
Prisons exist to remove them from society so they don't harm anyone else, while they REHABILITATE the inmates, so that they may return as successful and productive members of society.
Granted most are vermin through and through, and will NEVER be productive members of society, and most that are released, do end up coming back to prison.
But prisons don't exist to punish inmates. - Reply to this comment
- AGAIN - you're comparing MURDER, SUMMARY EXECUTION, and ASSASSINATION to the "legal gray area" that our CIA officers operated under.
Did the Iraqi's or Nazi's in your example, KNOW that KILLING someone was illegal? Of course they did, how could they not?
Did our CIA officers KNOW that what they were doing was illegal? They didn't kill anyone, or permanently harm them, right?
Posted by hungry1968-15 at 7:48 AM : Apr 17, 2009
just admit your opinion would be different if Obama authorized it....you make yourself look foolish with every post - Reply to this comment
- Posted by tomtona
I can do you one better, because if one asks ones' self, one's answer may only be opinion. Lets hear what the UN convention against torture, to which we are signatories, and therefore constitutionally obliged to observe, says on the subject...
Article 2
"No exceptional circumstances whatsoever" may be invoked to justify torture, including war, threat of war, internal political instability, public emergency, terrorist acts, violent crime, or any form of armed conflict. Torture cannot be justified as a means to protect public safety or prevent emergencies. Neither can it be justified by orders from superior officers or public officials. The prohibition on torture applies to all territories under a party's effective jurisdiction, and protects all people under its effective control, regardless of citizenship or how that control is exercised."
Pretty clear, yes? - Reply to this comment
- Apply your question to other Countries and your answer should reveal itself. Should Nazi war criminals be absolved of wrongdoing provided they were told by Hitler the actions were ok? How about the atrocities in Iraq? Didn't Saddam approve of the gassings? Should this negate prosecution of the acts?
War crimes do not cease to be war crimes because they were sanctioned by the upper brass.
Posted by tomtona at 7:40 AM : Apr 17, 2009
AGAIN - you're comparing MURDER, SUMMARY EXECUTION, and ASSASSINATION to the "legal gray area" that our CIA officers operated under.
Did the Iraqi's or Nazi's in your example, KNOW that KILLING someone was illegal? Of course they did, how could they not?
Did our CIA officers KNOW that what they were doing was illegal? They didn't kill anyone, or permanently harm them, right? - Reply to this comment
- But arent they uncomfortable being isolated?
Posted by mortar29 at 7:37 AM : Apr 17, 2009
Who cares?
Posted by hungry1968-15 at 7:42 AM : Apr 17, 2009
hungry says as he loosens his belt - Reply to this comment
- Good thing you arent running national defense!
Posted by mortar29 at 7:39 AM : Apr 17, 2009
Yeah - all that pesky "justice" and such.
We know how you conservatives hate that. - Reply to this comment
- But arent they uncomfortable being isolated?
Posted by mortar29 at 7:37 AM : Apr 17, 2009
Who cares? - Reply to this comment
- hungry 1968 asks, "So you think that the CIA officers should be charged with crimes, even though the Bush regime told them that what they were doing was perfectly legal?"
Apply your question to other Countries and your answer should reveal itself. Should Nazi war criminals be absolved of wrongdoing provided they were told by Hitler the actions were ok? How about the atrocities in Iraq? Didn't Saddam approve of the gassings? Should this negate prosecution of the acts?
War crimes do not cease to be war crimes because they were sanctioned by the upper brass.
Posted by tomtona at 7:40 AM : Apr 17, 2009
only reason hungry is against it...or says he is...is because Bush authorized....he is an obama sheep - Reply to this comment
- hungry 1968 asks, "So you think that the CIA officers should be charged with crimes, even though the Bush regime told them that what they were doing was perfectly legal?"
Apply your question to other Countries and your answer should reveal itself. Should Nazi war criminals be absolved of wrongdoing provided they were told by Hitler the actions were ok? How about the atrocities in Iraq? Didn't Saddam approve of the gassings? Should this negate prosecution of the acts?
War crimes do not cease to be war crimes because they were sanctioned by the upper brass. - Reply to this comment
Author Thomas Friedman on Obama's Afghanistan plan and the war on terror.
