tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post6458198583644624358..comments2024-02-29T00:46:38.800-08:00Comments on Washingtons Blog: Supreme Court Ruling Means Torture May ReturnUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post-91204628138236859922009-12-15T17:42:04.464-08:002009-12-15T17:42:04.464-08:00What a digusting distortion of the facts.
I read...What a digusting distortion of the facts. <br /><br />I read your Mclatchy link. The first thirteen paragraphs tell the tale of torture to extract al Qaida links to Iraq as told by one man. Then there is this:<br /><br />***Others in the interrogation operation "agreed there was pressure to produce intelligence, but did not recall pressure to identify links between Iraq and al Qaida," the report said.***<br /><br />IE, most folks agreed there was pressure for intel (how could there not have been?) yet no one else remembers that that intel had to be about Iraq-al Qaida. <br /><br />Great post. About nothing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post-4269495177808052272009-12-15T07:58:45.887-08:002009-12-15T07:58:45.887-08:00In the past we have executed people for torturing ...In the past we have executed people for torturing American POW and have signed treaty after treaty pledging not to do it. So any splitting of hairs of who has the power and who doesn't is missing the point. We have given our word by signature to abstain from torture. To argure wether it works or not or is needed or not is immaterial. As retired military I would not serve in a service that tortured.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13156080225918567393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post-35466846610993619952009-12-14T19:13:45.896-08:002009-12-14T19:13:45.896-08:00As I said and you wouldn't post meanspiritedne...As I said and you wouldn't post meanspiritedness is in Duhmerica's DNA.bosunjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16292980282480526542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post-11993326999743405932009-12-14T12:29:08.999-08:002009-12-14T12:29:08.999-08:00Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, waterboarding, ...Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, waterboarding, sleep deprivation, isolation, extended confinement, stress positions, good-cop/bad cop, and creative story telling.<br /><br />Some of these are clearly torture, and some are not, but I don't trust Congress to create a bright line rule in such a murky area. Some of these are used in ordinary police work, and the courts have upheld them. Keeping a suspect awake for 18 hours may be torture in some cases, and not in others. What about the junkie that is so doped up he thinks snakes will kill him if he goes back to the cell. Is that torture? <br /><br />The best policy is to curb the interrogation techniques of domestic law enforcement so that evidence is not excluded, but give a freer hand for use with prisoners of war to use the above methods. <br /><br />If a method only yields bad information, then experienced interrogators will not use them. If overzealous interrogators get to out of hand, then a civil lawsuits should be used to rebalance the system.<br /><br />Any legal ban would create a grey area in which interrogators would fear to tread, and would likely as not be pulled into the criminal justice system to make it even harder to catch crooks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-53246864840716464.post-63577626591064731382009-12-14T12:18:14.482-08:002009-12-14T12:18:14.482-08:00America has "banned" torture. But accor...America has "banned" torture. But according to the Bush administration's interpretation of the presidential powers, ANYTHING that interferes with the president's ability to do his job the way he wants to can be ignored as a threat to national security. America has always held international law to be non-binding, and after watching the events of Copenhagen, I think this is a trend that will continue.<br /><br />I think that this would be an entirely different issue if the command to torture had come from any desk but the president's. Presidents in America enjoy a number of benefits that might be classified as extra-judicial. No president (after becoming president) has ever been prosecuted for crimes by any entity other than congress, and never after term completion.<br /><br />In this case it would be very difficult to hold anyone accountable without holding the president accountable. A president is much more likely to get a pardon from his successor (or have his crimes ignored completely) than a subpoena to a war crimes tribunal.<br /><br />All of this still begs the question: why Iraq? We're still buying oil from them at not a discounted price. Was it to ensure access to and security of their oil fields? Was it an offensive projection into the middle east for some kind of strategic positioning? If Bush was pushing this hard to establish grounds for invasion, there was something specific he wanted there, something worth billions of dollars in military operations, as well as the credibility of the US and its intelligence services. At least, we would hope that such a cost-benefit analysis was made.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com