With the Democratic leadership continuing to block any impeachment effort or any serious effort to hold officials liable for the U.S. torture program, Congress was free to hold another bizarre hearing today to calmly discussed our use of torture. Even though current Attorney General continues to evade the question, former Attorney General acknowledged and defended water boarding.
This is not the first hearing where the value of our use of torture was addressed as a routine matter of discussion, click here. Indeed, we have now gotten to the point where we openly compare our acts of torture with those of other nations, click here.
Thus, it was no surprise to see members bantering about on the use of a war crime today like it was some chicken subsidy going to mark up.
For his part, Ashcroft fulfilled his stereotype as more general and attorney. When asked if he felt that other nations could legitimately waterboard our own soldiers when captured, Ashcroft did not contest that possibility. Instead, he gave a non-answer: “Well, my subscription to these memos, and my belief that the law provides the basis for these memos persisted even in the presence of my son serving two tours of duty overseas in the Gulf area as a member of our armed forces,.” Some could easily read that response as affirming that it would be permissible to waterboard our own soldiers when captured.
With the International Red Cross informing the Administration that high officials could be tried for war crimes over our torture program, here, many of us are left with this out-of-body sensation in watching these hearings unfold. Just yesterday, Speaker Pelosi reaffirmed that (no matter how strong the evidence might be that President Bush committed crimes, including war crimes, in office) she would not allow impeachment proceedings to begin. So, instead, we just sit around and calmly discuss war crimes like some interesting factoids and conversation points.
For the full story, click here.
The law is the law my friend mespo. If you are talking about the rule of law, you have to include the whole spectrum. And let’s get deep here, real deep. What about the death penalty? Why are you not bringing that up? Is it torture or morally wrong to kill a man or women because the committed a heinous crime? To me that seems like eye for an eye. Think about that and get back to me.
Gyges,
Miles and Sol are simply repeaters. They simply repeat what George and his communication handlers tell them what to say. As usual, facts do not get in their way. Illegality doesn’t matter because it is George doing it. It is a sad commentary, but true. I do believe that come January, 20th, there will be investigations that will bring some of these felons to justice.
Fine. I will admit I’m wrong about full blown torture. How about a suggestion that torture should instead be defined. Because I think some things labled as “torture” are not indeed torture.
“Now why don’t you go on the weed smoking blog, the going over the speed limit blog, and complain about how what they are doing is wrong too. I think everyone here speeds. Am I correct? Oh my gosh, the rule of law states we shouldn’t do that! It’s so morally wrong. It’s a small case but you have to put it in perspective.”
**********************
rafflaw & gyges:
I wouldn’t waste my time on this guy. Besides no knowledge of history, his perspective is warped if he equates speeding with torture. Warped, maybe I should say perverted. He can spell though–and that’s a plus for conservatives.
A country of morals? You think priests raping boys, murders, obese people, pornography, stealing money from shareholders makes a moral country? HAHAHA!! Oh please, the rest of the world is laughing at us, but it’s not because of torture.
Apparently I got so worked up I forgot how to use punctuation. By the way, I’m still waiting for an answer regarding shamanism.
I will forget the fact that you have multiple spelling errors in your argument rafflaw and just get to a real question. What then should we do if we catch a known terrorist? I will ask the same question as before. If we catch Osama, how to we get all the information he most certainly has? Do you not think it would be valuable to get info on funds, possible weapons, and training camps? Also, it may be illegal now, but would you ever be up for legalizing it for the better of the country? Slavery was legal, preventing blacks and women from voting was legal. Did that make it right? This country is great, but I have to tell you that we are in different times than 1776 my friend. There were no nukes back then, there wasn’t fear of planes flying into populated cities. We each, as Americans, are entitled to our opinion. And this is why our nation has begun to suffer, because there are such harsh contrasts between people that we can never get along. Now why don’t you go on the weed smoking blog, the going over the speed limit blog, and complain about how what they are doing is wrong too. I think everyone here speeds. Am I correct? Oh my gosh, the rule of law states we shouldn’t do that! It’s so morally wrong. It’s a small case but you have to put it in perspective.
Miles,
I don’t think you read what YOU said luckily for me, it’s right up there for all to see it reads “When the plotter of 9/11 endured 33 seconds of waterboarding, and then gave valuable information, I think you have to think of the lives cost.” That is not the same as saying that water boarding led to the capture of a 9/11 plotter.
I know it’s hard to believe, but I actually DO read through and THINK about what people who disagree with me say. Then I think about my reply. Then I go through and re-read the person’s comments and my own. I do that last just to make sure I got things right.
I admit the remark about where you get your info wasn’t in the spirit of reasonable debate, but you don’t seem that open to anyone else’s opinions anyway, so I thought I’d say something witty.
sol:
“What is the difference? We’re civilized?”
*********************
You’ve just answered your own question.
Miles:
Ah, those were Americans we put into those camps, and while their rights were violated they were not tortured. We apologized and paid reparations there. Do you really not see the difference or are you intentionally obtuse.
Sol,
While I was responding to MIles, you wrote that you approve of this illegal act. No matter what George W. Bush tells you and Miles, it is illegal. The “legal opinions” that Bush is clamoring about is better called an excuse. You don’t get out of jail by saying your attorney said it was ok! Your president has committed a domestic crime and a war crime. Are you in favor of your president committing war crimes? You must because you believe every lie that he tells you. He claims that waterboarding got us info that allowed us to catch Khalid Shiek Mohammed. And why should you believe a man who has lied us into an illegal war? Why should you think that this president who is AWOL from his Air National Guard unit is a patriot? And one more time, it is a crime no matter what information may or may not have been obtained. And lets not forget that this was the President who was asleep at the wheel prior to 9/11 and did nothing to prevent it. As I mentioned to Miles, lets have your full name so the war crimes tribunal can ask you a few questions.
The amazing thing, is that people watch 24, and assume that our intelligence services always have the same level of confidence and absolute assurance that the information they get is reliable as the data gotten on 24.
The REAL WORLD doesn’t work that way.
sol – If we caught someone, and had sufficient reason, to believe our torture could cough up reliable information, sufficient to STOP a terrorist attack that is immenent, then YES, I say torture. If we’ve captured someone, and we’re trying to get general information out of him, hideouts, names, numbers etc. then NO, I am not for torture.
The big problem is that many Americans seem to think that the activities on 24 are realistic, and the levels of confidence we have are far greater than they actually are.
Would you have supported torture based on our intelligence information regarding Iraq’s nuclear capabilities in 2002/3? I’m betting the guys in our intelligence service would have, after all we went to WAR over totally flawed intel that we had months to vet.
America should always be known for taking the high road. After all, it’s AMERICA. If we sink to the level of, “Well they behead us, so anything we do to them is ok,” we are no longer taking the high road, but will simply sink to the depths of THEIR immorality, abandoning ours along the way.
America is too good a country to have it’s morals dashed by fools.
Sol,
You’re arguing an old point. Torture doesn’t get good information, just confessions. That’s why the legal system doesn’t allow confessions given under duress. The duress is usually much milder then torture and yet the law views it as possible for it to make people to confess to things they didn’t do. How is a false confession going to help anyone?
By being nice to the Japanese during world war II you mean putting thousands of their people in camps in the West? Correct?
Miles,
I am saddened by your lack of knowledge of the historical facts surrounding torture. We prosecuted Japanese officials for waterboarding after WWII. We(The U.S.) prosecuted some of our own soldiers during the Vietnam era for waterboarding. Your statements assume two big myths: 1. Torture actually produces good information. If that was true why is the FBI and the U.S. Military against it. Before McCain was running for President, he stated that torture does not produce good information. So, even if you can get over the legal probelm, domestically and internationally, you don’t get good information. 2. The biggest myth is that it is ok to torture because we are dealing with bad guys here. Well, these bad guys are no badder than the Nazi’s or the Japanese torturers and we were not allowed to torture them and were better than them for not torturing. Also, tell me who the right guys are to torture. I always here we need to torture a specific inddividual who may have information about an attack on the U.S.. Unless they are torturing every prisoner, and they may be doing that, how do they know who has the “big information”?
Finally, your question about Osama being caught is a great one. What this illegal administration has us doing is debating whether we should torture a bad guy. You and the Bush felons have forgotten one big thing, It is Illegal and has been for years. It is illegal now. You are advocating and promoting someone to commit a felony and an international war crime. Why don’t you provide your real name so we can come looking for you when the grownups take over in January and we can add your name to the enablers that allowed our country, my country to be mentioned in the same discussion as the Nazi’s in the concentration camps and the Soviet Union in its Gulags. I stand with Gyges when he says having empathy is part of being a patriotic American.
One final question for you Miles. WWJT? I have asked it before. Who Would Jesus Torture?
THANK YOU SOL!! A LOGICAL PERSON!
I’m staring to think you don’t read much. It wasn’t the 9/11 plotter but it led to him.
The CIA has confirmed Zubaydah was one of three al Qaeda suspects subjected to waterboarding. After he was waterboarded, officials say Zubaydah gave up valuable information that led to the capture of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammad and fellow 9/11 plotter Ramzi bin al-Shibh.
Mohammad, who is known as KSM, was also subjected to waterboarding by the CIA.
In the interview with ABC News Friday, Bush defended the waterboarding technique used against KSM.
“We had legal opinions that enabled us to do it,” Bush said. “And no, I didn’t have any problem at all trying to find out what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed knew.”
The president said, “I think it’s very important for the American people to understand who Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was. He was the person who ordered the suicide attack — I mean, the 9/11 attacks.”
Miles,
Perhaps you know that the torture techniques approved by cheney and addington came from wwII enemy manuals on how to obtain false confessions from american prisoners? We now have actual, fact based evidence that these same techniques, applied to our prisoners had the exact same result–a whole lot of false information. If you want to protect America false confessions won’t help. The supposed usefulness of torture is a lie. I believe what Al, Mespo and others have said is more germain. If we give up being a nation of laws, of justice then we don’t need terrorists to destroy who we are, we just did that ourselves.
Pose a question to yourself. If the terrorists once
again were striking inside the US and one was caught
during the attack. Would you waterboard this individual
to try and extract information from him on the ongoing
attack or would you throw him in a jail cell and let him sit
while these terrorists continued there murderous ways?
Would you waterboard him to find out if there were future
attacks planned? What if it was you or one of your family
members in the way of this potential attack? Would you
then think differently about waterboarding? These terrorists
will stop at nothing to torture and murder us. What is the difference? We’re civilized? We’ll all be dead…
Miles,
I’m beginning to think you pull “information” out of a part of your anatomy most of us use to get rid of waste. Either that or you have way to big of a mouth for the security clearance you’ve been given.
Setting aside questions of how you were privy to what I assume would b e state secrets: If someone involved in the Sept. 11 tragedy was water boarded and revealed information how did it save lives? I’m assuming that since I didn’t hear about any part of the plan that was thwarted by anyone not aboard an airplane that this information was revealed after the fact. I repeat how did information about something that had ALREADY HAPPENED save lives?