Event Calendar
February 2012
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* * * 01 02 03 04
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 * * *
<< (add event) >>


User Blox 4
- Put stuff here

Barack Obama
"Lincoln Sells Out Slaves"
by: Rob Kailey - Sep 13
1 Comments
If You Haven't Seen This
by: Rob Kailey - Apr 28
5 Comments
Impeach the President?
by: Rob Kailey - Mar 16
15 Comments
It's the system, stupid!
by: Jay Stevens - Oct 25
7 Comments

Search




Advanced Search


Rob Kailey is a working schmuck with no ties or affiliations to any governmental or political organizations, save those of sympathy.

Torture masterminds should be prosecuted

by: Jay Stevens

Fri Jan 16, 2009 at 12:34:55 PM MST


Obama:

Obama said his team is still evaluating the whole issue of interrogations and detentions.

"Obviously, we are looking at past practices and I don't believe anyone is above the law," he told ABC in an interview.

"But my instinct is for us to focus on how do we make sure that moving forward we are doing the right thing. That doesn't mean that if somebody has blatantly broken the law, that they are above the law," he added.

Paul Krugman:

I'm sorry, but if we don't have an inquest into what happened during the Bush years - and nearly everyone has taken Mr. Obama's remarks to mean that we won't - this means that those who hold power are indeed above the law because they don't face any consequences if they abuse their power.

Glenn Greenwald, of course, is apoplectic:

Now added to the pantheon of "liberal" dogma is the shrill, ideological belief that high government officials must abide by our laws and should be treated like any other citizen when they break them. To believe that now makes you not just a "liberal," but worse: a "liberal score-settler." Apparently, one can attain the glorious status of being a moderate, a centrist, a high-minded independent only if one believes that high political officials (and our most powerful industries, such as the telecoms) should be able to break numerous laws (i.e.: commit felonies), openly admit that they've done so, and then be immunized from all consequences. That's how our ideological spectrum is now defined.

Greenwald goes on to claim, quite rightly I suspect, that probably the main reason Obama -- and more importantly, Congresss -- doesn't want to go there is because they were complicit with Bush's extralegal activities. In short, if they investigate, everyone will be swept up. I suspect the DC Establishment is content with Obama's promised kinder, gentler anti-terror activities, which probably will preclude torture, if Eric Holder's recent testimony during his confirmation hearings is any indication.

Still, it's torture. Those that green-lighted torture, those leaders that approved its use, should be prosecuted to the fullest, whether they were Democrats or Republicans. It's not a matter of "settling scores," it's about holding the guilty accountable, about ensuring that government officials respect the law.  

Jay Stevens :: Torture masterminds should be prosecuted
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Either we as a nation can investigate, (0.00 / 0)
or another nation will. I imagine a war crimes tribunal in a foreign country might get to the bottom of what transpired in the Bush regime quicker and more fully than anyof the three branches of our government will. I imagine that there will be a lot of people who will find that they have war crimes warrants out for them in foreign countries, and may not want to spend their golden years in a jail in, say, Spain or Turkey. Nothing like being banished to the one country that will shield you, and yet loathes you: the good ole U.S. of A.

There's a reason that (0.00 / 0)
the actions of elected officials in the course of the their jobs are not subject to prosecution.  It's to prevent political retribution.  Obama is apparently more informed on this than you guys.

There was no torture at any rate.  So get over it.

- Keeping the Left honest since 2001


Then you wouldn't mind a round (0.00 / 0)
on the waterboard to try it out, would you? We could arrange that for you.

[ Parent ]
wha--? (0.00 / 0)
Er, that's not quite right, Syd. (Big surprise!) While elected officials are protected to some degree, they're certainly subject to expulsion, impeachment, and then prosecution. And appointed officials enjoy no such protection.

As for the torture, there's plenty of first-hand accounts of it happening from both torturers and the tortured, there are pictures of it happening, and even Cheney and Bush admitted they approved of it. I'm not sure how much more evidence you need...

Or if you don't think waterboarding is torture, waterboarding has been prosecuted as a war crime by the US, so the legal precedent goes against you.  


[ Parent ]
They are subject to the law (0.00 / 0)
When in the course of their lives- ie: a dui will be prosecuted.  Deciding to bomb a country would not fall under that.  Administrations of the past have been protected even when their actions were less than judicious, or even when they resulted in horrific things.  

But, since liberal Democrats like you change things to suit your worldview, I suppose all that will change.

Though as always, it will be applied only to your political enemies, which that precedent was trying to prevent in the first place.  

- Keeping the Left honest since 2001


[ Parent ]
The countless numbers of politicians (0.00 / 0)
that have gone to jail for breaking the law serves to invalidate your so-called "precedent" theory. If the people of this country really wanted to protect politicians (all the way up to, and including the president) from the provisions of the law, they wouldn't have written things like impeachment into the federal and state constitutions.

Believing that there are a class of people above the law only invites the people to revolt against this oligarchy. Holding that the executive branch wields extra-legal authority and powers invokes visions of the king and his court. That illusion can and must be broken by the will of the people, revealing once again that indeed the emperor wears no clothes.


[ Parent ]
Get a life Jay........ (0.00 / 0)
You are forgetting the fact that these are people who are foreign combatants - if it wasn't for the FACT that information gleaned from these people saved American lives they should have been lined up and shot - and saved the fuel transporting them to Cuba -

Let's see how his worship, the almighty Obama deals with them -  


Torturing enemy combatants did NOT save American lives (0.00 / 0)
nor get any valuable information.  The FBI concluded after studying the results from torture that most of the information gleaned was false and the remainder unusable.  Torture does not extract the truth and never has.  The purpose of torture is to humiliate the victim.

Larkspur

[ Parent ]
enemy combatants? (0.00 / 0)
That's a straw man argument. Innocent people have been tortured. Plus we're not at war. No declaration of war exists. Therefore, there can't be "enemy combatants." And even if enemy combatants existed, it's illegal to torture them according to the treaties we've signed.

The real question is, do you respect the law?


[ Parent ]
I repeat - get a life - (0.00 / 0)
So Jay, in your quest to keep this inane argument alive you deny we are at war?

When a civilian picks up a weapon he is no longer a civilian -

I know that the anointed one, his worship,messiah of the white liberals, protector of the poor Barack Obama voted against the war, but the rest of the Congress authorized it when they abdicated their authority to the President -  


[ Parent ]
Even if what you say is true: (0.00 / 0)
"information gleaned from these people saved American lives," the way the information was gleaned (torture--in the eyes of our adversaries), has been the single most effective recruiting tool for al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations.

There have been around 4,000 American troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan since Abu Ghraib. And Abu Ghraib has been a huge factor in building opposition forces against the American occupation of Iraq, which has prolonged the war.

American tactics (torture) in the Iraq war are directly responsible for the course of the war and the thousands of additional American deaths and tens of thousands of wounded. So what information that may have been gained, and at questionable value was done at great expense of American troops.

Also, if you are really willing to say it is ok for us to lose thousands of troops and extend wars indefinitely in exchange for the opportunity to engage in a little feel-good revengeful torture, then you are morally culpable for the needless deaths of American troops and the pain, loss and suffering of their families.  


[ Parent ]
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Bookmark and Share

Poll
Voting. Useful or not?
Yes!
No!
Maybe, but only if you vote my way.
There are theories that ...
Meh ...

Results

Blog Roll
  • A Secular Franciscan Life
  • Big Sky Blog
  • David Crisp's Billings Blog
  • Discovering Urbanism
  • Ecorover
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Intelligent Discontent
  • Intermountain Energy
  • Lesley's Podcast
  • Livingston, I Presume
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Montana Cowgirl
  • Montana Main St.
  • Montana Maven
  • Montana With kids
  • Patia Stephens
  • Prairie Mary
  • Speedkill
  • Sporky
  • The Alberton Papers
  • The Fighting Liberal
  • The Montana Capitol Blog
  • The Montana Misanthrope
  • Thoughts From the Middle of Nowhere
  • Treasure State Judaism
  • Writing and the West
  • Wrong Dog's Life Chest
  • Wulfgar!

  • Powered by: SoapBlox