Terrorism and Torture...how do we move forward?

[Trinity]

A. Do you think no acts of torture were committed under the Bush/Cheney regime? Should we just move on? If so, how? If not, what should be done?

B. Do you think that acts of torture were committed but because Nancy Pelosi didn't blow the whistle we should all move on? If so, how? If not, what should be done?

C. Do you believe something else entirely? If so, where do we go from here?

*****************************************************
Depending on your answer:

1. Is there ever an argument for torture?

2. Would God condone torture?

3. Is waterboarding torture?

4. Are other Enhanced Interrogations/Harsh Interrogations Torture?

5. Were the Geneva Conventions and/or International law violated?

6. Was the Constitution violated?

7. Is Obama's Military Tribunal Plan the most humane, the most legal and the best option for Detainees?

8. Is Prolonged Indefinite Detainment the most humane, the most legal and the best option for Detainees?

9. Can Attorney General Eric Holder prosecute anyone for war crimes when he himself believed that the Detainees did not fall under the Geneva Conventions?

10. Is Nancy Pelosi lying about what the CIA briefed her on? Is Graham lying? Is Goss lying? Is the CIA lying to Congress misleading congress on torture? Should there be an investigation into the matter?

11. Did Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats have a responsibility to impeach Bush and Cheney if they believed war crimes were committed?

12. Since Pelosi voted against impeachment are the charges nullified by her failure to recognize the war crimes charges? Do her accusations now look like partisan politics?

13. Is there a problem in intelligence oversight?

14. Will changing law and policy on torture change the way the U.S. is viewed in the world for the better?

15. How can the stain of torture be removed? Will the removal of the "stain" of torture help stop fueling hatred against the U.S and reduce recruitment and prevent terrorists attacks?

16. If in the future, terrorism rises to a fever pitch and the atmosphere is similar to that after 9/11 and Pres. Obama makes the hard decision to use harsh interrogation techniques (openly or it is discovered after the fact) is there ever a situation that he would be justified?

17. If you believe there should be Torture prosecutions...who should be prosecuted specifically? Bush? Cheney? Rice? Powell? Bush OLC lawyers? other Bush Dept. of Justice Officials? Bush State Dept Officials? Bush Nat'l Sec. Advisors? Members of Congress w/ Oversight?
Should there be sanctions for some?

 

[Industrialsize]

For the record.......Impeachment by congress and facing criminal charges are 2 different things....

I also think the OP should begin the discussion by weighing in on her beliefs.

 

[HazelGod]

I also think the OP should begin by shooting itself in the face.

Fixed that for ya.

 

[Trinity]

For the record.......Impeachment by congress and facing criminal charges are 2 different things....

For the record, we have ways we do things in this country. When the President, Vice President commit crimes in office, by the constitution they are to be impeached. The trial would present evidence to Congress and the American people so that we can all know whether our country should proceed with conviction in the impeachment trial and conviction on criminal charges. There is also the criminal impeachment charge of treason.

Impeachment
Upon conviction, the official is automatically removed and may also be barred from holding future office. The removed official is also liable to criminal prosecution. - Wikapedia
​

I also think the OP should begin the discussion by weighing in on her beliefs.

This was an effort to move in the direction you seemed to want to go Indy. I am not on trial. You and those who share your position and have been so vocal will need to lay it out. Face your own demands.

 

[Trinity]

I also think the OP should begin by shooting itself in the face.

You go first.

 

[Industrialsize]

For the record, we have ways we do things in this country. When the President, Vice President commit crimes in office, by the constitution they are to be impeached. The trial would present evidence to Congress and the American people so that we can all know whether our country should proceed with conviction in the impeachment trial and conviction on criminal charges. There is also the criminal impeachment charge of treason.

Impeachment
Upon conviction, the official is automatically removed and may also be barred from holding future office. The removed official is also liable to criminal prosecution. - Wikapedia
​

This was an effort to move in the direction you seemed to want to go Indy. I am not on trial. You and those who share your position and have been so vocal will need to lay it out. Face your own demands.

Never said you were on trial, but when you're asking us to state our beliefs on this whole situation, The OP usually opens the discussion by giving their feelings. And your wiki quote supports my contention that impeachment and a criminal trial are 2 entirely different animals. One can face criminal prosecution without being impeached.

 

[sparky11point5]

I originally supported Obama's position to 'look forward' and to not prosecute. However, after listening to the torture apologists such as Cheney, I realized that prosecution of those responsible is the only way to ensure this does not happen again. There are too many individuals who are willing to compromise our nation out of fear, politics, and stupidity.

A special prosecutor can examine who committed acts of torture, who conceived and ordered it, and who condoned it actively or passively. We could see different penalties for different levels of responsibility. I think the important issue is to re-affirm the precedent that the US does not torture, and that we are willing to live to our own standards for the rule of law. This does not mean that we will judge everyone involved harshly.

Any political implications, such as censure, resignation, or even impeachment could after the criminal prosecution led by the Justice department.

 

[Trinity]

Never said you were on trial, but when you're asking us to state our beliefs on this whole situation, The OP usually opens the discussion by giving their feelings. And your wiki quote supports my contention that impeachment and a criminal trial are 2 entirely different animals. One can face criminal prosecution without being impeached.

I'm not asking you to state your beliefs on this whole situation. You have been demanding the questions of me repeatedly and across numerous threads. This is presumably the way you wanted to go, I thought it should be discussed in a manner of relaying personal feelings on torture rather than inserting personal feelings on torture into specific topics like Nancy Pelosi's oversight of the intelligence community and Gen. Petraeus' statements on the Geneva Conventions.

You don't have to face your own demands but don't expect me to do what you won't do.

And I never stated that you were wrong about there being 2 different trials. I stated:

For the record, we have ways we do things in this country. When the President, Vice President commit crimes in office, by the constitution they are to be impeached. The trial would present evidence to Congress and the American people so that we can all know whether our country should proceed with conviction in the impeachment trial and conviction on criminal charges. There is also the criminal impeachment charge of treason.

Impeachment
Upon conviction, the official is automatically removed and may also be barred from holding future office. The removed official is also liable to criminal prosecution. - Wikapedia :smile:

​

 

[tripod]

I originally supported Obama's position to 'look forward' and to not prosecute. However, after listening to the torture apologists such as Cheney, I realized that prosecution of those responsible is the only way to ensure this does not happen again. There are too many individuals who are willing to compromise our nation out of fear, politics, and stupidity.

A special prosecutor can examine who committed acts of torture, who conceived and ordered it, and who condoned it actively or passively. We could see different penalties for different levels of responsibility. I think the important issue is to re-affirm the precedent that the US does not torture, and that we are willing to live to our own standards for the rule of law. This does not mean that we will judge everyone involved harshly.

Any political implications, such as censure, resignation, or even impeachment could alter the criminal prosecution led by the Justice department.

I could not have said it any better than Sparky!!

 

[B_Nick4444]

A. Do you think no acts of torture were committed under the Bush/Cheney regime? Should we just move on? If so, how? If not, what should be done?

B. Do you think that acts of torture were committed but because Nancy Pelosi didn't blow the whistle we should all move on? If so, how? If not, what should be done?

C. Do you believe something else entirely? If so, where do we go from here?

*****************************************************
Depending on your answer:

1. Is there ever an argument for torture?

at first blush, I would say no; however, sound philosophical arguments for it can be advanced

2. Would God condone torture?

God, no; Allah, yes

3. Is waterboarding torture?

not categorized as such at International Military Tribunal for the Far East in the prosecution of war crimes (contrary to the LPSG posts on earlier threads), no permanent injury, so am undecided on this one; could go either way

4. Are other Enhanced Interrogations/Harsh Interrogations Torture?

details?

5. Were the Geneva Conventions and/or International law violated?

the broader interpretation would say yes; some very well respected legal scholars would say no

6. Was the Constitution violated?

prior legal rulings narrowly hold since it didn't take place on American soil, no; arguments can be advanced for a broader interpretation that would lead to a yes answer

7. Is Obama's Military Tribunal Plan the most humane, the most legal and the best option for Detainees?

hmmmm :scratchchin:

8. Is Prolonged Indefinite Detainment the most humane, the most legal and the best option for Detainees?

have a problem with "indefinite"

9. Can Attorney General Eric Holder prosecute anyone for war crimes when he himself believed that the Detainees did not fall under the Geneva Conventions?

the legal scholars I referenced earlier would argue no

10. Is Nancy Pelosi lying about what the CIA briefed her on? Is Graham lying? Is Goss lying? Is the CIA lying to Congress misleading congress on torture? Should there be an investigation into the matter?

yes, less than truthful, each one; investigation pursuant to bringing legal actions, no; inquiry to determine how something so horrific could have occurred, and to implement procedures and policies to prevent its recurrence, yes

11. Did Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats have a responsibility to impeach Bush and Cheney if they believed war crimes were committed?

some action should have been taken

12. Since Pelosi voted against impeachment are the charges nullified by her failure to recognize the war crimes charges? Do her accusations now look like partisan politics?

yes -- partisan politics entirely

13. Is there a problem in intelligence oversight?

more than likely

14. Will changing law and policy on torture change the way the U.S. is viewed in the world for the better?

who really cares what other nations think -- I don't

15. How can the stain of torture be removed? Will the removal of the "stain" of torture help stop fueling hatred against the U.S and reduce recruitment and prevent terrorists attacks?

acknowledging our failures to prevent and taking actions to ensure it doesn't happen again

16. If in the future, terrorism rises to a fever pitch and the atmosphere is similar to that after 9/11 and Pres. Obama makes the hard decision to use harsh interrogation techniques (openly or it is discovered after the fact) is there ever a situation that he would be justified?

at the philosophical level, such justifications can be advanced

17. If you believe there should be Torture prosecutions...who should be prosecuted specifically? Bush? Cheney? Rice? Powell? Bush OLC lawyers? other Bush Dept. of Justice Officials? Bush State Dept Officials? Bush Nat'l Sec. Advisors? Members of Congress w/ Oversight?
Should there be sanctions for some?

as it stands now, from what I know -- no

other information/viewpoint may persuade me otherwise

 

[Industrialsize]

A. Do you think no acts of torture were committed under the Bush/Cheney regime? Should we just move on? If so, how? If not, what should be done?

B. Do you think that acts of torture were committed but because Nancy Pelosi didn't blow the whistle we should all move on? If so, how? If not, what should be done?

C. Do you believe something else entirely? If so, where do we go from here?

*****************************************************
Depending on your answer:

1. Is there ever an argument for torture?
NO
2. Would God condone torture?
NO
3. Is waterboarding torture?
Absolutely
4. Are other Enhanced Interrogations/Harsh Interrogations Torture?
Yes
5. Were the Geneva Conventions and/or International law violated?
Yes
6. Was the Constitution violated?
I don't know
7. Is Obama's Military Tribunal Plan the most humane, the most legal and the best option for Detainees?
I'm not sure but lean towards NO
8. Is Prolonged Indefinite Detainment the most humane, the most legal and the best option for Detainees?
NO
9. Can Attorney General Eric Holder prosecute anyone for war crimes when he himself believed that the Detainees did not fall under the Geneva Conventions?
YES
10. Is Nancy Pelosi lying about what the CIA briefed her on? Is Graham lying? Is Goss lying? Is the CIA lying to Congress misleading congress on torture? Should there be an investigation into the matter?
I believe the CIA di lie to congress. I have no idea regarding Pelosi, Graham and Goss. There should be an investigation
11. Did Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats have a responsibility to impeach Bush and Cheney if they believed war crimes were committed?
Yes......but it's complicated
12. Since Pelosi voted against impeachment are the charges nullified by her failure to recognize the war crimes charges? Do her accusations now look like partisan politics?
The charges are NOT nullified and her accusations look like Partisan Politicsf from the REPUBLICANS to deflect attention from the real issues. Pelosi is the bright shiny object to get people to look anywhere but the issues
13. Is there a problem in intelligence oversight?
duh....yup

14. Will changing law and policy on torture change the way the U.S. is viewed in the world for the better?
Of course
15. How can the stain of torture be removed? Will the removal of the "stain" of torture help stop fueling hatred against the U.S and reduce recruitment and prevent terrorists attacks?
The stain can be removed by a full and open investigation. The removal of the stain, among other things, will help fueling the hatred.
16. If in the future, terrorism rises to a fever pitch and the atmosphere is similar to that after 9/11 and Pres. Obama makes the hard decision to use harsh interrogation techniques (openly or it is discovered after the fact) is there ever a situation that he would be justified?
No......torture is against the law
17. If you believe there should be Torture prosecutions...who should be prosecuted specifically? Bush? Cheney? Rice? Powell? Bush OLC lawyers? other Bush Dept. of Justice Officials? Bush State Dept Officials? Bush Nat'l Sec. Advisors? Members of Congress w/ Oversight?
Should there be sanctions for some?Bush and Cheney should face criminal prosecution. The BUCK STOPS HERE. Bush always said he was the decider.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Fixed that for ya.

EPIC THREAD WIN! :biggrin1:

 

[Trinity]

EPIC THREAD WIN! :biggrin1:

Hazel,

You've won the praise and admiration of the nincompoop of miscomprehension in your quest to advocate violence.
Congrats to the both of you :35:

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Hazel,

You've won the praise and admiration of the nincompoop of miscomprehension in your quest to advocate violence.

Well, what does that make you?
A bitter, feminine Democrat imposing, conservative blog regurgitating, issue dodging bitch? Seriously, dear... I may misinterpret a few small factoids here and there, but I do know how to make my individual voice heard when it's time to get to the fuckin' point. To err is human. To do what YOU do? Starting anywhere up to 15 thread a week of anti-Democrat, anti-Obama rhetoric? Avoid answering questions by posting every internet pundit post you can think of that repeats the same bullet points of the last? It's fuckin' pathetic.

Also, a word of warning. You may try to refrain from calling people names here. That's another game you won't win with me.

 

[Notaguru2]

A. Do you think no acts of torture were committed under the Bush/Cheney regime? Should we just move on? If so, how? If not, what should be done?

Torture was not only committed, its also well documented. We have no choice but to move on. We should take steps to make sure it never happens again.

B. Do you think that acts of torture were committed but because Nancy Pelosi didn't blow the whistle we should all move on? If so, how? If not, what should be done?

Whether NP blew the whistle or not, we as a country need to move on. What is to be gained by dragging out an ex-President and his administration in front of the country? What would we gain by doing so? We don't owe anything to anyone outside of the U.S. regarding our treatment of war prisoners.

C. Do you believe something else entirely? If so, where do we go from here?

We move on. There are more pressing issues to deal with.

*****************************************************
Depending on your answer:

1. Is there ever an argument for torture?

No.

2. Would God condone torture?

Not mine.

3. Is waterboarding torture?

Yes.

4. Are other Enhanced Interrogations/Harsh Interrogations Torture?

Yes. If you have ask, "Is this torture?", then it is.

5. Were the Geneva Conventions and/or International law violated?

Yes. Generals have even come forward with the same assessment now.

6. Was the Constitution violated?

Strictly speaking? No. The constitution provides no protection to prisoners of war. (my understanding)

7. Is Obama's Military Tribunal Plan the most humane, the most legal and the best option for Detainees?

At this point, detainees deserve their day in court. So, yes.

8. Is Prolonged Indefinite Detainment the most humane, the most legal and the best option for Detainees?

No. The should be tried without further delay.

9. Can Attorney General Eric Holder prosecute anyone for war crimes when he himself believed that the Detainees did not fall under the Geneva Conventions?

Holder will not ultimately make the determination of the detainee's status when all is said an done.

10. Is Nancy Pelosi lying about what the CIA briefed her on? Is Graham lying? Is Goss lying? Is the CIA lying to Congress misleading congress on torture? Should there be an investigation into the matter?

I believe some things are better left unknown. The truth of some circumstances could rock the core of liberty. Its best to move on.

11. Did Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats have a responsibility to impeach Bush and Cheney if they believed war crimes were committed?

There was no path to impeachment. Furthermore, the impeachment of a president during a war would further jeopardize or national blood and treasure.

12. Since Pelosi voted against impeachment are the charges nullified by her failure to recognize the war crimes charges? Do her accusations now look like partisan politics?

A higher road was taken. The GOP would've impeached Clinton or Obama if the shoe were on the other foot. It sort of makes Bill's lapse of judgment seem like romper-room politics now doesn't it? And dont you think average Americans can see it?

13. Is there a problem in intelligence oversight?

Who would you propose oversee intel?

14. Will changing law and policy on torture change the way the U.S. is viewed in the world for the better?

In the short term, no. Long term, it won't have a lasting impact.

15. How can the stain of torture be removed? Will the removal of the "stain" of torture help stop fueling hatred against the U.S and reduce recruitment and prevent terrorists attacks?

I don't think the "stain" is as large as you'd think.

16. If in the future, terrorism rises to a fever pitch and the atmosphere is similar to that after 9/11 and Pres. Obama makes the hard decision to use harsh interrogation techniques (openly or it is discovered after the fact) is there ever a situation that he would be justified?

No. He is a subscriber to the belief that torture does not provide any real or credible information.

17. If you believe there should be Torture prosecutions...who should be prosecuted specifically? Bush? Cheney? Rice? Powell? Bush OLC lawyers? other Bush Dept. of Justice Officials? Bush State Dept Officials? Bush Nat'l Sec. Advisors? Members of Congress w/ Oversight?
Should there be sanctions for some?

I think we need to move on.

 

[Drifterwood]

Revenge on people innocent of 9/11 is not a pretty sight.

Apologize, compensate, prosecute those responsible, reiterate that you are not at war with Islam.

 

[Trinity]

Well, what does that make you?
A bitter, feminine Democrat imposing, conservative blog regurgitating, issue dodging bitch? Seriously, dear... I may misinterpret a few small factoids here and there, but I do know how to make my individual voice heard when it's time to get to the fuckin' point. To err is human. To do what YOU do? Starting anywhere up to 15 thread a week of anti-Democrat, anti-Obama rhetoric? Avoid answering questions by posting every internet pundit post you can think of that repeats the same bullet points of the last? It's fuckin' pathetic.

Also, a word of warning. You may try to refrain from calling people names here. That's another game you won't win with me.

As much as you've called me a B*tch and out of my name, in addition to your consistent miscomprehension and dense logic...you have earned that. And that is the only thing you won.:wink:

 

[B_VinylBoy]

As much as you've called me a B*tch and out of my name, in addition to your consistent miscomprehension and dense logic...you have earned that. And that is the only thing you won.:wink:

No, sweetie. When it comes to the issues and getting to the point, you don't have a leg to stand on against me. All you do is sweat the small stuff, the typos, the small oversights, and repeat stuff written on blogs by other people. You don't come up with your own estimation on the subject matter.

Which is why in the National Road Trip thread, you're not willing to go toe to toe with anyone about why you're willing to trumpet the demise of our nation based on a guess given by an unknown video creator who made estimates on Obama's financial plan. Of course, since I said two instead of eight on one mindless calculation, you jump up and down as if this is some kind of victory and TRY to make it seems as if I'm missing the point.

Which is also why in the thread about Nancy Pelosi, you try so desperately to paint her as the picture of torture, acting as if what she knew was more important than the people who actually proposed and acted on the measures. You even criticized her for calling the CIA a bunch of liars, but I've noticed that your silence is DEAFENING when Cheney essentially said the same thing. Hypocrite.

Trust me, dear... you NEED to be focused on the small stuff. That's all you're good for on this board. Now go ahead and post your next dismissive, fact avoiding post. I know you want to.

 

[Trinity]

No, sweetie. When it comes to the issues and getting to the point, you don't have a leg to stand on against me. All you do is sweat the small stuff, the typos, the small oversights, and repeat stuff written on blogs by other people. You don't come up with your own estimation on the subject matter.

Which is why in the National Road Trip thread, you're not willing to go toe to toe with anyone about why you're willing to trumpet the demise of our nation based on a guess given by an unknown video creator who made estimates on Obama's financial plan. Of course, since I said two instead of eight on one mindless calculation, you jump up and down as if this is some kind of victory and TRY to make it seems as if I'm missing the point.

Which is also why in the thread about Nancy Pelosi, you try so desperately to paint her as the picture of torture, acting as if what she knew was more important than the people who actually proposed and acted on the measures. You even criticized her for calling the CIA a bunch of liars, but I've noticed that your silence is DEAFENING when Cheney essentially said the same thing. Hypocrite.

Trust me, dear... you NEED to be focused on the small stuff. That's all you're good for on this board. Now go ahead and post your next dismissive, fact avoiding post. I know you want to.

And once again you've said a bunch of nothing and there is no need to respond to it. You've earned that clearly. :wink:

 

[B_VinylBoy]

And once again you've said a bunch of nothing and there is no need to respond to it. You've earned that clearly. :wink:

You're so predictable, Trinibitch... really, you are.
Keep dodging the main issues, OK?