Discussion in 'On Topic' started by dpakman91, Jan 4, 2005.
any have the details? i just heard it on inside politics, but just caught the end of it
I can imagine that the military officials were signing this along with the religious officials?
And how many posts until TekDragon comes in here and starts boasting the benefits of torture, and how making terrorists suffer pain "10,000 times that of a broken leg" is perfectly fine?
I'm going with 13.
I think that the whole "lifetime detainee" is some kind of spin on this.
This Alberto Gonzalez gave Bush the cliff notes on his Execution Appeals (?) and left all kinds of details, like that one guy was retarded (the prisoner, not Bush). And he was the one who decided that Bush had powers above and beyond the Geneva Convention regarding prisoners and torture.
that's right, i do remember reading about that when alberto was first nominated/chosen/etc for the position back in november.
Where are the "Seperation of Church and State" people on this one? Religious leaders have no voice in public policy I thought?
I was going to wait for the 13th post, but I wanted to agree with this too badly
i actually was referring to the military officials who were involved, not the religious. i really couldn't care less about the religious officials, as i have no interest really in what they think.
If torturing a terrorist who we know has information to prevent another 9/11 means we break international law then I say so be it. It's not like the UN will do anything about it as we've seen over and over again. My only complaint is personally not being able to choose how it happens. It's funny how countries like France, Russia and China can break international law without a slap on the wrist and we make one prisoner of war get naked and they act like we killed Jesus or something.
it's been shown again and again that those prisoners who are tortured do not, in fact, end up providing more information, on the whole, than they were originally willing to.
it does, however, make the interrogators who are unable to get the information they want to feel better. also, it makes it more likely that the prisoner will MAKE UP "information" which the interrogators are trying to get just to stop the torture.
overall, just doesn't make sense to do it.
Really, where did you hear this from?
under normal circumstance i would put together a series of links, but i'm nto even going to bother. you'll either say the sources are biased, that the information isn't to your liking for one reason or another, and won't be responsive to the idea at all. just look it up yourself if you're really curious.
This guy will be nominated for the Supreme Court in the next 4 years.