Bush Official Admits Detainee Tortured At Gitmo
Mohammed al-Qahtani has been described as “the 20th hijacker” in the 9/11 attacks. Susan J. Crawford, the senior Pentagon official in charge of prosecuting detainees, told Bob Woodward of the Washington Post that his treatment amounted to torture. Techniques used included sustaned isolation, sleep deprivation, nudity and prolonged exposure to cold, leaving him in a “life-threatening condition.”
“We tortured [Mohammed al-]Qahtani,” said Susan J. Crawford, in her first interview since being named convening authority of military commissions by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in February 2007. “His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that’s why I did not refer the case” for prosecution.
Crawford says the combination of the techniques, how long they lasted, and the effect on Qahtani’s health is what led her to her conclusion.
“The techniques they used were all authorized, but the manner in which they applied them was overly aggressive and too persistent. . . . You think of torture, you think of some horrendous physical act done to an individual. This was not any one particular act; this was just a combination of things that had a medical impact on him, that hurt his health. It was abusive and uncalled for. And coercive. Clearly coercive. It was that medical impact that pushed me over the edge” to call it torture, she said.
Twice, the detainee had to be hospitalized because his heart rate fell below 60 beats per minute, once going below 35 beats per minute, a condition that can lead to death.
At one point he was threatened with a military working dog named Zeus, according to a military report. Qahtani “was forced to wear a woman’s bra and had a thong placed on his head during the course of his interrogation” and “was told that his mother and sister were whores.” With a leash tied to his chains, he was led around the room “and forced to perform a series of dog tricks,” the report shows.
Bush has said “we don’t torture”, that “it’s against our values.” Cheney has said, ”And I think on the left wing of the Democratic Party, there are some people who believe that we really tortured.” Crawford, by the way is a life-long Republican, who says, ”But there still has to be a line that we should not cross. And unfortunately what this has done, I think, has tainted everything going forward.” More Crawford:
“I was upset by it. I was embarrassed by it. If we tolerate this and allow it, then how can we object when our servicemen and women, or others in foreign service, are captured and subjected to the same techniques? How can we complain? Where is our moral authority to complain? Well, we may have lost it.”
[...]
“I think the buck stops in the Oval Office.”
What the hell is going on with American moral values? These acts are really what a Christian would call “wicked”. But nooooo. This is an exception. We absolutely NEED all the oh-so-valuable flawed information that we can acquire by T O R T U R I N G a human being. Jesus would be proud! … I don’t think so.
January 14th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Why is christianity brought up so much on this board when the topic has NOTHING to do with it? First you have folks saying we weren’t founded on christian morals but when something comes up like this, you start with the whole “what would jesus do” stuff.
I am glad they stopped when his health was at risk. That is the difference between us and them. You get captured by the taliban and you lose your head, literally.
January 14th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Vegas said: What the hell is going on with American moral values?
Vegas,
The farther this country moves away from the judeo/christian values upon which it was founded the greater it’s distance from judeo/christian morality will be. Its popular to deny the efficacy and even the existence of God but then become outraged when people don’t practice a Godly moral code.
We can’t have it both ways, we either acknowledge God and HIS morality or secular humanism and IT’S morality but we can’t deny God and still expect everyone to practice God’s morality.
January 14th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Didn’t we already know this???
January 14th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Maybe because Bush is supposed to be a ‘Christian’ who talks to “a Father”, and there was troubling over proselytizing in the Air Force,
And I used to think we were A LOT better than them.
January 14th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
Bliss,
I have never denied that this nation was founded on Christian moral values, but being a Catholic Liberal, I know that this is wrong. Leaving a human being naked in isolation and not allowing him/her to sleep all the while being subjected to prolonged exposure to cold? WICKED! Who cares what the Taliban does? We should not be taking their example even minimally!
If our nation was founded on Christian moral values, which it was, then it MIGHT be a good idea in a case such as this to ask, WWJD?
January 14th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Or, I’ll preempt FROSTY and OLD LEFTY:
FROSTY
Darn Big C Christians and their religion and antiquated text of fairy tales at it again…and it’s the direct result of G aWol Bush and the Americans failure to adhere to their G20 committment; and don’t forget the influence GW had on creating world-wide anti-muslim paranoia!
OLD LEFTY,
See, I told you Gore should’ve been President in ‘00! It’s in the PNAC manifesto! You can’t argue with that!
January 14th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Hey, don’t I deserve a parody, Jared?
January 14th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Ooops, sorry Um CARA, but I haven’t been able to nail down anything in particular you continuously bring up. maybe, give me more time? ;)
January 14th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Oh yes let the terrorists SET the PACE for us.
I say waterboard ALL of them in JESUS name [with holy water].
But; never happen in liberalized Amerika!
Never underestimate the ignorence of your fellow man !
I do it all the time.
Remember communists and( Sadam) jail their political enenies 9or kill them].
It what the [liberals] have come to.
Let the terrorists go and jail the republicans !!!!!!!!!!!!!
January 14th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Very Christianist, Onward Christianist Soldiers.
STILL a War Crime.
January 14th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
I think if you go back and re-read your old testament, instead of just waving it around, you’ll find that the only “Godly” morality that was consistant through the ages was “worship me, and no other”.
Everything else, death, rape, torture, prostitution, incest, slavery, sexualy captivity, polygamy, and my favorite bedtime bible story – Genocide! were at one time part of your ‘Godly morality’, when it suited ‘Him’…
Ironically the most “Christian” administration ever in the US has pretty well proven that it’s not necessarily a prerequisite to ethical behaviour, is it?
January 14th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Jerrysrollin’blogcom said: I say waterboard ALL of them in JESUS name [with holy water].
…
LOL. HILARIOUS! … “[with holy water]“. Hahahahaha!
January 14th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
diego,
You might not personally deny that our country was founded on those principles, but look around. Many here do, and I get tired of them bringing up God when it is convenient (like this).
January 14th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Jared, that was priceless
January 14th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Bliss,
I’m not saying that there isn’t people hear who don’t believe in God who bring Him up conveniently. By paying attention to that you only add fuel to the fire. In this case I felt compelled because going to that extent IS unGodly.
January 14th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
FROSTY,
List for me, if you will, specific passages in the old testament where God condones rape, torture, prostitution, incest, slavery, sexual captivity, genocide. I can’t wait!
And who, besides you, has said this is the “most christian” admin every…I’d think pretty much all of our founding fathers who became president probably had more of a religious influence than GW.
January 14th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
vegas,
would you do it to save the life of your child? Just curious
Frosty,
Obama is a christian. you have a problem wtih that too?
January 14th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
List for me, if you will, specific passages in the old testament where God condones rape, torture, prostitution, incest, slavery, sexual captivity, genocide. I can’t wait!
Dear God, please, no! But, if you are going to list bible passages, would you mind just posting chapter and verse?
January 14th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Can we drop the religious crap for a minute? You know how touchy the conservatives are about that.
The point is, Bush officials admitted we tortured (after Bush said we don’t). This is against the Geneva convention, but then again, when did the Bush/Cheney administration ever follow the law?
January 14th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Bliss,
If I was put in a situation in which torturing this individual would deliberately save my child’s life, then, yes, maybe I would resort to it. I know that this time, though, torturing this man is not deliberately saving any child’s life. This action might actually be encouraging children to go and blow themselves up in a busy market in Baghdad.
January 14th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Frosty,
Obama is a christian. you have a problem wtih that too?
Posted by blissfulconservative
—————————————————-
Wait a minute. Now which is it? Is he a Muslim or a christian? He’s been accused of being both by the right.
January 14th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
TDro,
It may be easier for you to identify the instances when Bush Co didn’t follow the law rather than “when did they ever follow the law”?
January 14th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
TDro…Only the right-wing wackos…
January 14th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Jared’s right, TDro. Only the right-wing wackos, like Jerry up there with his rollin blog, think that.
January 14th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
This sounds fairly firmly into the torture category, so yeah, should not have happened. I’m not sure what our government should do now about it, though. What was the mindset behind it? Was it an order from the President? Why would he order it? Was this common, or just this one person?
Likely those questions are going to be answered by the people up at the top. While it is no excuse whatsoever, I know there are situations where torture-related things happen even in the most respected countries (like us!). The people involved should be punished. But I see why they might not be. There is a conflict between the desire to punish and the desire to hide those sorts of actions from getting worldwide attention. For me, if the situation is not integral to national defense, let it be as open as possible. Too many times bad things happen and are made worse by efforts to cover it up.
Reminds me of something I heard in a sermon once: sin thrives in the darkness, but dies in the light. Whatever wrong that has been committed needs to be exposed so that it does not fester and rot everything else that’s associated with it.
January 14th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
TD said: Wait a minute. Now which is it? Is he a Muslim or a christian? He’s been accused of being both by the right.
Those that say he is a christian use what is known of his 20 years with Rev. Wright. Those that say he is Muslim use what is know of his 27 – or whatever – years prior being raised in a muslim family.
Take your pick… Have I mentioned that we don’t REALLY know much about him? ;-)
January 14th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Those that say he is Muslim use what is know of his 27 – or whatever – years prior being raised in a muslim family.
Where did you hear he was raised in a ‘muslim family’ for 27 (or so) years? That is not a true statement.
January 14th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
UM said: Those that say he is Muslim use what is know of his 27 – or whatever – years prior being raised in a muslim family. Where did you hear he was raised in a ‘muslim family’ for 27 (or so) years? That is not a true statement.
UM,
He was born to a muslim father, given a muslim name, raised by a muslim stepfather, sent to a school that admitted only muslims in Indonesia. His extended family is muslim. I don’t know if this happened for 27 years but figuring him at 47 years old and subtracting the 20 years he’s been a christian left 27 years with a prior world view and religion. Have I mentioned we don’t really KNOW much about him? ;-)
January 14th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
That is the difference between us and them. You get captured by the taliban and you lose your head, literally.
Posted by blissfulconservative
_____________________________________________________
I think the point is keep it that way. The closer we go to using there tactics the more they have won.
January 14th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Read his book, or check wikipedia (I hate wikipedia, but this part is sourced, at least):
Doesn’t sound like he was raised in a Muslim home to me. Sounds like his dad was an atheist, and his mom wasn’t particularly religious.
January 14th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Regarding Mr. Obama’s religion, I feel that he’s not being honest about it. I wish he would be. More than that, though, I wish he could be. It would be a very interesting story to learn about how he went from whatever religious beliefs he had before to Christianity in some fairly specific terminology. But the problem with any sort of conversion is that you are rejecting whatever it was you were with before.
It’s a difficult situation, I think, and why he has left things generally at, in my words, “I’m a Christian, I have been for 20-ish years, so that’s that.” There seems as if something is being hidden, and to me, I think the reasoning probably has something to do with not wanting to damage his relationship with Muslims. You have to think that whatever decision he made to become Christian had to be a very difficult (even if you think he did it for political reasons, as some do), if only because of his loved ones that are not Christian.
At my family holiday celebrations, my grandmother usually asks me to pray before we eat. I know that there are people there who are not Christian, who are even anti-Christianity, and that this might bother them. It doesn’t change what I do, but I do realize that in praying in front of them like this there is a bit of a wedge between us. And this is only a small thing once or twice a year. Every time Mr. Obama speaks of his Christianity, it has to hurt some of his Muslim family members. To detail exactly what tenants of the Muslim belief he rejected to come to Christianity in a very public way would probably hurt them much more, and could hurt his image as being someone who unites, not separates.
Now, I think that image will be challenged soon enough, but as far as it relates to his religion, I think I understand why he has been fairly vague about the details. It’s probably the same reason why you wouldn’t see Mike Huckabee pointing out the reasons why Baptists are superior to Methodists, for example, even though he obviously has to have a preference since he chose one of them. Mr. Obama has a lot of Muslim supporters, and it’s likely his desire to not create any sort of wedge between them over something that likely isn’t all that relevant to his presidency (however interesting it would be).
((And for the record, I say Mr. Obama because he’s no longer a Senator; not quite a President. Makes me think of a Britney Spears song :P ))
January 14th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Who the H cares if he was born to a Muslim father, given a Muslim name, raised by a Muslim stepfather, sent to a Muslim school, and has a Muslim extended family?Oh, I get it. I guess some paranoid individuals are afraid he is an unrepentant Muslin and will infiltrate the country with Muslim terrorist. More conspiracy theories.
January 14th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Regarding Mr. Obama’s religion, I feel that he’s not being honest about it. I wish he would be.
I take people at their word, regarding their religious beliefs – I figure they are the only ones who know what their beliefs are.
January 14th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
“Why is christianity brought up so much on this board…”
Because the radical rightists are incessantly proclaiming themselves the representatives of all things Christian, if not God’s own spokespeople on earth.
“Qahtani “was forced to wear a woman’s bra and had a thong placed on his head during the course of his interrogation” and “was told that his mother and sister were whores.” With a leash tied to his chains, he was led around the room “and forced to perform a series of dog tricks,” the report shows.”
Sounds like the same game played at Abu Graib. Only there the administration blamed the troops, and prosecuted the troops, and sentenced the troops to federal prison, instead of “supporting” the troops.
January 14th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
“Why is christianity brought up so much on this board when the topic has NOTHING to do with it? First you have folks saying we weren’t founded on christian morals but when something comes up like this, you start with the whole “what would jesus do” stuff. Posted by BlissfulConservative”
Well, some of us liberals are into Jesus and his message if not exactly Christians. This is where some of us draw our message of non-violence and unity. Jesus wouldn’t condone torture in any form and hence those who are against torture policy bring up Jesus. The morality of GOD and morality of secular humanists is the same thing. The church and hate-mongers are the opnes who tell you different. Everyone wants to love their neighbor and everyone teaches as much. Bottom line is torture and torture policy under Bush has lead to the most dangerous erosion of freedom this country has ever seen.
I personally believe that all pro-torture CONs would change position probided it was their husband / dad / sister / wife / friend getting tortured and detained forever with no charges. When people can see it first hand that we are in war against our own govt everyday of our lives for our very freedom they might start changing their tune about how much skin to tear off a prisoners face before it becomes ‘cruel and ununsual.’
As I always end up doing:
Those who support torture and continue to support Bush in light of his actions in office obviously don’t much care for the Constitution and The United States of America. I know I’m stealing the right-wing line on this but; GET THE HELL OUT OF OUR COUNTRY YOU COMMIE PIECES OF TRASH! There are lots of great nations out there that love to torture and wrongly jail everyone around. Bush has turned the clock toward becoming Soviet Russia and every NEOCON out there has helped destroy what this country always stood for. If I have to fight a war over this I will. I see it important enough to start another civil war over, personally.
January 14th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Put the shoe on the other foot. Can you imagine the American outrage if: an American had been forced to wear a bra on his head, was told his mother and sisters were whores, was led aroung the room on a dog leash, made to perform dog tricks, was waterboarded and other disgusting practices. We would be outraged, would be calling these people ever horrid mane in the book. For those of you who proclaim to be Christians, ” Do unto to others as you would have them do unto you.” Nothing warrants these disgusting practices. We have done nothing more than lower ourselves to their level!
January 14th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Kudos to Aaron, Um, and Eric, even though Eric might get many Cons very angry.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Do any of you here know how to get information out of the enemy that will save or has the potential to save hundreds or even thousands of lives?
January 14th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Susan
It happens everyday at college campuses EVERYWHERE. It is called hazing.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Willy,
The technique which you ask of is definitely not TORTURE.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Susan,
How ya doing?
Do you remember the bodies of our dead soldiers in Magadishu being dragged through the streets and the lack of outrage here. Just a day or two of news coverage. What about the beheadings of our citizens in Iraq and not outrage here. But you put a bra on the head of an enemy combatant and look out. You are all up in arms over this.
I do not condone torture, but I do condone the saving of thousands of lives. Sleep deprevation, and sustained isolation are tactics that have been used for many, many years to retrieve info from the enemy. I don’t necessarily consider that torture. And to coerce information from the enemy! Why, we must be out of our minds.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Hazing has been outlawed on many college campuses for presisely the same reasons. And just because it did or does occur on college campuses doesn’t make it an acceptable practice. College students also engage in binge drinking, some die of alcohol poisioning; should we also take up that practice?
January 14th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
What technique Vegaslib?
January 14th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
The technique of how to acquire info from the enemy is what I speak of, Willy.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Let’s outlaw alcohol like we have drugs. Boy that worked.
Torture used to be defined as pulling fingernails off, or shoving bamboo shoots up under someone’s fingernails, or attaching a car battery to genetalia.
It is like that episode of 24 that so many made a big deal about. We have the defeminization of our military up front and center. You want them to come home and be safe, but don’t want them to do what is necessary to do the job they have been sent to do.
quite a paradox
January 14th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Two wrongs don’t make a right. If you approve of these techniques then don’t complain or utter one word when the same techniques are used on our troops. After all:To coerce information from a US serviceman, well what’s wrong with that? Bet if it was your son or daughter you’d be singing a different toon!
January 14th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
sleep deprivation is torture??? I guess we torture med students then. Loud music is torture?? Arrest those folks who drive through neighborhoods at night blasting their radios.
we gotta stop that.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
I didn’t speak of any technique Vegaslib. I just ask if anyone here knows of a better way to retrieve information from enemy combatants.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Susan
If they start using the same techniques?? IF?? They do WORSE!! Remember those contractors who were burned alive then hung from a bridge in Iraq?? Or Daniel Pearl who was beheaded? Or the missionaries in various locations on humanitarian missions who are caught and beheaded. How about the soldiers willy listed??
Ask John McCain about torture. Ask anyone who spent time in a nam prison about torture.
They have been doing much worse for a long time
January 14th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Did I say we should outlaw alcohol? I was drawing an analogy.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Bliss,
Consecutively exposing someone who is naked to sustained isolation, sleep deprivation, and prolonged cold has already been admitted as a treatment that has met the legal definition of torture, which is equal to “pulling off fingernails, shoving bamboo shoots up under someone’s fingernails, or attaching a car battery to someone’s genitalia.”
January 14th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Our enemy doesn’t resort to these tactics. They behead their prisoners. They put them in 3 x 5 boxes for several days with no food or water. We give our enemy detainees comfortable lodging, their native foods, their religious books and symbols, blankets, water, time to pray, games to play, exercise, etc… Torture? I don’t think so. Most of these torture stories were told by who? Oh, the prisoners, that is who and most Americans believe our sworn enemies?
January 14th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
And so was I
As far as my son and daughter go. Their dad, their grandpa, 8 cousins, 4 uncles all have served in the military so there is a really good chance they will too. If they do, I will want them to do whatever they have to do to come home safe. If that involves someone playing really loud music or offending someone by making them wear underwear on their head, whatever.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Way. Technique. . . Tomato. Tomáto.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Legal as difined by who Vegaslib? Could it be the liberal judges we have in this country who hesitate to put murders and rapist in jail because they think they can’t receive rehabilitation there? You need to pay more attention to who is sitting on the benches in our courts today.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Vegas said: Consecutively exposing someone who is naked to sustained isolation, sleep deprivation, and prolonged cold has already been admitted as a treatment that has met the legal definition of torture.
Vegas,
My wife does all these things to me and calls it foreplay… Where do I turn her in to the authorities?
January 14th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Way. Technique. . . Tomato. Tomáto
let’s call the torture off.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
vegaslib,
She stated that everything they did was authorized, but the combination pushed him over the edge. They stopped when he became ill and he was given medical treatment. I wasn’t there and neither was anyone else here.
This will obviously be investigated.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Noone anwered my question about sleep deprivation and medical students. HUH
January 14th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
There you go again with your sarcasm. Certainly you know the difference between the sleep deprivation of med students and those being tortured! Your hell on statistics and studies, go look it up.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Susan
If you think there is a difference between med school and torture you have never talked to a med student who has been up for 3 days straight doing pelvic exams and chest tubes.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
Willy said: Torture? I don’t think so. Most of these torture stories were told by who? Oh, the prisoners, that is who and most Americans believe our sworn enemies?
“Susan J. Crawford, the senior Pentagon official in charge of prosecuting detainees, told Bob Woodward of the Washington Post that his treatment amounted to torture.” Who gives if some of our enemies behead their prisoners? That is the reason that they’re our enemies! We should be acting opposite to that, not following in their footsteps! THAT is why we give our enemy detainees comfortable lodging, their native foods, their religious books and symbols, blankets, water, time to pray, games to play, exercise, etc… THAT is why we SHOULD NOT torture.
Bliss said: If that involves someone playing really loud music or offending someone by making them wear underwear on their head, whatever.
Bliss,
You know as well as I do that they do not have to play really loud music or offend someone by making them wear underwear on their head or ANYTHING similar in order to come home safe! What kind of logic is that?
January 14th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
vegas,
No, my point in saying that is they have to do worse. MUCH worse. I personally and tired and yes, calloused as hell when it comes to this.
We aren’t as bad as they are by any measure. If you really believe we are like them then this country is farther in the tank that I thought.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Blissful Conservative,when hazing,happens at our schools and elsewhere,it’s idiot kids who are willing to participate,just be in with in crowd!Each to his own.Abu Grab was a pathetic bunch of sadist masochist,bully’s and most bully’s are cowards.It’s embarrassing & juvenile.But it pales in comparison to your head being severed from your body,or gang raped & shot in head execution style!God Bless America,& help your foolish people!No Offence 2 No 1…
January 14th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
So Vegas, what do we do to get information out of the enemy? You sure know what we shouldn’t do, or so it seems.
By what means do we get enemy information????????????
January 14th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Bliss,
Of course I don’t believe we are like them. That is why we don’t behead them and put them in 3 by 5 boxes as Kregg said. When we leave someone in a life-threatening condition we are following in those footsteps. As they say: one thing leads to another. If this is being allowed now, as it escalades, what is going to be permitted in the future?
January 14th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
Phill,
after that I am not sure if you are for or against the actions that were taken?
:-( disapointed noone appreciated my funny about med students (sigh)
January 14th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Vegas, I don’t think they just left him like that?? IF his heart rate dropped to the 30’s he had to receive medical care to recover (most likely).
I am assuming he was hooked up to monitors, or was getting vitals checked often if they caught that early on.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
You can not possibly be that clueless! I can’t possibly explain the difference if you just don’t get it. 1] medical students are not being held in a prison. 2]medical students are goal oriented, they are working towards a degree. 3] they have supports in place, family, friends. 4] they are not in isolation. 5] they are not being subject to other techniques of torture.6]they can destress by doing other enjoyable outlets.7]they are not being held in the hospital against their will.etc, etc the list of differences is endless. FYI the long hours of interns, residents is starting to be limited now. It was proven that the students were not effective after a period of times and some mistakes were the result of that.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
By what means do we get enemy information?
Aside from the ethical reasons why we shouldn’t torture (which are enough, in my book), torture isn’t terribly effective. Or it wouldn’t be on me, anyway. I’d tell ‘em whatever they wanted to know, true or not, to get them to stop torturing me.
Maybe our torture victims are more ethical than me though. Perhaps they only tell the truth, even when being tortured. I’m just not that good a person.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Kregg said: My wife does all these things to me and calls it foreplay… Where do I turn her in to the authorities?
Haha. I mean, I guess if you guys roll that way. For us its not really cold and I’m usually not isolated. But that’s just us.
Willy said: So Vegas, what do we do to get information out of the enemy? You sure know what we shouldn’t do, or so it seems.
Torture we shouldn’t. That’s right. What we should do? Not sure. I’ve never studied interrogation techniques.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
Torture is effective if given the right circumstances and the desired imformation is received. Sleep deprivation is not torture nor is exposure to extreme cold. Beating someone with a bamboo cane just to beat them is.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
1. medical students are held in a prison- they are called student loans
2. medical students are goal oriented and working toward a degree with sucky pay and horrible hours
3. You have no life outside the hospital, so friends and family forget what you look like
4. They are in isolation. It is called the 24 hour shift
5. They are tortured: Patients with body odor, patients spitting in your face, cursing you out, throwing dirty underpants at you, Bed pans, bacteria, viruses, psych patients who think you look like everyone who has done something wrong to them are out to get ya, long hours, horrible pay, liability insurance premiums, CHARGE NURSES
6. Destress?? See #3, you have no life outside med school
7. Yeah, they aren’t being held against their will…oh wait, go back to the thing about the student loans and the required LONG hours.
Whew.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
I know the whole story on what med students do, my father and brother are both doctors; however, the two things are not comparable!
January 14th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
hazing.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
Susan,
I’m not sure that Bliss is very serious. Relax. LOL.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Sorry Bliss, you obviously don’t understand what motivates most who go into medicine. I never once heard either my father or brother complain about the things you go on and on about. Wait: maybe they are both a messiah,” one who is dedicated to a cause.”
January 14th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Vegas,
Nah. We can debate and get angry til the cows come home. it will be investigated, and if charges are necessary they will happen.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Susan, can you take a joke and not be so up tight?? Stress does bad things to folks.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
MK said: Sleep deprivation is not torture nor is exposure to extreme cold.
Those things alone might not be, but all the things that the guy went through CONSECUTIVELY did “amount to torture.”
January 14th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
One never knows?! She makes some pretty outrageous comparisons!
January 14th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
“By what means do we get enemy information????????????”
Posted by Willy
Studies show that torture does NOT work. Do a little research and you’ll see cited examples.
I think you need to be waterboarded, Willy. I hear it’s really fun!
January 14th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
Bliss,
Yeah, you’re right. There comes a time when you kind of realize that the logic of your point will never become accepted by some. It’s all good. Essentially we’re all on the same side. It’s just that this sucks. It really does.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Willy:
“Legal as difined by who Vegaslib? Could it be the liberal judges we have in this country who hesitate to put murders and rapist in jail because they think they can’t receive rehabilitation there? You need to pay more attention to who is sitting on the benches in our courts today.”
You do not know very much about history do you?
“After Japan surrendered, the United States organized and participated in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, generally called the Tokyo War Crimes Trials. Leading members of Japan’s military and government elite were charged, among their many other crimes, with torturing Allied military personnel and civilians. The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding.
As a result of such accounts, a number of Japanese prison-camp officers and guards were convicted of torture that clearly violated the laws of war. They were not the only defendants convicted in such cases. As far back as the U.S. occupation of the Philippines after the 1898 Spanish-American War, U.S. soldiers were court-martialed for using the “water cure” to question Filipino guerrillas.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201170_pf.html
What about a domestic terrorist who plotted to firebomb, and murder U.S. citizens, or a traitor who sold arms to our enemy and facilitated to smuggling of drugs into the U.S. should we allowed them to be tortured?
January 14th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Bliss,what I’m saying is in this great circle of life,what goes around comes around!If you hit me hard,I will hit you harder.And like Um Cara posted,Aside from the ethical reasons,it’s not terribly effective.And can we complain,when they do even worse atrocities to our troops?There is nothing funny about that!
January 14th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
I would like you to tell the families of the victims of 9/11 that one of the co-conspirators didn’t get enough sleep last night or the thermostat was to low for them in there living space.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Phill
So what you are saying is: they are justified to do what they do to us if we less it to them, but we are not justified to do LESS to them because of what they did to us
January 14th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Mk, that is a very good point.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Mk, that is not a very good point.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
Thanks Bliss
I think it was as well despite what UM says
January 14th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
MK said: I would like you to tell the families of the victims of 9/11 that one of the co-conspirators didn’t get enough sleep last night or the thermostat was to low for them in there living space.
You mean that he didn’t get sleep for weeks while he was naked and isolated inside a freezing room in which his heart rate went down to 30 BPM and left him in a life-threatening state? I think if it were up to them, the fool’d be dead already, but for the good of the nation, he needs to be tried and sentenced fairly, no torture involved.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
No I DID NOT SAY THAT!JUSTIFIED!WHO SAID THAT?
January 14th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
Better point Vegas but if the imformation gotten out of him is useful in preventing more American losses I say get out the rubber hoses and the car batteries.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
I would like the say, “Yes. True. IF ‘the imformation gotten out of him is useful in preventing more American losses I say get out the rubber hoses and the car batteries’”, but I cannot. First, the information that we get out of him with the “rubber hoses and the car batteries” WILL NOT prevent more American losses. Second, America is a nation founded on Christian moral values and is definitely NOT one to condone the act of T O R T U R E.
January 14th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Willy:
“No I DID NOT SAY THAT!JUSTIFIED!WHO SAID THAT?”
If you are supporting the torture of terrorist then I am just trying to determine to what extent that torture should extend.
After WWII the U.S. Government tried, convicted, and executed Japanese officers for the same acts that you are condoning. Please see the link that I provided for you.
So should a domestic terrorist who plotted to firebomb, and murder U.S. citizens, or a traitor who sold arms to our enemy and facilitated the smuggling of drugs into the U.S. be tortured?
The question is not that difficult
January 14th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
CDP,
AWESOME point!
January 14th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Anyone heard the new osama bin laden tape?????????
It doesn’t matter what we do or don’t do, the muslim extremists will always find a reason to go after us and Israel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGA1t8UkYfQ
January 14th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
MK.
“Better point Vegas but if the imformation gotten out of him is useful in preventing more American losses I say get out the rubber hoses and the car batteries.”
Could you please refer me to the part of the Holy Scripture where the Lord condones torture?
Torture does not seem like a very “Christian” thing to do.
I was always taught that as a Christian I should strive to be Christ-like in everything that I do.
Just how is torture going to achieve that goal?
I think you should follow Christ teachings as outlined in Luke 6:31
“Do to others as you would have them do to you”.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%206:31
January 14th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
I am going to go out on a limb here for arguments sake. I could be argued that torture is a terrorist tactict. We are in a supposed war on terror. At what point do we become our own enemy?
January 14th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
That’s what I’m saying Placefield! We SHOULD NOT be following in the enemy’s footsteps! Good point.
January 14th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
CDP
I guess I could refer you to the section on “Thou shall not Kill”
I’ll decide what I should follow or not follow..It has nothing to do with what religion you follow its about preventing more loss of life period..
Its’ kinda funny that people always bring religion into play when these terrorist are doing the acts in the name of their religion
January 14th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
So should a domestic terrorist who plotted to firebomb, and murder U.S. citizens, or a traitor who sold arms to our enemy and facilitated the smuggling of drugs into the U.S. be tortured?
If both are caught in the United States then they should be brought to justice under our laws of the United States.
The people you keep refering to as being tortured are enemy combatants not US citizens and do not fall under the same laws.
January 14th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
MK,
No enemy combatants fall under a different set of laws that still outlaws torture. And the enemy combatant title is questionable for a few of them.
January 14th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Placefield
Not sure what you meant..Interrogation is completely different than torture. questioning an enemy combatant about imfo that he has and won’t release is interrogation. Torture is causing someone pain for no other reason than to cause pain.
January 14th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
MK,
Torture is a tactic that the US has been using during interrogation. And we shouldn’t be.
January 14th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
MK,
So do two wrongs make a right?
Thou shalt not kill, does not mean that we should not be in Iraq killing people?
It is shameful how many people pick and choose which part of the Holy Scripture they will follow this week.
I take it by your failure to show where to Holy Scripture condones torture than you admit that is something that your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ would not do. That is not very Christ-like. How can you call your self a Christian doing something that goes against the teachings of the bible?
As far as saving lives by torture I am unsure of where you are getting your information but that is simply not true.
“In fact, the problem of torture does not stem from the prisoner who has information; it stems from the prisoner who doesn’t. Such a person is also likely to lie, to say anything, often convincingly. The torture of the informed may generate no more lies than normal interrogation, but the torture of the ignorant and innocent overwhelms investigators with misleading information. In these cases, nothing is indeed preferable to anything. Anything needs to be verified, and the CIA’s own 1963 interrogation manual explains that “a time-consuming delay results” — hardly useful when every moment matters.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/13/AR2007121301303.html
STATEMENT BY LIEUTENANT GENERAL HARRY E. SOYSTER, USA (Ret.),
FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (DIA), 1988-91
“Experienced military and intelligence professionals know that torture, in addition to being illegal and immoral, is an unreliable means of extracting information from prisoners. Much is being made of former CIA official John Kiriakou’s statement that waterboarding “broke” a high-value terrorist involved in the 9/11 plot. There are always those who, whether out of fear or inexperience, rush to push the panic button instead of relying on what we know works best and most reliably in these situations. I would caution those who would rely on this example. It is far from clear that the information obtained from this prisoner through illegal means could not have been obtained through lawful methods. The FBI was getting good intelligence from this prisoner before the CIA took over. And there are numerous examples of cases where relying on information obtained through torture has disastrous consequences. The reality is that use of torture produces inconsistent results that are an unreliable basis for action and policy. The overwhelming consensus of intelligence professionals is that torture produces unreliable information. And the overwhelming consensus of senior military leaders is that resort to torture is dishonorable. Use of such primitive methods actually put our own troops and our nation at risk.”
http://www.opposingviews.com/arguments/information-obtained-through-torture-is-not-reliable
Would you care to answer the question that I put to Willy?
Should a domestic terrorist who plotted to firebomb, and murder U.S. citizens, or a traitor who sold arms to our enemy and facilitated the smuggling of drugs into the U.S. be tortured?
January 14th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
Um
We agree to disagree..Torture is not a tactic that the US uses..Interrogation is what we do and should continue to do to prevent further loss of American Lives.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
MK,
Torture is a tactic that the US uses, the Bush official admitted it.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
In the Bybee memo, and in 2006, John Yoo wrote that if the president deems that he’s got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person’s child, there is no treaty that can stop him.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
CDP
I didn’t say I follow any scripture and I did not call myself a christian. But I will say that your ability to judge me is pretty amazing for a CHRISTIAN and how are you going to answer for that to your LORD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST.
Throwing a couple of snipits from a couple of left wing sites does not prove that interrogation methods don’t work.
I answered your questions already but here they are agian
If both are caught in the United States then they should be brought to justice under our laws of the United States.
The people you keep refering to as being tortured are enemy combatants not US citizens and do not fall under the same laws.
Don’t throw your religion in my face to justify your point because the terrorist are doing all this in the name of their religion
January 14th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
Um
because some writes a legal opion it doesn’t make it law
Critics include Harold Koh, dean of the Yale Law School, who referred to the memo as “perhaps the most clearly erroneous legal opinion I have ever read.” [2]
January 14th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
The people you keep refering to as being tortured are enemy combatants not US citizens and do not fall under the same laws.
Posted by mk
………………………………………………
The problem is, the president can say ANYONE, even an American citizen is an enemy combatant, even you.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
Old
You are really reaching now. Give me an example when a president has done that excluding the war between the states has taken an American citizen and converted them to an enemy combatant on foreign soil.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
MK
“Um
We agree to disagree..Torture is not a tactic that the US uses..Interrogation is what we do and should continue to do to prevent further loss of American Lives.”
We can agree to disagree that is one thing that makes this country great, however the facts do not support your contention.
It is a fact that the U.S. has waterboarded prisoners.
It is also a fact the the U.S. tried, convicted, and executed Japanese officers for waterboarding U.S. prisoners during WWII
“After Japan surrendered, the United States organized and participated in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, generally called the Tokyo War Crimes Trials. Leading members of Japan’s military and government elite were charged, among their many other crimes, with torturing Allied military personnel and civilians. The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201170_pf.html
It is a fact that waterboarding was designated as illegal by the U.S. Army in 1898 and U.S. soldiers were court-martialed for waterboarding prisoners during the Spanish-American war and in Vietnam
“Water boarding was designated as illegal by U.S. generals in Vietnam 40 years ago. A photograph that appeared in The Washington Post of a U.S. soldier involved in water boarding a North Vietnamese prisoner in 1968 led to that soldier’s severe punishment
“The soldier who participated in water torture in January 1968 was court-martialed within one month after the photos appeared in The Washington Post, and he was drummed out of the Army,” recounted Darius Rejali, a political science professor at Reed College.
Earlier in 1901, the United States had taken a similar stand against water boarding during the Spanish-American War when an Army major was sentenced to 10 years of hard labor for water boarding an insurgent in the Philippines.
“Even when you’re fighting against belligerents who don’t respect the laws of war, we are obliged to hold the laws of war,” said Rejali. “And water torture is torture.”
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1356870
You need to realize that your government has tortured people in your name, and that my friend should sicken you.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
It is a fact that the U.S. has waterboarded prisoners.
IT IS NOT TORTURE and I’m glad that did and hope they still do.
It is also a fact the the U.S. tried, convicted, and executed Japanese officers for waterboarding U.S. prisoners during WWII
That was not their only crime.
Because some loon 30 years ago said waterboarding is torture doesn’t make it so. I don’t know who Darius Rejali is or care and his opinion carries about as much weight as yours.
You need to realize that your government has kept you safe since 9/11 and that my friend should make you feel good.
I myself am very proud of my country and will continue to be I am sorry that you feel the way you do but don’t despair you can always move to Canada. Love it or leave it.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
MK,
You don’t love it or leave it, you stay and fight for it.
“The deterioration of every government begins with the decay of the principles on which it was founded.
~Charles-Louis De Secondat From “The Spirit of Laws,” 1748
In June, 2003, President Bush has declared Ali Saleh Kahlah Al-Marri of Peoria, Ill., an enemy combatant.
Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft asked a court to dismiss the indictment against him, which it did; asked President Bush to declare Al-Marri an enemy combatant, which he did Monday; and then whisked Al-Marri under cover of darkness from a federal holding facility in Chicago to a Navy brig in South Carolina.
Al-Marri could languish there for the rest of his life without ever having been convicted of a crime. He has no access to family, friends or lawyers, and he may never see a judge, a jury or a prosecutor. Under this administration’s interpretation of the law, it’s possible that he won’t be charged, tried or convicted, and all the while he’ll be held in solitary confinement.
The president – using standards not legislated by Congress, not approved by any court and never made known to the public – has claimed the right to incarcerate enemy combatants until the war on terrorism is over. But when will that be?
The president has also floated a plan to try enemy combatants before secret panels of American soldiers whenever he wants to – such as in Cuba, where he claims the U.S. Constitution doesn’t apply.
We may know later today whether the U.S. Supreme Court will take up one of the biggest unanswered questions in the war on terror: Can the government pick up people in the United States and declare them enemy combatants?
. Jose Padilla had been detained for a month as a material witness in a federal facility in New York City, President Bush declared him an enemy combatant and he was transferred to a Navy brig in Charleston, South Carolina.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
MK
“Give me an example when a president has done that excluding the war between the states has taken an American citizen and converted them to an enemy combatant on foreign soil.”
How about, Jose Padilla, Yaser Esam Hamdi, and John Walker Lindh
MK
“Throwing a couple of snipits from a couple of left wing sites does not prove that interrogation methods don’t work.”
Since when is the 1963 CIA interrogation manual left wing,
not to mention Lieutenant General Harry E. Soyster, USA (Ret.) who served as Director, Defense Intelligence Agency during DESERT SHIELD/STORM. He also served as Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Department of the Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army, Commanding General, U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command and in the Joint Reconnaissance Center, Joint Chiefs of Staff. I can tell that he is a real moonbat.
The more you know………
I do feel sorry for you my friend to be able to deny the truth when it is put in front of you.
The fact is that Waterboarding was deemed to be unlawful by the U.S. Army in 1898 and U.S. solders have spent time in the stockade for waterboarding prisoners.
As far as the Japanese officers “The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding.”
I can see that I am not going to change your mind, but facts are facts and cannot be denied no matter how hard we try.
However I love my country too much to just stand by and let these atrocities be committed in my name with out speaking out.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Well said CDP.
It is not just the right, but the responsibility of the citizens of a free country to bring to light the failings of their gov`t. And when an association of constitutional lawyers agrees with you on the issue of torture by the US, you’re in good company.
One tip though, you won’t get anywhere with some of the folks on here with this:
“” How can you call your self a Christian doing something that goes against the teachings of the bible? “”
As we see time and time and time again, over and over the bible is something that many christians use to beat humanist ethics and morality over the head. The same is done by many muslims with the Qur’an.
I don’t see much difference.
cheers
January 14th, 2009 at 10:28 pm
Ali Saleh Kahlah Al-Marri is a citizen of Qatar.
Jose has been convicted and sentenced by a court in Fla. for aiding terrorist.
John Walker Lindh was captured in Afghanistan fighting with the taliban.
Yaser Esam Hamdi was also captured in Afghanistan fighting along side the taliban.
Come on guys you can do better than that. I’m not doing anymore fact searching for you when the all lead to dead ends.
I have fought for it and will continue to fight for it but I will not undermine it
January 14th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
CDP
I agree to disagre with you on the subject of torture but I agree with the passion you bring with your opinion and I do thank God everyday that we can voice our opinions right or wrong in a free country. I enjoyed the talk and you have given me some things to think about and I thank you for that.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:43 pm
MK,
And I thank you for your kind words.
It is always a pleasure to have a civil discussion with somebody who I can disagree with and not have my loyalty or patriotism questioned.
We are all Citizens of this great country and our diversity is what makes us strong.
God Bless……………
Badmrfrosty,
Point taken,
Thank you very much.
January 14th, 2009 at 11:30 pm
Jared said: Didn’t we already know this???
Vegas apparently didn’t – he asked.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:46 am
The tactic,(used by some conservatives on this site)to defend their position or argument by pointing the finger,”What about him,her or them and what they did?” reminds me of an intervention where concerned loved ones point out how dysfunctional actions are harming themselves and hurting others. They usually first respond by saying, “what about him or her” and what they did or didn’t do. Keep at it Libs. Maybe they’ll seek help!!!!
January 15th, 2009 at 4:24 am
I served in the Navy for 3 years and have several friends that are vets. We where discussing torture. Doing war we do not torture and denounce it as well. You do it with total denial. You don,t go around telling the world. Bush and company let the world know and they have a black eye for it. Torture is a total top secert means of war. If ? about it and accused for it should be answer with lies,denial and speeches denouning torture.
January 15th, 2009 at 7:51 am
Jose Padilla was NOT convicted or EVEN charged with the crime he was arrested for. His trial came only after the courts ruled that you could not hold him indefinitely without charging him.
As for John Walker Lindh, he was an American citizen, picked up outside the US. So could ANY US citizen be picked up, outside the US, for no reason, no questions asked?
You have people like Lieutenant Colonel Darrel Vandeveld, and Air Force Major David Frakt, who is defense counsel with the Office of Military Commissions which administers the tribunals at Guantanamo, who fear it is a rigged system and says, “You know, we took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States, and we‘re doing that by serving as defense counsel and assuring that our clients are not tried in an unconstitutional system.”
What if you read the wrong books, or give to the wrong political party?
Can you be picked up when you leave the country, called an enemy combatant and detained without access to a lawyer?
January 15th, 2009 at 8:02 am
The problem with Bush and this war is information leaks. Letting staff and the press make comments about torture that most of the world condemns should not be discussed. Having Guantanamo only makes matters worst. You give reason to ? when no 1 should know. That sort of information should be top secert.
January 15th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
OLD LEFTY,
I think I have you figured out…leave out the details that are detrimental to your arugument in hopes nobody actually checks into what you’re saying. Thanks, WIKI:
John Walker Lindh was fighting for Al Queda in Afghanistan and was a sworn soldier of Bin Laden when he was arrested and charged as an enemy combatant. He was interrogated, as all prisoners of war are, then stood trial wherein he was convicted on 10 counts of terror-related activities. What exactly, was your point of bringing him up?
January 15th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Jared,
I know that John Walker Lindh was fighting for Al Queda in Afghanistan, (it was actually the Taliban).
That doesn’t have anything to do with the fact that giving the president the power to declare “enemy combatant” status means that, say in 20 years a president that you strongly disagree with can have you arrested if you travel and charged as an enemy combatant, rendered, and never heard from again.
John Walker Lindh was only known to the public because they released the information to the public, and the media covered it.
What makes you think you would know about other detentions?
Don’t forget, the bottom line, in guarding our liberty, is NOT waiting until the above scenario happerns, that’s when it’s too late.
January 15th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
OLD LEFTY,
Firstly, he admitted to fighting for Al Queda in a sworn statement to the USMC…”While on the Peleliu, he signed confession documents while he was held by the United States Marine Corps and informed his interrogators that he was not merely Taliban but al-Qaeda…”
Secondly, the President has every right to declare a person an enemy combatant when the person has willingly endagered the lives of American citizens by physically helping Taliban or Al Queda (in this case). You cannot be an enemy combatant without fighting for an opposing force, and against the US. And your scenario about a person, 20 years from now, saying bad things about his President, is absolutley absurd as saying bad things about someone isn’t a crime.
What makes you think you wouldn’t know about other detentions, Mr. Pessimistic?
My point is that your automatic reaction with regards to the Bush administration is to jump to the worst possible conclusion, without giving the benefit of the doubt that our leadership, which we elected, is doing what they believe is in our best interests?
January 15th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Jared,
(forgot about this thread)
The only problem ANYBODY has with John Walker Lindh is that the executive does not have to meet those same standards.
When you say,
“Secondly, the President has every right to declare a person an enemy combatant when the person has willingly endagered the lives of American citizens by physically helping Taliban or Al Queda (in this case).”
Are you saying that he has to PROVE that the person is endangering the lives of American citizens?
Can the enemy combatant ONLY be helping al Qaeda?, What about a FARC or the PKK, or a Timothy McViegh type?
Does the president have to PROVE or just give probable cause?
Who does he have to offer evidence of terrorist associations or danger to?
If the answer is No one, then we are back to, it could be you, or me or ANYONE the president doesn’t like or wants to get rid of.
Are we to juat trust the goodness of the most powerful when we know, “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
As for
“your automatic reaction with regards to the Bush administration is to jump to the worst possible conclusion, without giving the benefit of the doubt that our leadership, which we elected, is doing what they believe is in our best interests?”
Isn’t that the job of the citizen?
Isn’t that what Ben Franklin meant by, “A republic, Madam, if you can keep it”? AND
“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
January 15th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Kregg said: “Vegas apparently didn’t – he asked.”
Asked what? You mean, “what the hell is going on with American moral values?” When it comes to torture, I guess morale is slowly deteriorating… slowwwwwly, but suuuuuurely.
January 15th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
OLD LEFTY,
If you look up the definition, it clearly states an enemy combatant is anyone fighting for an opposing force’s proclaimed military during a time of war. The US uses this term, lately, as a descriptor for forces fighting for the Taliban or Al-Queda.
In the event of Lindh, it wasn’t very hard at all to prove that he was endangering the lives of American citizens, was it? Your bantering makes my head hurt, and it makes no sense.
Lindh was afforded due process, and had a trial, because he was due those rights as an American citizen, and he was PROVEN to be colluding with Al-Queda.
Are you trying to argue against the idea of identifying someone as an enemy combatant?
You’re right, it is the responsibility of the citizen to question their government, and I believe most people exercise this right responsibly; you, however, continually try to demonize the Bush admin for everything under the sun. Your obvious lack of faith in the Bush Admin is very disconcerting. I only hope you’re equally as critical of the Obama Admin…I’ll hold my breath…
January 15th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Jared,
Nobody doubts that ‘Lindh was afforded due process, and had a trial, because he was due those rights as an American citizen, and he was PROVEN to be colluding with Al-Queda’
My problem is if you give one person the power to decide that ANYONE can be called an enemy combatant, and denied due process, (remember, habeus corpus has been what ALL these court cases have been about),
How do you know when that power is not being used against the citizenry?
We know Nixon abused HIS power, and we have seen democracies slip away in other countries because the citizens had more faith in their leaders than in their freedom.
“Are you trying to argue against the idea of identifying someone as an enemy combatant?”
……………………………….
Not with due process, but not as in the case of Yaser Hamdi, where the government took the position that “with no meaningful judicial review, any American citizen alleged to be an enemy combatant could be detained indefinitely without charge or counsel on the government’s say-so.”
I guess I give Bush about as much as the conservatives gave Clinton.
I also believe in impeachment, but I think that lying a nation into war, and ‘fixing the intelligence around the policy are greater crimes’.
It amazes me how much more respect conservatives expect liberals to give Bush compared to how little they gave Clinton.
Once we give such awsome power, we need to be at least skeptical of those we supported and we tend to be cynical of those we did not.
January 15th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
OLD LEFTY,
No, not anyone qualifies as an enemy combatant. As I’ve said before, only those who are endangering America lives by physically engaging against them, are enemy combatants. Spreading propaganda, etc. does not qualify you as an enemy combatant; however, picking up an AK-47 and hurling bullets at my head would definitely qualify you as an enemy combatant.
In any case, in your opinion, should US citizens who takes up arms against their country in an internationally recognized war zone be afforded the rights of the US Constitution? My opinion is no…if it can be proven they willingly fought against their country, they have effectively renounced their citizenship and should not be given due process and should be treated as an enemy of the US. I believe that would also qualify as treason…
January 16th, 2009 at 11:28 am
Jaded,
The problem is NOT who is called an enemy combatant, it is WHO gets to call them that with NO oversite.
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Hamdan v Rumsfeld, the Congress passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 which contains a definitions for lawful and unlawful enemy combatants. The Military Commissions Act mandated that Guantanamo captives were no longer entitled to access the US civil justice system, so all outstanding habeas corpus petitions were stayed.
Then, on June 12, 2008, the Supreme Court ruled in Boumediene v Bush, that the Mil. Com. Act could not remove the right for Guantanamo captives to access the US Federal Court system. And all previous Guantanamo captives’ habeas petitions were eligible to be re-instated. The judges considering the captives’ habeas petitions would be considering whether the evidence used to compile the allegations the men and boys were enemy combatants justified a classification of “enemy combatant”.
So the problem I have is until these court rulings that gave them access to legal representation, what would have stopped a future president who hates what you write about him from declaring Jared an enemy combatant, picking you up when you get off the plane and you are never heard of again?
That’s why even the John Birch was calling for impeachment.
You said,
“In any case, in your opinion, should US citizens who takes up arms against their country in an internationally recognized war zone be afforded the rights of the US Constitution? My opinion is no…if it can be proven they willingly fought against their country, they have effectively renounced their citizenship and should not be given due process and should be treated as an enemy of the US. I believe that would also qualify as treason… “
……………………………………………………………….
But that is NOT my opinion, MY opinion is, If they don’t have a right to a defense, How can you prove anything?
January 16th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
[...] Obama says he wants to “move forward”, there is more pressure to investigate now that a Pentagon official has admitted that treatment of a Gitmo detainee “met the legal definition of [...]
January 18th, 2009 at 10:09 am
OLD & LUMPY,
How can you prove that a person was fighting for a enemy group without a defense?? Oh, I don’t know, how about the bullets flying by your head? How’s that for a defense? Geez…
January 19th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Jared,
By defense, I mean LEGAL defense.
If they pick you up, and throw you into a detention camp, with no access to due process, how do we know you fighting Americans or just someone the president doesn’t like?
January 19th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
OLD LEFTY,
You’re trying to find something…ANYTHING to help your argument, but it’s not making sense.
“how do we know you fighting Americans or just someone the president doesn’t like?” It’s my opinion those people being detained at Gitmo are enemy combatants who were captured in a war zone. I have full confidence our men and women are only detaining people who were fighting for the enemy…hence, no defense necessary.
Surely you’re not suggesting the president is calling the men and women with boots on the ground and telling them: “pick up Joe, cuz he said somethin’ I didn’t like.” I know you don’t much care for Pres Bush, but this is out there…
January 19th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Jared,
No, that’s not what I’m suggesting.
What HAS happened is that troops, (sometimes contractors) have rounded up everyone in a nieghborhood….It’s not their job to make distinctions.
They then end up in abu Ghraib being interrogated, often by CACI..how do we kmow who they are if they have no habeus corpus?
The darker scenario is that if someone is seen as a threat to a president, what’s to stop a G Gordon Liddy type, (he said he would do ANYTHING for the president), to pick that person up at the airport, call him terrorist or enemy combatant, and he’s never heard of again.
Having access to due process is the only safegaurd. In the same way that ANYONE is entitled…they could be framed.
It’s naive to assume, “it could NEVER happen here”.
It need not be Bush, it could be a future far leftie, fighting religious extremism….including Christians.
Do you want to trust our legal system, or one man?
January 19th, 2009 at 5:57 pm