|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Now Jules,, Look at the "What" that GM responded to you with.. you will note that there is a  after it.... Meaning he was confused by your comment..... Now, Go look at the "what" as a response to me and you will see  which is the sign for a Grin... Then tell me again how I don't comprehend things..... 
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
OMG! LMAO!!!! This just gets better by the moment. I need to stop because I'm actually feeling sorry for you now. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Really? I think it's getting better and better.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
It bothers you that you were caught being wrong doesn't it Jules...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061 |
Quote:
Quote:
We are talking about doing these harsher techniques against so called enemy combatants that are known terrorists.
If they are an enemy combatant, and we have them captured and detained. Wouldn't that make them a POW?
No it wouldn't. German infiltrators in World War two were captured (in Florida I believe) and actually executed even though they were actual German soldiers. They were not uniformed soldiers and thus could be classified as spies.
The ruling on these guy is since they fight for no country (and no uniform) they are not considered to be POWs. That title is reserved for members of a foreign uniformed army.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,102 |
j/c Imagine if, shortly after 9/11, someone had told you that the US government would adopt an interrogation policy based on Chinese Communist techniques designed to elicit false confessions. You'd have thought that person was pretty cynical. But he'd turn out to be exactly right. To craft its torture program, the Bush team consulted experts from the military's SERE program (for "Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape"). SERE was adopted in the wake of the Korean War to train American soldiers to resist abuse by rogue regimes. After 9/11, we put those techniques to work to interrogate terrorist suspects. It's hardly surprising, then, that, as one former high-ranking intelligence official told the Washington Post: "We spent millions of dollars chasing false alarms." Beaten savagely by Egyptian torturers, one victim of our "extraordinary rendition" program concocted a story about Saddam Hussein giving Al Qaeda WMD training. That story made it into Colin Powell's UN Security Council speech selling the Iraq War. http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10133
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Dude, you need to stop. Everybody here knows what's going on except you.....and you just don't get it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We are talking about doing these harsher techniques against so called enemy combatants that are known terrorists.
If they are an enemy combatant, and we have them captured and detained. Wouldn't that make them a POW?
No it wouldn't. German infiltrators in World War two were captured (in Florida I believe) and actually executed even though they were actual German soldiers. They were not uniformed soldiers and thus could be classified as spies.
The ruling on these guy is since they fight for no country (and no uniform) they are not considered to be POWs. That title is reserved for members of a foreign uniformed army.
Even better, cause then they don't fall under the Geneva convention, we should have just forced them to sleep with pigs until they gave up the info.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
Dude, you need to stop. Everybody here knows what's going on except you.....and you just don't get it.
No,, there is one person on this board that doesn't......You!
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Based on the number of PMs I had sitting there for me this morning about this, I can tell you that you are amusing the hell out the board. Keep going Daman, and keep missing the fact that GM was joking both times. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Jules Jules Jules......... so your buddies all feel you are soooooo right and I'm sooooo wrong.. Tell me jules, what's surprising about that..
What's funny is, you can't prove that... it could be you being untruthful... don't know.. but it could be.. I'll be honest, with ya, I only got one that said to ignore you.. Good advice..
I think I will do just that...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
I didn't send any PM's but if I had I would've been on Jules' side.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276 |
Quote:
I didn't send any PM's but if I had I would've been on Jules' side.
Suck up!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,799
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,799 |
I think they are both butt faces
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
This has got to be the lamest pishing match I've seen since the Great Muppet Fight of '07.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,369
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,369 |
Beaker would have won that too, if Animal hadn't jumped in the ring with that chair. 
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
I think they are both butt faces
Hey Hey,, I resemble that remark 
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,799
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,799 |
Where is Michael Buffer when ya need him to hype this thing up
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
This has got to be the lamest pishing match I've seen since the Great Muppet Fight of '07.
Actually that was MUCH more entertaining...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,799
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,799 |
Maybe I should start a fight with a young kid, you know kinda like Rocky XXVIIII
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I thought that was Rocky XXIX...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,799
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,799 |
Don't make me drive down there and run you over with my scooter chair
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,070
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,070 |
Quote:
and I really wish we could prosecute for the TORTURE that guys like Phil, Tyler, Da Man Is Hot and mac put us through when reading there views on things like this ... what they say and the examples they bring up just make me wanna PUKE ..
Diam...so your upset because I posted a story that included some facts about torture?
Oh those terrible facts...
I didn't give a personal opinion on this subject, therefore, your problem is with the article I posted...my guess is, you didnt even read the story.
Waterboarding Used to Be a Crime
By Evan Wallach
Sunday, November 4, 2007
As a JAG in the Nevada National Guard, I used to lecture the soldiers of the 72nd Military Police Company every year about their legal obligations when they guarded prisoners. I'd always conclude by saying, "I know you won't remember everything I told you today, but just remember what your mom told you: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." That's a pretty good standard for life and for the law, and even though I left the unit in 1995, I like to think that some of my teaching had carried over when the 72nd refused to participate in misconduct at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.
Sometimes, though, the questions we face about detainees and interrogation get more specific. One such set of questions relates to "waterboarding."
That term is used to describe several interrogation techniques. The victim may be immersed in water, have water forced into the nose and mouth, or have water poured onto material placed over the face so that the liquid is inhaled or swallowed. The media usually characterize the practice as "simulated drowning." That's incorrect. To be effective, waterboarding is usually real drowning that simulates death. That is,
the victim experiences the sensations of drowning: struggle, panic, breath-holding, swallowing, vomiting, taking water into the lungs and, eventually, the same feeling of not being able to breathe that one experiences after being punched in the gut. The main difference is that the drowning process is halted. According to those who have studied waterboarding's effects, it can cause severe psychological trauma, such as panic attacks, for years.
The United States knows quite a bit about waterboarding. The U.S. government -- whether acting alone before domestic courts, commissions and courts-martial or as part of the world community -- has not only condemned the use of water torture but has severely punished those who applied it.
After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. At the trial of his captors, then-Lt. Chase J. Nielsen, one of the 1942 Army Air Forces officers who flew in the Doolittle Raid and was captured by the Japanese, testified: "I was given several types of torture. . . . I was given what they call the water cure." He was asked what he felt when the Japanese soldiers poured the water. "Well, I felt more or less like I was drowning," he replied, "just gasping between life and death."
Nielsen's experience was not unique. Nor was the prosecution of his captors. 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.
In this case from the tribunal's records, the victim was a prisoner in the Japanese-occupied Dutch East Indies:
A towel was fixed under the chin and down over the face. Then many buckets of water were poured into the towel so that the water gradually reached the mouth and rising further eventually also the nostrils, which resulted in his becoming unconscious and collapsing like a person drowned. This procedure was sometimes repeated 5-6 times in succession.
The United States (like Britain, Australia and other Allies) pursued lower-ranking Japanese war criminals in trials before their own tribunals. As a general rule, the testimony was similar to Nielsen's. Consider this account from a Filipino waterboarding victim:
Q: Was it painful?
A: Not so painful, but one becomes unconscious. Like drowning in the water.
Q: Like you were drowning?
A: Drowning -- you could hardly breathe.
Here's the testimony of two Americans imprisoned by the Japanese:
They would lash me to a stretcher then prop me up against a table with my head down. They would then pour about two gallons of water from a pitcher into my nose and mouth until I lost consciousness.
And from the second prisoner: They laid me out on a stretcher and strapped me on. The stretcher was then stood on end with my head almost touching the floor and my feet in the air. . . . They then began pouring water over my face and at times it was almost impossible for me to breathe without sucking in water.
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.
More recently, waterboarding cases have appeared in U.S. district courts. One was a civil action brought by several Filipinos seeking damages against the estate of former Philippine president Ferdinand Marcos. The plaintiffs claimed they had been subjected to torture, including water torture. The court awarded $766 million in damages, noting in its findings that "the plaintiffs experienced human rights violations including, but not limited to . . . the water cure, where a cloth was placed over the detainee's mouth and nose, and water producing a drowning sensation."
In 1983, federal prosecutors charged a Texas sheriff and three of his deputies with violating prisoners' civil rights by forcing confessions. The complaint alleged that the officers conspired to "subject prisoners to a suffocating water torture ordeal in order to coerce confessions. This generally included the placement of a towel over the nose and mouth of the prisoner and the pouring of water in the towel until the prisoner began to move, jerk, or otherwise indicate that he was suffocating and/or drowning."
The four defendants were convicted, and the sheriff was sentenced to 10 years in prison.
We know that U.S. military tribunals and U.S. judges have examined certain types of water-based interrogation and found that they constituted torture. That's a lesson worth learning. The study of law is, after all, largely the study of history. The law of war is no different. This history should be of value to those who seek to understand what the law is -- as well as what it ought to be.
Evan Wallach, a judge at the U.S. Court of International Trade in New York, teaches the law
of war as an adjunct professor at Brooklyn Law School and New York Law School.
web page
GM strong...
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
I didn't give a personal opinion on this subject, therefore, your problem is with the article I posted...my guess is, you didnt even read the story.
Just as a side note mac.. when you post an article like this and you choose to highlite certain parts in bold or red or italics.. that is an indirect way of giving your opinion... that is like saying, "This is the important part, this is the part that I want you to focus on"... So don't hide behind the article...
As for waterboarding being a crime at one point... opium used to be legal, quite a few sex acts used to be illegal... laws change.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,070
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,070 |
Quote:
when you post an article like this and you choose to highlite certain parts in bold or red or italics.. that is an indirect way of giving your opinion... that is like saying, "This is the important part, this is the part that I want you to focus on".
DC...nice of you to give "your" opinion as to why I highlighted parts of the article in red.
But hey, your wrong again...I highlighted them because the article was a little long and some might become disinterested in it and not continued to read down to the parts I highlighted in red.
I just wanted to make sure folks like you and Diam noticed and read the parts which deal with the history of water boarding and how (in the past) the US government has handled cases where water boarding has been used.
It's history lesson, DC...a learning opportunity for all of us....but its not my opinion...mac
GM strong...
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Wait,, I need to understand something..
Is waterboarding legal or not? I'm still not clear on that. It is clear that it wasn't always legal or an accepted practice. So if it's legal now, when did it become legal.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061 |
This is not that difficult to understand. It is against the Geneva Conventions to do water boarding to a POW. We are not water boarding POWs. We did it to three high ranking terrorist ( I believe all were high ranking Al Qeda members) who in no shape or form are considered POWs. This has been discussed more then once in this thread.
For anyone to buy the opinion in Mac's article they would have to first deduct that "enemy combatants" are the same as POWS.
Others could argue that water boarding should be against the law based on other merits.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
So, the waterboarding that took place on those three guys was, in fact, Legal!
Thanks
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349 |
Quote:
So, the waterboarding that took place on those three guys was, in fact, Legal!
Thanks
yes it was, at that time. I think now it has been banned again, if I am understanding correctly.
KING
You may be in the drivers seat but God is holding the map. #GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
yes it was, at that time. I think now it has been banned again, if I am understanding correctly.
I'd say so. With all the Bruhaha about it,, I'm pretty sure that nobody in thier right mind would attempt it right now..
But that brings up another question.. Pdawg made the distinction between these guys that were waterboarded and POW's.
Maybe I missed this somewhere or I just didn't understand the significant differences, but if a guy is captured while we are at war and then he is imprisoned, how is that not a POW?
I'm struggling with the difference!
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349 |
I think the difference is what the Geneva conventions states compared to our own policys. What we did before was technically ok by Geneva standards but was in the past against our policys. Our policys changed to allow it post 9/11, now our policys are being changed back to not allow it.
KING
You may be in the drivers seat but God is holding the map. #GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
I think the difference is what the Geneva conventions states compared to our own policys.
I was talking about the difference between the status of the guys we waterboarded and those that are considered POW's under the Geneva Convention..
I'm just trying to understand the difference between them...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
POW's are considered national fighters from a country that you are at war with. Enemy combatants are rogue fighters not fighting under a specific flag.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
POW's are considered national fighters from a country that you are at war with. Enemy combatants are rogue fighters not fighting under a specific flag.
Well, Ok.. So, if we go to war with a country and we capture one of thier soldiers who wants to kill our soldiers and defeat us,, we can't torture them under the rules of the Geneva Convention!
But, if we go to war with a country, capture a guy that isn't in the military but who still wants to kill our soldiers and defeat us, we can waterboard him if we want to?
Do you see my point.. call them what you want, but if they were captured in war time, held or imprisoned because they want to kill our soldier and defeat us in war, doesn't that by definition, make them Prisoners of War?
Almost sounds like semantics.
Excl,, I think there has got to be more to it than you describe.. just gotta be..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
And this right here HIGHLIGHTS THE PROBLEMS with most of U .. and by U ... i mean the people that want to TALK LIKE THEY KNOW WHATS GOING ON WHEN IN FACT THEY DON'T HAVE A CLUE BECAUSE U HAVE NOT PAID ONE BIT OF ATTENTION ... this has been going on since 2002 and the legal battle surronding this started pretty much then and is continioung today .. U all read a headline and read one article or watch one or two news stories and think U UNDERSTAND AND KNOW IT ALL .....
here's how this thing has played out ...
1. Waterboarding is illegal under the Geneva Convention ...
2. The Geneva Convention is a document that refers to war time "rules" and PROTECTING POW'S ...
3. The US took the position that these "prisoners" were not POW's because they fought for NO COUNTRY .. they did not wear uniforms ..... they were DRESSED AS CIVILIANS AND WERE INTERWINED with the civilain population and they fought for NO COUNTRY ..
therefore they were NOT LABELED POW'S ... we did this so they would not be protected under the geneva convention ... and because of that we could INTEROGATE THEM without the handcuffs of the Geneva Convention hindering our info extracting methods ..
4. We brought them to Guantanamo because our gov't officials could then claim that no US COURTS had jurisdiction so that when the liberal groups in this country got involved they would have no where to bring there court cases ....
so at the end of the day ... as for the waterboarding stuff ... it is STILL "LEGAL" as far as these prisoners go .. it was NEVER ILLEGAL in the interpertation Bush placed on these "prisoners" .. it was basically all a PLAY ON WORDS so we could "legally" use what ever methods we wanted to when trying to extract info ....
If u would like to know more .. let me know (or better yet .. how about u GOOGLE this stuff .. I do not need to because i have followed it SINCE 2002) .. the SUPREME COURT has rendered 3 MAJOR DECISION in this case .. each decision has gone against the gov't as far as JURISDICTION goes and how these prisoners should be labeled .... the first one i believe was in 2004 ...
well in verdicts 1 & 2 our elected gov't officials in all branches decided to change the "laws" to skirt around these decisions ... yup .. thats the same people now screaming holy hell about the injustices done here ... them folks enacted new laws to skirt around the supreme court decisions .. *L* ..
verdict #3 witch came down in 08 LEFT NO WIGGLE ROOM ... none what so ever ... if u want to know what i mean ...
GO LOOK IT UP for a change instead of talking out your ass on sumptin U see the HEADLINES ON and form an opinion WITHOUT KNOWING SQUAT about what actually happend ..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276 |
Wow! someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed,,,lol
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,433
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,433 |
The Geneva Convention also recognizes that people not in uniform, acting against one of it's ememys is a spy, and spies can be executed.
We should get what we want on the waterboad, then turn them upside down again and really put some water on that towel and drown them for real.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,558
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,558 |
Pretty much everything you said is correct. The Bush administration said (probably correctly) that the majority of detainees are not POW's, because they are neither fighting for a country, nor do they wear uniforms. However, they have tried to push them into a nebulous "enemy combatant" classification, which the Bush administration used to deprive them of POW rights, while still allowing the US to apprehend and try them in US courts while witholding rights granted to people being tried on US soil (thus the existence of Gitmo bay). To do this they had to argue that although the US controls Gitmo Bay, it is not US territory. This classification has been repeatedly rejected by the Supreme Court. If Gitmo Bay is US territory, then people being held on it would have the same rights as american citizens, regardless of whether they are citizens or not (for instance, if a random English citizen is held for a crime in Chicago, they still get all the same protections under the law that an american citizen does, under both US and international law) The only thing i'd take issue with.... Quote:
so at the end of the day ... as for the waterboarding stuff ... it is STILL "LEGAL" as far as these prisoners go .. it was NEVER ILLEGAL in the interpertation Bush placed on these "prisoners" .. it was basically all a PLAY ON WORDS so we could "legally" use what ever methods we wanted to when trying to extract info ....
When Obama redefined waterboarding as torture, he made it illegal, because it is then specifically banned by the UN Convention on Torture, to which the US is a signed party. According to that treaty (not the Geneva convention) torture can't be used against anybody, and this would include so-called "enemy combatants"
The bush administration needed to prove three things to keep waterboarding of enemy combatants legal:
1.) Waterboarding is not torture (or the UN treaty against torture would ban it)
2.) The Detainees are not POWs (or else the Geneva Convention would ban it)
3.) Guantanamo Bay is not "US Land" (or else numerous national laws on treatment of prisoners would ban it)
It's mostly the third point that the supreme court has rejected, and it is the first point that the Obama administration has overturned. The second point is probably true, and it's probably not the geneva convention which makes the torture of detainees illegal.
~Lyuokdea
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 04/28/09 01:04 PM.
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
I get really really stupid about twice a year and respond to U .. no clue why i do it cause its like talking to the proverbial wall .. but here i go again .. MAY GOD HELP ME cuase by responding to U it proves I AM TO STUPID TO HELP MYSELF ... *L* .. Quote:
Diam...so your upset because I posted a story that included some facts about torture?
No the story does not upset me at all ..... its people like him and U and a huge ass segment of our population that MAKES OUR COUNTRY WEAKER and VERY VERY VULNERABLE and HARDER AND HARDER to DEFEND with how u think and want to do things ...
I could go on for an hour about how naive and ABSURD your position is on this entire subject .... about how u ask people to defend U and then when they have to get there hands dirty to do it U want to TELL THEM HOW even though from your IVORY TOWER U have no idea what it takes .....
the bottom line here .... is the fact U try and REGULATE WAR ... U want to put rules on sumptin where the END GAME is KILLING PEOPLE ...
the object of war is to win ... to win U need to KILL enough of the enemy so they can no longer defend themselves and they have to surrender .... and u want to put rules to it .. *LOL* .. well all righty then ... we need to KILL LIKE GOOD BOYS .. U know how absurd that is ...
Oh wait .. this is about POW's and they have rights ... and I agree ... but u see ... heres the problem .. POW's SOMETIMES have VALUABLE INFORMATION that could help us WIN THE WAR and have FEWER CASUALTIES (and once war starts .. winning it with as few casualties as possible is the objective . no???) ...
and U know what .. sometimes U have to do BRUTAL THINGS to get that info .. cause U know what ... THEY DO NOT WANT TO SEE THERE BUDS KILLED or there side lose the war .. so MOST OF THE TIME ... PRETTY PLEASE WITHH A CHERRY ON TOP DOES NOT WORK ....
and the info MORE OFTEN THAN NOT NEEDS TO BE EXTRACTED ASAP ... cause in war things MOVE VERY FAST AND PLANS CHANGE QUICKLY .... so the longer it takes to get the info ... the LESS VALUE IT HAS ....
ITS UGLY MAC ... and its WRONG to do those things to people .. it is INHUMANE and MAKES ME SICK ... but SOMETIMES IT IS 100% NECCESSARY and the ABSOLUTE RIGHT THING TO DO ...
your boys says sumptin that is at the crux of the problem here ...
Quote:
"I know you won't remember everything I told you today, but just remember what your mom told you: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."
thats a GREAT SAYING and a good one to live by .. problem is the terrorists were engaged with now .. there Ma's appearantly have a different saying .. it may go sumptin like this ..
"take out as many of those American Infidels as u can while securing your virgin"
like i said mac thats a great saying .. right up until your kicked in the nuts or punched in the face ... then dad takes over .. and my dad never said turn the other cheek .. he said .. WHEN ATTACKED, DO WHAT U GOTTA DO .... and i'm sure u did not teach your kids to just lay down ....
and that quote used in this context tells me just how naive most of U are and it tells me all I need to know about this guys thinking (that and hes a judge .. so everything this guy does is based on the law .. and the law is USELESS IN WAR TIMES ... tell me witch war we've been in where the other side OBEYED ANY RULES??? .. GOOD LUCK ANSWERING THAT ONE ..... ) ...
cause U know what Mac ... ask any of the mothers who had kids in the twin towers or in the pentagon or on the flight that crashed or who had kids on the USS Cole or any of the other DEATHS these folks are responsible for ... ask there Moms what they would say to there kids in regards to that saying .... how were there kids treated ....
Quote:
Oh those terrible facts...
I didn't give a personal opinion on this subject, therefore, your problem is with the article I posted...my guess is, you didnt even read the story.
I did read it .. and it was just as i suspected ... a LAWYERS/JUDGES VIEW with the COURT HISTORY sprikled in to try and make a point that it is no good cause it is illegal ...
well guess what mac .. U want a history lesson on "torture" and how it is used by us and how it has evolved over the years .. JUST ASK ... and for U .. I may give u complete rundown ... one of your liberal buddies touched on it earlier when they mentioned "SERE" and how the training has evolved ...
and U wanna know what mac .. WATEROARDING IS A DAY AT THE BEACH COMPARED TO WHAT GOES ON OUT IN THE FIELD ... a day at the beach ...
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum CIA Waterboarding Uncovered 2nd
Wave Attack on L.A.
|
|
