Director Brennan: CIA Won't Waterboard Again — Even if Ordered by Future President

[smb]

Re: Director Brennan: CIA Won't Waterboard Again — Even if Ordered by Future Presiden

First. Our Constitution doesn't forbid infliction of pain to force compliance with certain courses of action. The Bill of Rights specifically state no person "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself", bans cruel and unusual punishments in these cases making it unconstitutional to use coercion to force somebody to confess to a crime, or as a punishment. Absolutely nothing about obtaining information from terrorists seeking to harm Americans.

It's normally a serious felony to intentionally kill another. Yet both law/common sense say the law's hypothetical "reasonable person" can do exactly that to protect himself or others from an imminent threat of death or serious physical harm.

Stands to reason that if one can legally kill to stop a violent felony, one can legally torture [ lesser violation ] to accomplish the same. Ipso facto.


Raises anxiety/heart rate, like a terrifying roller coaster. Nothing much else if conducted properly. Hell, folks volunteer to be water-boarded. Hannity, Chris Hitchens, others... came out not enjoying it, but nobody showed them harmed for life. No one in their right mind volunteers for torture, but several, verifiable, have volunteered for water-boarding.

Once again you did a lot of unnecessary writing. Hamdan ruled that the prisoners in Guantanamo bay and prisoners taken captive under the AUMF are entitled to the protection of the Geneva Conventions. As a ratified treaty voluntarily signed into by the United States it has equal authority with the Constitution as stated in the Constitution. Any coercive treatment of protected people for the purposes of gathering information is forbidden by the Geneva Conventions. Because the SCOTUS ruled that there is no extra-Constitutional power granted by the President to declare them anything but prisoners taken during war they are entitled to all those protections.

Torture occurs in many ways and doesn't necessarily leave a person scarred or mutilated. The whole purpose of waterboarding is coerce a person into divulging information by inflicting pain, suffering and mental anguish. That is the very definition of cruel and unusual punishment. You don't have to take my word for it. Just ask the U.S. government that prosecuted Japanese military personnel for torture, namely waterboarding and convicted them. Again, we as a country, have convicted people for torture that used waterboarding. It IS TORTURE and it IS ILLEGAL under U.S. Law, International Law and the Geneva Conventions. Your opinion notwithstanding.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Re: Director Brennan: CIA Won't Waterboard Again — Even if Ordered by Future Presiden

Once again you did a lot of unnecessary writing. Hamdan ruled that the prisoners in Guantanamo bay and prisoners taken captive under the AUMF are entitled to the protection of the Geneva Conventions. As a ratified treaty voluntarily signed into by the United States it has equal authority with the Constitution as stated in the Constitution. Any coercive treatment of protected people for the purposes of gathering information is forbidden by the Geneva Conventions. Because the SCOTUS ruled that there is no extra-Constitutional power granted by the President to declare them anything but prisoners taken during war they are entitled to all those protections.

Torture occurs in many ways and doesn't necessarily leave a person scarred or mutilated. The whole purpose of waterboarding is coerce a person into divulging information by inflicting pain, suffering and mental anguish. That is the very definition of cruel and unusual punishment. You don't have to take my word for it. Just ask the U.S. government that prosecuted Japanese military personnel for torture, namely waterboarding and convicted them. Again, we as a country, have convicted people for torture that used waterboarding. It IS TORTURE and it IS ILLEGAL under U.S. Law, International Law and the Geneva Conventions. Your opinion notwithstanding.

I am here to debate my views. Correctly.

You may not want to be informed. Didn't dicker with you on the Constitutionality honoring treaties, specified the treaties you utilize do not afford our A-Q enemies the title of a legal combatant therefore WE are not required to be treat them except under Art 3, GC. Proved that under dire circumstances, yes, a person or nation can justifiably defend ourselves all the way up to, including, killing those intent on doing us harm.

Beyond the courts ruling in June of 2006 countermanded by the United States Military Commissions Act of 2006 [October ] signed into law by President GWBush. Checks and balances system overrides. Two branches come together to outweigh the third. Yes, in Boumediene v. Bush (2008), Supreme Court held the MCA was unconstitutional restricting use of habeas corpus, determined that detainees could have access to federal courts to hear habeas corpus petitions, to restore a protection of the Constitution even though meant for American citizens, not necessarily to give enemy combatants citizen's rights. Congress overwhelmingly passed the Military Commissions Act of 2009 amending some provisions of the 2006 Act to improve protections.

Interrogation also occurs in many ways and doesn't necessarily leave a person scarred or mutilated. The whole purpose of interrogation is , through various means coercion only one of them, to get a person to divulge information. That is the very definition of interrogation.

I don't take your word for it. Why should I? The U.S. government prosecuted Japanese military personnel not just for torture as you through your wording would make it seem, which included a more extreme version of waterboarding, it convicted/executed them of, as politifact truthfully informs us, of "a long list of additional charges"and not "solely for that offense" but "a variety of war crime charges, including waterboarding". Bobby Scott: After WWII U.S. executed Japanese for war crimes including waterboarding | PolitiFact Virginia

Your own clever wording, "Again, we as a country, have convicted people for torture that used waterboarding" could also just as easily have said, and would be just as true, "Again, we as a country, have convicted people for torture that drank coffee in the mornings" ... does not make coffee drinking torture.

That you wholeheartedly believe that it IS TORTURE and it may be currently illegitimately ILLEGAL under U.S. Law, which erroneously quotes our obligations under International Law/Geneva Conventions proven in previous posts. Only thing that one should actually note, an asterisk to your post #52, is that's all bunk when you have an unlawful combatant. With an unlawful combatant, to reiterate what I proved previously, only Article 3 of the GC applies, and the bunk post 52 uses a Geneva Protocol which we have never even agreed to... just misleading and wrong. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_I and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_II

Sorry, brother. You have no place left but your opinions. Which, while I respect your right to have them, in no way outrank mine. Since I have proven you wrong time and time again, your opinions do not seem to weigh in at the same level. You have the current president that holds the same weak-kneed opinion. Hopefully we will elect a new one with the required brass balls to do those things necessary and right to protect Americans from the evil that lives alongside, and counter to, the good on this planet.

 

[Socrates1]

Re: Director Brennan: CIA Won't Waterboard Again — Even if Ordered by Future Presiden

Read more @: Director Brennan: CIA Won't Waterboard Again — Even if Ordered by Future President

Well its good that CIA officers wont waterboard again. But what about CIA contractors who waterboard? CIA foreign partners working in CIA-paid jails? What about them? I have a suspicion that their waterboard activities will go on... [/FONT][/COLOR]

These guys act more and more like politicians than men of honor . I guess hanging around the WH and listening to Obama has that effect on most . :lamo

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Director Brennan: CIA Won't Waterboard Again — Even if Ordered by Future Presiden

If you are so independently omniscient about what is and what isn't a time for the US to get involved, why not run for office, see what the real world thinks of your ideas?

I've studied enough history and politics that I don't trust any of those guys any further than I could throw them... I just trust them more than I trust our enemies and our, sometimes, allies.

I'm not independently omniscient, but if that was a compliment, thanks much. :mrgreen:

No, not omniscient at all, but certainly in possession of common sense and analytical thinking skills. I'm old enough to remember the Gulf Of Tonkin lies and the Pentagon Papers. The Pentagon and CIA's reputations for mendacity is well established.

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Director Brennan: CIA Won't Waterboard Again — Even if Ordered by Future Presiden

One would hope that many are at least as patriotic as I am. Hell, we all need a paycheck, doesn't mean we are necessarily corrupted by it.

It seems specious to claim that patriotism is based upon torture, but they say crooks have been known to wrap themselves in the flag....

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Re: Director Brennan: CIA Won't Waterboard Again — Even if Ordered by Future Presiden

It seems specious to claim that patriotism is based upon torture, but they say crooks have been known to wrap themselves in the flag....

Many of us can hold our noses and do the right thing, especially when the choices are so stark. Besides which, only the foolish would classify something as innocuous as this to be true torture. Scary and involuntary yes, torture no.

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Director Brennan: CIA Won't Waterboard Again — Even if Ordered by Future Presiden

Did I tell you that I know bull**** when I see it?