Bush admin official admits torture

[GarfieldtheCat]

CNN link

So, after all this time of denying torture, it comes out in the open. The judge in charge of the military courts down in Gitmo specifically admits that we tortured "Mr 20", and as a direct result of that, she could not prosecute him.

"We tortured (Mohammed al-) Qahtani," Crawford told the Post. "His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that's why I did not refer the case" for prosecution.

So thanks to Bush and Cheney breaking the law, we can't convict and execute a real terrorist, with real evidence to a real crime. So what do we do know? Just lock him up forever without rights? Ignore the law? Let him go? Thanks to their willingness to ignore the law, we can't prosecute this person now, and are stuck in a bad situation.

If a US judge of a criminal cases sees that the police/prosecution have broken the law or ignored a persons rights, he/she has to drop the case because of the abuse from the police/prosecution. And a possibly guilty person goes free. And this is what has happened in Gitmo now.

And the judge brings up another good point:

"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."

Another great reason why we shouldn't be torturing people, as if we needed any more.

 

[Arkaign]

Epic Fail

 

[Sinsear]

Back room execution.

 

[alien42]

but GWB just said on Larry King Live that we never tortured anyone and he never lies.

 

[RichardE]

What a pussy judge.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: RichardE
What a pussy judge.

Wow.

I can totally understand, and share the opinion, that we should prosecute and upon a finding of guilt, proceed to quickly execute those guilty of terrorism or similar mass murders.

But to support torture for any reason is an utterly horrific and counterproductive policy stance. Becoming the enemy is a sure way to lose everything that we strived so very hard to achieve with this nation.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Back room execution.

/win

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: RichardE
What a pussy judge.

Wow.

I can totally understand, and share the opinion, that we should prosecute and upon a finding of guilt, proceed to quickly execute those guilty of terrorism or similar mass murders.

But to support torture for any reason is an utterly horrific and counterproductive policy stance. Becoming the enemy is a sure way to lose everything that we strived so very hard to achieve with this nation.

Sure, do that, don't use "torture" as an excuse to let go of this guy though. You want to make a stance, make it a different way than letting go of someone who started this ball rolling.

Again, a pussy judge.

 

[Skitzer]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Back room execution.

/win

+1

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: RichardE
What a pussy judge.

Wow.

I can totally understand, and share the opinion, that we should prosecute and upon a finding of guilt, proceed to quickly execute those guilty of terrorism or similar mass murders.

But to support torture for any reason is an utterly horrific and counterproductive policy stance. Becoming the enemy is a sure way to lose everything that we strived so very hard to achieve with this nation.

Sure, do that, don't use "torture" as an excuse to let go of this guy though. You want to make a stance, make it a different way than letting go of someone who started this ball rolling.

Again, a pussy judge.

No, the judge is following the rule of law, that's courage. I'm sure she agrees that he should be punished. She's no softie, historically speaking :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Crawford_(Pentagon)

Sometimes our national ideals and the rule of law is more important than a single case. This guy will get what's coming to him one way or another, and this is fully a case where I would support turning him over to an unfriendly nation to do as they please. That shouldn't be SOP, we should follow our own laws to the letter, and support a standard of humanity, fairness, and toughness that is a beacon to the world. We should not look incompetent, corrupt, and inconsistent, which of course we have due to many many reasons.

 

[ZzZGuy]

I'm getting the impression that torture is fine and dandy in America as long as no one hears about it.

At the very least, throw out every scrap of evidence acquired by torture, and prosecute and imprison those who tortured him along with those who ordered it. Hell, torture is counter productive to begin with, all you get is what you want to hear and not the truth.

Don't like that solution? Then congratulations, you have the justice system of a 3rd world country.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: alien42
but GWB just said on Larry King Live that we never tortured anyone and he never lies.

Of course GWB, Cheney, and Rumsfeld never personally tortured anyone, they do it the clean hands way, they hire it done. Never mind the fact that they are equally guilty in the eyes of the law, they can exonerate themselves in their own minds.

But every once and awhile, Cheney can't restrain himself, so he shoots a hunting companion and blood lust satisfied, is good to go for awhile.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: ZzZGuy
I'm getting the impression that torture is fine and dandy in America as long as no one hears about it.

At the very least, throw out every scrap of evidence acquired by torture, and prosecute and imprison those who tortured him along with those who ordered it. Hell, torture is counter productive to begin with, all you get is what you want to hear and not the truth.

Don't like that solution? Then congratulations, you have the justice system of a 3rd world country.

Should the justice system be based on morals, or based on protecting the people it serves?

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Skitzer

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Back room execution.

/win

+1

We can hand him off to some other country where Im sure the asshole has commited other crimes. They can "take care" of him.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Skitzer

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Back room execution.

/win

+1

We can hand him off to some other country where Im sure the asshole has commited other crimes. They can "take care" of him.

Definitely

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: ZzZGuy
I'm getting the impression that torture is fine and dandy in America as long as no one hears about it.

At the very least, throw out every scrap of evidence acquired by torture, and prosecute and imprison those who tortured him along with those who ordered it. Hell, torture is counter productive to begin with, all you get is what you want to hear and not the truth.

Don't like that solution? Then congratulations, you have the justice system of a 3rd world country.

Should the justice system be based on morals, or based on protecting the people it serves?

It should be based on the law. If the law doesn't satisfy your desires, lobby your Congressman for a change. Until then, they had better damned well follow it. We've had enough "cowboys" in government to last a very long time.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: ZzZGuy
I'm getting the impression that torture is fine and dandy in America as long as no one hears about it.

At the very least, throw out every scrap of evidence acquired by torture, and prosecute and imprison those who tortured him along with those who ordered it. Hell, torture is counter productive to begin with, all you get is what you want to hear and not the truth.

Don't like that solution? Then congratulations, you have the justice system of a 3rd world country.

Should the justice system be based on morals, or based on protecting the people it serves?

There's no reason it can't be both. This judge is making a stand, based upon our nation's laws, that reinforces our standards and ideals. It's not like we're not going to drop this guy in NYC with a welfare check and a book of food stamps. I'm pretty confident that he will be dealt with by a 3rd party that is interested in extradition. I didn't look it up, but he is probably a Saudi, and I don't think they take well to his kind in the Kingdom.

 

[Budmantom]

Too bad we don't torture people in this forum.

 

[GTKeeper]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: ZzZGuy
I'm getting the impression that torture is fine and dandy in America as long as no one hears about it.

At the very least, throw out every scrap of evidence acquired by torture, and prosecute and imprison those who tortured him along with those who ordered it. Hell, torture is counter productive to begin with, all you get is what you want to hear and not the truth.

Don't like that solution? Then congratulations, you have the justice system of a 3rd world country.

Should the justice system be based on morals, or based on protecting the people it serves?

So I am assuming that if you were wrongfully detained/accused you would be ok with it as long as the gov't said 'this is to protect the US' ? You would be ok with having no legal recourse whatsoever?

This is a slippery slope, because once the gov't gets used to breaking laws, you better hope you are not in their way or are affiliated with someone who is in their way because next time it could very well be your ass in gitmo rotting away. But you seem to be ok with that.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: ZzZGuy
I'm getting the impression that torture is fine and dandy in America as long as no one hears about it.

At the very least, throw out every scrap of evidence acquired by torture, and prosecute and imprison those who tortured him along with those who ordered it. Hell, torture is counter productive to begin with, all you get is what you want to hear and not the truth.

Don't like that solution? Then congratulations, you have the justice system of a 3rd world country.

Should the justice system be based on morals, or based on protecting the people it serves?

So I am assuming that if you were wrongfully detained/accused you would be ok with it as long as the gov't said 'this is to protect the US' ? You would be ok with having no legal recourse whatsoever?

This is a slippery slope, because once the gov't gets used to breaking laws, you better hope you are not in their way or are affiliated with someone who is in their way because next time it could very well be your ass in gitmo rotting away. But you seem to be ok with that.

I would be. I thought about this question, but if I was the victim of a law I thought would be better for the country as a whole, it is my duty obviously to weed myself out as the weak spot in a system that strives to give a chance to everyone within it's borders.

Before you think that is crazy, it is no different than saying you would die for your freedoms.

 

[ericlp]

I'd love to see bush and cronies go down for this. That would be truly justice.

Anyone catch the BS that Cheney said yesterday on PBS? I found it funny that he said he didn't believe in the polls, then he said, he didn't care about the polls - Basically he spat in the faces of the American Public yeah, you know ... He was suppose to be working for us. Haha, what a joke! Of course he said, if Obama stops the tortures and closes down gotamo then we would see real terror again in America. Oh man!

We are gonna be sitting ducks again if we don't beat the piss out of them. Oh and then they said that 70% of all the people let out of the torture camps went back to being terrorists! No!!!! How can that be? Shit, if you were waterboarded and almost beat to death you think you wouldn't want revenge? I would.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: ZzZGuy
I'm getting the impression that torture is fine and dandy in America as long as no one hears about it.

At the very least, throw out every scrap of evidence acquired by torture, and prosecute and imprison those who tortured him along with those who ordered it. Hell, torture is counter productive to begin with, all you get is what you want to hear and not the truth.

Don't like that solution? Then congratulations, you have the justice system of a 3rd world country.

Should the justice system be based on morals, or based on protecting the people it serves?

So I am assuming that if you were wrongfully detained/accused you would be ok with it as long as the gov't said 'this is to protect the US' ? You would be ok with having no legal recourse whatsoever?

This is a slippery slope, because once the gov't gets used to breaking laws, you better hope you are not in their way or are affiliated with someone who is in their way because next time it could very well be your ass in gitmo rotting away. But you seem to be ok with that.

I would be. I thought about this question, but if I was the victim of a law I thought would be better for the country as a whole, it is my duty obviously to weed myself out as the weak spot in a system that strives to give a chance to everyone within it's borders.

Before you think that is crazy, it is no different than saying you would die for your freedoms.

Excuse me, what just what the sam hell did you just say? I can't follow what you're saying.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: ZzZGuy
I'm getting the impression that torture is fine and dandy in America as long as no one hears about it.

At the very least, throw out every scrap of evidence acquired by torture, and prosecute and imprison those who tortured him along with those who ordered it. Hell, torture is counter productive to begin with, all you get is what you want to hear and not the truth.

Don't like that solution? Then congratulations, you have the justice system of a 3rd world country.

Should the justice system be based on morals, or based on protecting the people it serves?

So I am assuming that if you were wrongfully detained/accused you would be ok with it as long as the gov't said 'this is to protect the US' ? You would be ok with having no legal recourse whatsoever?

This is a slippery slope, because once the gov't gets used to breaking laws, you better hope you are not in their way or are affiliated with someone who is in their way because next time it could very well be your ass in gitmo rotting away. But you seem to be ok with that.

I would be. I thought about this question, but if I was the victim of a law I thought would be better for the country as a whole, it is my duty obviously to weed myself out as the weak spot in a system that strives to give a chance to everyone within it's borders.

Before you think that is crazy, it is no different than saying you would die for your freedoms.

Hey guys, we just uncovered ourselves another crazy! He's okay with being illegally locked up for the rest of his life for no reason. If I were you I would stop praying for Israel right about now and start praying for myself, because you're going to be badly taken advantage of at some point.

 

[GTKeeper]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: ZzZGuy
I'm getting the impression that torture is fine and dandy in America as long as no one hears about it.

At the very least, throw out every scrap of evidence acquired by torture, and prosecute and imprison those who tortured him along with those who ordered it. Hell, torture is counter productive to begin with, all you get is what you want to hear and not the truth.

Don't like that solution? Then congratulations, you have the justice system of a 3rd world country.

Should the justice system be based on morals, or based on protecting the people it serves?

So I am assuming that if you were wrongfully detained/accused you would be ok with it as long as the gov't said 'this is to protect the US' ? You would be ok with having no legal recourse whatsoever?

This is a slippery slope, because once the gov't gets used to breaking laws, you better hope you are not in their way or are affiliated with someone who is in their way because next time it could very well be your ass in gitmo rotting away. But you seem to be ok with that.

I would be. I thought about this question, but if I was the victim of a law I thought would be better for the country as a whole, it is my duty obviously to weed myself out as the weak spot in a system that strives to give a chance to everyone within it's borders.

Before you think that is crazy, it is no different than saying you would die for your freedoms.

Fair enough. I can at least respect your opinion if you would be ok with the above. I personally think we could have dealt with these guys better. We did a terrible PR job on this whole situation.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: ZzZGuy
I'm getting the impression that torture is fine and dandy in America as long as no one hears about it.

At the very least, throw out every scrap of evidence acquired by torture, and prosecute and imprison those who tortured him along with those who ordered it. Hell, torture is counter productive to begin with, all you get is what you want to hear and not the truth.

Don't like that solution? Then congratulations, you have the justice system of a 3rd world country.

Should the justice system be based on morals, or based on protecting the people it serves?

So I am assuming that if you were wrongfully detained/accused you would be ok with it as long as the gov't said 'this is to protect the US' ? You would be ok with having no legal recourse whatsoever?

This is a slippery slope, because once the gov't gets used to breaking laws, you better hope you are not in their way or are affiliated with someone who is in their way because next time it could very well be your ass in gitmo rotting away. But you seem to be ok with that.

I would be. I thought about this question, but if I was the victim of a law I thought would be better for the country as a whole, it is my duty obviously to weed myself out as the weak spot in a system that strives to give a chance to everyone within it's borders.

Before you think that is crazy, it is no different than saying you would die for your freedoms.

Hey guys, we just uncovered ourselves another crazy! He's okay with being illegally locked up for the rest of his life for no reason. If I were you I would stop praying for Israel right about now and start praying for myself, because you're going to be badly taken advantage of at some point.

Taken advantage of because I would die for a belief?