Bush Administration approved waterboarding in memos

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: Butterbean
Even if this was significant - lefties LOVE this stuff -it makes their day - the more of it there is the more they like it. If it was Bush getting water boarded instead of Islamofascists they would cheer. Die-hard Libs dont mind harsh interrogations unless its against the bad guys. Their hatred reverses the polarity of their souls so they do things backwards.

Well, it just shows that you are an ass. Torture is illegal, and shouldn't be used against *anyone*. But since you seem to think of yourself as some big toughguy, I'm sure you could volunteer to let the CIA practice on you, since you are OK with this.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: winnar111

These people are enemy combatants who have already confessed to their crimes.

Which people? Name the ones "who have already confessed to their crimes." In particular, name the ones who didn't already confess to "their crimes" without being tortured. What about any others who have not (yet) "confessed to their crimes?" Should we not worry about how they suffer because YOU know they will eventually confess if they're tortured enough?

Those you call "enemy combatants" were labelled as such by your Traitor In Chief and his henchman as an attempt to dodge our own Constitution and statutes and international laws, and they have already been held to have failed.

We don't owe them any of the protections of our legal system.

WRONG! The U.S. government, including the CIA, are bound by U.S. statutes and any and all international treaties to which we are a party. The U.S. statute defining torture:

U.S. Code § 2340. Definitions

As used in this chapter?

• (1) ?torture? means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;
  
  (2) ?severe mental pain or suffering? means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from?
  • 
    (A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
    
    (B) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;
    
    (C) the threat of imminent death; or
    
    (D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality; and
  (3) ?United States? means the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories, and possessions of the United States.

§ 2340A. Torture

• 
  (a) Offense.

• ? Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.
  
  (b) Jurisdiction.? There is jurisdiction over the activity prohibited in subsection (a) if?
  • 
    (1) the alleged offender is a national of the United States; or
    
    (2) the alleged offender is present in the United States, irrespective of the nationality of the victim or alleged offender.
  (c) Conspiracy.? A person who conspires to commit an offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties (other than the penalty of death) as the penalties prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.

§ 2340B. Exclusive remedies

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as precluding the application of State or local laws on the same subject, nor shall anything in this chapter be construed as creating any substantive or procedural right enforceable by law by any party in any civil proceeding.

The United Nations Convention the Geneva Conventions Against Torture are noted, here. I won't waste more forum space quoting them. You can read, can't you? :roll:

We owe every human being their humanity, or we lose ours. Obviously, you've already lost yours. :thumbsdown: :|

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Oh, and more on beheading for RightisWrong:

The closest thing we have to a ban against 'beheading' of foreigners off US soil is the 1976 Executive order preventing any member of the United States government from engaging in an assassination.

Since it's an Executive Order, Bush is free to ignore it, which is why we could shoot Saddam's sons.

lulz

http://www.religioustolerance.org/execut3.htm

Only two countries use beheading as a form of capital punishment : Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

Guess you'd like us to be up with those paragons of dignity and honor, eh Akbar?

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Oh, and more on beheading for RightisWrong:

The closest thing we have to a ban against 'beheading' of foreigners off US soil is the 1976 Executive order preventing any member of the United States government from engaging in an assassination.

Since it's an Executive Order, Bush is free to ignore it, which is why we could shoot Saddam's sons.

Cool, so it's perfectly legal to behead you then, right?

The lack of logic in your posts, even by P&N standards, is truly mind boggling.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat
I think it is obvious to 99% of all the posters here that you are nothing but a pathetic neo-con troll, but read this link:

Link


I realize you don't have a clue about how our government works, and that you live in the neocon fantasy land where the President is all-powerful, but it doesn't work that way, except in your dreams. The President *cannot* overrule the laws of this country. Some specific federal laws are listed below from the article I linked.

WE have posted where the US bovernment has arrested and convicted it's own soldiers and citizens for torture and waterboarding. We have posted links the laws that says it's illegal. All you do is spout some BS that "Bush says it's OK". Either post *real* proof proving your position or STFU.


Some quotes:

The War Crimes Act of 1996 (18 U.S.C. § 2441) makes it a criminal offense for U.S. military personnel and U.S. nationals to commit war crimes as specified in the 1949 Geneva Conventions. War crimes under the act include grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions. It also includes violations of common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits ?violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; ?outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.

A federal anti-torture statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340A), enacted in 1994, provides for the prosecution of a U.S. national or anyone present in the United States who, while outside the U.S., commits or attempts to commit torture. Torture is defined as an ?act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.? A person found guilty under the act can be incarcerated for up to 20 years or receive the death penalty if the torture results in the victim?s death.

And you live in a fantasy land where some kooks at Amnesty International determine policy for our intelligence agencies.


Congress still has yet to establish that the specific technique of waterboarding fits the criteria of a "violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; ?outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment".

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: winnar111
Oh, and more on beheading for RightisWrong:

The closest thing we have to a ban against 'beheading' of foreigners off US soil is the 1976 Executive order preventing any member of the United States government from engaging in an assassination.

Since it's an Executive Order, Bush is free to ignore it, which is why we could shoot Saddam's sons.

Cool, so it's perfectly legal to behead you then, right?

The lack of logic in your posts, even by P&N standards, is truly mind boggling.

No, you'd be violating the laws of the state of new Jersey.

 

[Arkaign]

^^ And you continue to ignore the wide bi-partisan condemnation of the use of waterboarding and torture as just plain bad policy that reflects extremely negatively on our image and our global standing. There are a LARGE number of people from both sides of the aisle that think that this behavior is beneath us as Americans. I agree with that. Do you work in the intelligence or military service area? Ask Palehorse what he thinks, he works directly with the issues at hand.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat
I think it is obvious to 99% of all the posters here that you are nothing but a pathetic neo-con troll, but read this link:

Link


I realize you don't have a clue about how our government works, and that you live in the neocon fantasy land where the President is all-powerful, but it doesn't work that way, except in your dreams. The President *cannot* overrule the laws of this country. Some specific federal laws are listed below from the article I linked.

WE have posted where the US bovernment has arrested and convicted it's own soldiers and citizens for torture and waterboarding. We have posted links the laws that says it's illegal. All you do is spout some BS that "Bush says it's OK". Either post *real* proof proving your position or STFU.


Some quotes:

The War Crimes Act of 1996 (18 U.S.C. § 2441) makes it a criminal offense for U.S. military personnel and U.S. nationals to commit war crimes as specified in the 1949 Geneva Conventions. War crimes under the act include grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions. It also includes violations of common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits ?violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; ?outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.

A federal anti-torture statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340A), enacted in 1994, provides for the prosecution of a U.S. national or anyone present in the United States who, while outside the U.S., commits or attempts to commit torture. Torture is defined as an ?act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.? A person found guilty under the act can be incarcerated for up to 20 years or receive the death penalty if the torture results in the victim?s death.

And you live in a fantasy land where some kooks at Amnesty International determine policy for our intelligence agencies.


Congress still has yet to establish that the specific technique of waterboarding fits the criteria of a "violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; ?outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment".

You asked for proof. I showed the US federal laws that state torture and waterboarding is illegal. Now yo say it doesn't matter what the law says? Way to change your position. What's next. Bush is a god, so anything he says or does is gospel truth, and cannot be questioned?

So answer this, yes or no: The President is allowed to ignore the laws of this county.

It's a simple question.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat
I think it is obvious to 99% of all the posters here that you are nothing but a pathetic neo-con troll, but read this link:

Link


I realize you don't have a clue about how our government works, and that you live in the neocon fantasy land where the President is all-powerful, but it doesn't work that way, except in your dreams. The President *cannot* overrule the laws of this country. Some specific federal laws are listed below from the article I linked.

WE have posted where the US bovernment has arrested and convicted it's own soldiers and citizens for torture and waterboarding. We have posted links the laws that says it's illegal. All you do is spout some BS that "Bush says it's OK". Either post *real* proof proving your position or STFU.


Some quotes:

The War Crimes Act of 1996 (18 U.S.C. § 2441) makes it a criminal offense for U.S. military personnel and U.S. nationals to commit war crimes as specified in the 1949 Geneva Conventions. War crimes under the act include grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions. It also includes violations of common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits ?violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; ?outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.

A federal anti-torture statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340A), enacted in 1994, provides for the prosecution of a U.S. national or anyone present in the United States who, while outside the U.S., commits or attempts to commit torture. Torture is defined as an ?act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.? A person found guilty under the act can be incarcerated for up to 20 years or receive the death penalty if the torture results in the victim?s death.

And you live in a fantasy land where some kooks at Amnesty International determine policy for our intelligence agencies.


Congress still has yet to establish that the specific technique of waterboarding fits the criteria of a "violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; ?outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment".

You asked for proof. I showed the US federal laws that state torture and waterboarding is illegal. Now yo say it doesn't matter what the law says? Way to change your position. What's next. Bush is a god, so anything he says or does is gospel truth, and cannot be questioned?

So answer this, yes or no: The President is allowed to ignore the laws of this county.

It's a simple question.

No, you posted laws that say torture is illegal. I don't dispute that.

There's no consensus or law, however, that says that waterboarding is torture.

 

[Arkaign]

Does anyone have an extra crazy-to-english translator so I can figure out WTF Winnar is babbling about now?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: winnar111

No, you posted laws that say torture is illegal. I don't dispute that.

There's no consensus or law, however, that says that waterboarding is torture.

Others and I have posted applicable statutes and treaties and plenty of documentation stating that waterboarding is torture. The only place where "there's no concensus" is in your own tortured, feeble mind.

There's no point arguing further with you. The only thing you've proven conclusively is that you're as much of an ethical and moral turd as your Traitor In Chief and his criminal gang. :thumbsdown: :|

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat
I think it is obvious to 99% of all the posters here that you are nothing but a pathetic neo-con troll, but read this link:

Link


I realize you don't have a clue about how our government works, and that you live in the neocon fantasy land where the President is all-powerful, but it doesn't work that way, except in your dreams. The President *cannot* overrule the laws of this country. Some specific federal laws are listed below from the article I linked.

WE have posted where the US bovernment has arrested and convicted it's own soldiers and citizens for torture and waterboarding. We have posted links the laws that says it's illegal. All you do is spout some BS that "Bush says it's OK". Either post *real* proof proving your position or STFU.


Some quotes:

The War Crimes Act of 1996 (18 U.S.C. § 2441) makes it a criminal offense for U.S. military personnel and U.S. nationals to commit war crimes as specified in the 1949 Geneva Conventions. War crimes under the act include grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions. It also includes violations of common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits ?violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; ?outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.

A federal anti-torture statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340A), enacted in 1994, provides for the prosecution of a U.S. national or anyone present in the United States who, while outside the U.S., commits or attempts to commit torture. Torture is defined as an ?act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control.? A person found guilty under the act can be incarcerated for up to 20 years or receive the death penalty if the torture results in the victim?s death.

And you live in a fantasy land where some kooks at Amnesty International determine policy for our intelligence agencies.


Congress still has yet to establish that the specific technique of waterboarding fits the criteria of a "violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; ?outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment".

You asked for proof. I showed the US federal laws that state torture and waterboarding is illegal. Now yo say it doesn't matter what the law says? Way to change your position. What's next. Bush is a god, so anything he says or does is gospel truth, and cannot be questioned?

So answer this, yes or no: The President is allowed to ignore the laws of this county.

It's a simple question.

No, you posted laws that say torture is illegal. I don't dispute that.

There's no consensus or law, however, that says that waterboarding is torture.

Then you can't read very well. Go back to school.

The laws are there. Go read them carefully. Then explain how various prosecuting attornies and judges have tried and convicted US citizens for waterboarding under these laws if it is not in fact illegal.

You say "torture is fine". The law, and the judges interpreting the law say you are flat wrong.

Guess which one 99% of the world believes? (hint - it isn't you)

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: winnar111

No, you posted laws that say torture is illegal. I don't dispute that.

There's no consensus or law, however, that says that waterboarding is torture.

Others and I have posted applicable statutes and treaties and plenty of documentation stating that waterboarding is torture. The only place where "there's no concensus" is in your own tortured, feeble mind.

There's no point arguing further with you. The only thing you've proven conclusively is that you're as much of an ethical and moral turd as your Traitor In Chief and his criminal gang. :thumbsdown: :|

Funny. The Senate just confirmed an Attorney General who explicitly denied such a consensus. The Congress has repeatedly failed to pass a law that would ban the CIA from waterboarding.

Go ahead, dig up some more liberal monkeys and pretend their opinion matters.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Funny. The Senate just confirmed an Attorney General who explicitly denied such a consensus. The Congress has repeatedly failed to pass a law that would ban the CIA from waterboarding.

Go ahead, dig up some more liberal monkeys and pretend their opinion matters.

No need to pass a law when something is already illegal.

It's really sad that people like you think this way. Anything that you feel is "right" is instantly legal and totally moral and OK. No one has a right to correct anything that you feel is "right". In fact, people like you feel they have a moral right to do "whatever is needed", whatever the cost. Breaking the law is OK, since it's the "right" thing to do.

People like you are why the rest of the world doesn't like us any more. This "my way or the highway" doesn't go over real well, especially when you assert that the US is unilaterally allowed to torture/murder/kill anyone and everyone that we feel is necessary, no proof or evidence needed.

Ever wonder how, back in the 1930's, Hitler came to power? Thinking the "ends justify the means" is a very slippery slope, as lots of people have found out. And you are quickly sliding down that slope already. We can only hope that you are still young and can learn the error of your ways.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: winnar111
No, you posted laws that say torture is illegal. I don't dispute that.

There's no consensus or law, however, that says that waterboarding is torture.

Then you can't read very well. Go back to school.

The laws are there. Go read them carefully. Then explain how various prosecuting attornies and judges have tried and convicted US citizens for waterboarding under these laws if it is not in fact illegal.

You say "torture is fine". The law, and the judges interpreting the law say you are flat wrong.

Guess which one 99% of the world believes? (hint - it isn't you)

Guess you ought to read the thread, then: The small list of people who have stated that waterboarding is torture are:

John McCain, US Senator
some judges on an International Court 60 years ago
David Miliband, the United Kingdom Foreign Secretary
some assortment of legal experts, politicians, war veterans, intelligence officials, military judges, and human rights organizations
Bent Sørensen, Senior Medical Consultant
Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency
the Red Cross
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour
some people on this forum

Nowhere on this list do you find any United States appointed judge of a United States Court.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: winnar111
Funny. The Senate just confirmed an Attorney General who explicitly denied such a consensus. The Congress has repeatedly failed to pass a law that would ban the CIA from waterboarding.

Go ahead, dig up some more liberal monkeys and pretend their opinion matters.

No need to pass a law when something is already illegal.

Then why did they try to do so?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Guess you ought to read the thread, then: The small list of people who have stated that waterboarding is torture are:

John McCain, US Senator
some judges on an International Court 60 years ago
David Miliband, the United Kingdom Foreign Secretary
some assortment of legal experts, politicians, war veterans, intelligence officials, military judges, and human rights organizations
Bent Sørensen, Senior Medical Consultant
Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency
the Red Cross
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour
some people on this forum

Nowhere on this list do you find any United States appointed judge of a United States Court.

Oh Really?

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.

I suggest you allow NPR to educate you on waterboarding.

Specifically you will note that the US has prosecuted other people for waterboarding. That means the federal government is making a positive declaration that waterboarding is torture. Anyways, that's not necessary. James Parker of Texas was subject to a federal indictment and conviction in a US court for (among other things) waterboarding prisoners.

So, you were saying?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: winnar111
Funny. The Senate just confirmed an Attorney General who explicitly denied such a consensus. The Congress has repeatedly failed to pass a law that would ban the CIA from waterboarding.

Go ahead, dig up some more liberal monkeys and pretend their opinion matters.

No need to pass a law when something is already illegal.

Then why did they try to do so?

Because the Bush administration was attempting to use the ambiguity in the old law as an excuse for torturing people. The new law's purpose was to give the president no loopholes through which to continue the human rights violations. Of course what Bush simply did was say that he would refuse to obey the law he just signed, yet another example of the utterly lawless nature of the Executive over the last eight years.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Specifically you will note that the US has prosecuted other people for waterboarding. That means the federal government is making a positive declaration that waterboarding is torture. Anyways, that's not necessary. James Parker of Texas was subject to a federal indictment and conviction in a US court for (among other things) waterboarding prisoners.

So, you were saying?

The first is a lawsuit, and the second was processed as a civil rights violation.

Detainees don't have US civil rights, and never have.

In any case, the Department of Justice is certainly fit and capable of changing its mind.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Specifically you will note that the US has prosecuted other people for waterboarding. That means the federal government is making a positive declaration that waterboarding is torture. Anyways, that's not necessary. James Parker of Texas was subject to a federal indictment and conviction in a US court for (among other things) waterboarding prisoners.

So, you were saying?

The first is a lawsuit, and the second was processed as a civil rights violation.

Detainees don't have US civil rights, and never have.

The US government has prosecuted people such as a Japanese soldier for torture, explicitly mentioning waterboarding as one of the elements of it. When the US government prosecutes someone, they are stating that they consider a person's actions to be a crime. There's really no way around this.

Furthermore your original argument was that nobody in the US had found waterboarding to be torture and therefore illegal. Now you're trying to run away and argue that it's only illegal against US persons. Your ceaseless defense of the police state is baffling to me.

 

[Pens1566]

There's some powerful stupid in this thread .....

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Funny. The Senate just confirmed an Attorney General who explicitly denied such a consensus. The Congress has repeatedly failed to pass a law that would ban the CIA from waterboarding.

Not funny, at all. Mukasey is a placeholder for your Traitor In Chief's disgraced, lying POS, Gonzo the Clown.

Go ahead, dig up some more liberal monkeys and pretend their opinion matters.

It wouldn't matter. Brain dead, self deluded moral slime like you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the ass so I'll just repeat my invitation to you...

If you still don't believe waterboarding is illegal as torture, YOU should volunteer as a crash test dummy to prove it. If you can't do that, you're just an immoral, loud mouthed, know-nothing chickenshit chickenhawk. :thumbsdown: :|

Tell us if you survive it. Don't bother to ask if I care.