Gonzales: I don’t think anyone is going to prosecute me.
Gonzales: I don’t think anyone is going to prosecute me.
In his confirmation hearings, Attorney General nominee Eric Holder declared “waterboarding is torture,” worrying conservatives that he might pursue criminal prosecutions of officials involved in detainee interrogations. In an interview with NPR today, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said he doesn’t believe he’ll be prosecuted:
On the question of prosecuting officers who employed any of the “extreme tactics” that the Bush administration has acknowledged, without admitting to any “torture” of detainees: “I don’t think that there’s going to be a prosecution, quite frankly.” Gonzales said. “Because again, these activities…. They were authorized, they were supported by legal opinions at the Department of Justice.”
When Holder is confirmed – with a vote expected Wednesday – he “will have to make a decision as to whether or not move forward with an investigation or a prosecution,” Gonzales said. “But under those circumstances, I find it hard to believe…
“Nonetheless, the very discussion about it is extremely discouraging,” the former attorney general said.
Gonzales recently wondered, “What is it that I did so fundamentally wrong?” As ThinkProgress noted, he politicized the Justice Department, approved torture, lied about warrantless wiretapping, and distorted pre-war intelligence.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Welcome to Lala Land, Gonzo.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:39 pmGonzo, A memo to yourself saying it’s OK for you to break the law is not legal authorization.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:40 pmWay to wave that red flag, Gonzo.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:41 pmOf course, he’s no lawyer…
January 26th, 2009 at 1:42 pmDelusional until the end…
January 26th, 2009 at 1:42 pmAnd all those poor souls on trial at Nuremburg tried to say the very same thing. Guess what? We prosecuted them! Don’t leave this country Gonzo. If you do, bring a change of clothes and a lawyer.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:42 pmIs he really that clueless?
If you get your friend, the attorney, to say that committing a certain crime is not prosecutable, does that mean a crime was not committed?
January 26th, 2009 at 1:43 pmIgnorance is no excuse.
If he believed what he was doing was not illegal, why did he have to lie and otherwise weasel his way out of answering inquiries?
Disingenuous Gonzo. Willfully ignorant Gonzo. Criminal Gonzo.
There goes Gonzo again, using the Cheney defense — “if we say it’s not illegal, then it’s not illegal”…
January 26th, 2009 at 1:43 pmi think they should have locked him up after watching him testify. he was so blatantly lying, he’d recall meetings, who was at the meetings, where they were held, and then when asked anything about the substance of the meetings he couldn’t recall what was discussed.
really?
lock him up!
January 26th, 2009 at 1:43 pmtsk, i really hope he’s wrong….
January 26th, 2009 at 1:45 pmMan, that sounds like a taunt. Sic ‘im!!
January 26th, 2009 at 1:45 pmThat he even needs to make that statement shows just how dreadful and dysfunctional the Bush White House really was. Gonzales is just singing a really sad GOP song.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:47 pmGonzo won’t be prosecuted for the torture programs, there is a 5 year limit that is going to expire mid-March for his lying to Congress about visiting Ashcroft in the hospital. He claimed that Card and him weren’t going there to have Ashcroft sign off on the warrantless program, even though he had the documents in hand.
Time go get Ted Olson in front of Congress to see what happened later that night at the White House with Comey & Card.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:48 pmRe Gonzo’s photo.
Is anyone else thinking “The 40 Year Old Virgin?”
January 26th, 2009 at 1:48 pmOf course, he won’t be prosecuted. After all he is under the protection of the “KISS”. Off to Disney Gitmo, you wienie!!
January 26th, 2009 at 1:48 pmWell, at least he got one thing right . . . “the very discussion about it is extremely discouraging” . . . it really should be a no-brainer, not susceptible to discussion.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:48 pmMagical thinking. If I shoot somebody, and get a lawyer to write me a note, then I have not committed a crime. Anyway, it’s all in the past so why dwell on it?
January 26th, 2009 at 1:52 pmIf nothing happens to those who authorized and approved of the torture, our country will never be whole again. There will forever be a very dirty, very smelly corner of rot that will, from time to time, flare up and threaten to infect the rest of the ‘body.’
January 26th, 2009 at 1:52 pmI know you’re a slow learner, Gonzo, but hear this: you epitomize the George Costanza Law. You should always do the opposite of your natural instinct.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:52 pmI don’t think that there’s going to be a prosecution,….Because again, these activities…. were supported by legal opinions at the Department of Justice.”
*) And did Gonzo have any association with the DOJ which would make the above a rather circular argument ? (I was right according to legal opinions written by me).
Oh wait – he was head of the DOJ. And all his underlings were from Regents U.
*) And how often was Gonzo right ? I don’t think I’d bet on a horse with such a strong losing record.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:56 pmNo, no, no. That’s not how it works. First, you get a lawyer to write a note saying it’s OK for you to shoot somebody. Then, you can start shooting.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:57 pmGonzales recently wondered, “What is it that I did so fundamentally wrong?”
Pretty much everything….you are a WAR CRIMINAL and should go to jail.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:58 pmWell, they could put you in detention and hold you indefinately without charges under ‘rules’ you helped create. No need to prosecute.
January 26th, 2009 at 1:59 pmHis fetish for male bondage probably doesn’t help much either.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:02 pmectoendomezo Says:
I will attack Rusia in the winter..I can do it…
You, sir, have made my day. Bravo :)
January 26th, 2009 at 2:03 pmRe: Fredo’s prosecution
It will be a classic miscarriage of justice if he’s not prosecuted and convicted..
January 26th, 2009 at 2:10 pmGozo, you just go on thinking that…
January 26th, 2009 at 2:11 pmIt’s not up to him as to whether or not he will face a trial–he’s not in charge anymore. Yeah for the good guys! Time to clean house and put a few things away for a very long time.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:13 pmActually, I should have written it’s time to clear some Bushes and haul them off to the dump
January 26th, 2009 at 2:14 pmThey were authorized, they were supported by legal opinions at the Department of Justice.
He means the Yoo memos, which Yoo has said weren’t to his knowledge the sole authorivation for these torture techniques.
Holder really has to stop this musical chairs of torture buck passing. They’re all guilty to some extent, but this carousel of cupidity will end in a lot of not-so-guilty actors being swept up in Hague war crimes’ trials, along with the truly evil, like Yoo, and Gonzo.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:22 pmI remember when i was a kid and at the pool one day. Some jackass held my head under the water.
Maybe i can prosecute him for torture.
Was that jackass a representative of the US Government attempting to extract information from you and under orders from the White House?
No?
Then maybe assault, but I doubt you’d get torture to stick… Gonzo on the other hand had better find a good lawyer (Which may be difficult, since he fired so many of them himself)
January 26th, 2009 at 2:23 pmglezzery Says:
I remember when i was a kid and at the pool one day. Some jackass held my head under the water.
Maybe i can prosecute him for torture.
Maybe he thought you were in need of a good dunking, to get rid of the ringworm.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:25 pmMaybe you could state the case for the prosecution of torture, under the definition defined by the government at the time.
Sure- but since we agree that people should be prosecuted under the definitions of the law at the time of the infraction- aren’t the Bushies guilty of illegal wiretapping? That S hit started in early 2001 and it was definetly illegal then…
January 26th, 2009 at 2:25 pmMaybe you could state the case for the prosecution of torture, under the definition defined by the government at the time.
Anything but strict adherence to Geneva Conventions.
Pretty simple – and a very clear line.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:27 pmGonzo says: “Nonetheless, the very discussion about it is extremely discouraging,” the former attorney general said. TP goes on to report, Gonzales recently wondered, “What is it that I did so fundamentally wrong?” As ThinkProgress noted, he politicized the Justice Department, approved torture, lied about warrantless wiretapping, and distorted pre-war intelligence.
B’ess ums ‘ittle bittle heart; that mean ol’ phantom of justice just keeps waving its ugly big scales and twying to tewwify ‘ittle Gonzie-puss. Why don’t you hold your breath until you turn blue? Stuff your fingers in your ears so you can’t hear? Close your eyes again, as you turned a blind eye to every law that you broke BEFORE Shrub tapped you and the plenitude that you broke or tap-danced around AFTER he tapped you?
No, no, Gonzie-puss; we won’t hold you accountable for your own crimes or for abetting others in criminal enterprises. . . we think you were RIGHT to lie about the firings of employees who didn’t choke down the party line. We all want to give you a BIIIIG hug. . . we just want to use a 30-foot anaconda to do it. Rodents are among its favorite foods.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:27 pmI don’t think that there’s going to be a prosecution, quite frankly.”
Those words should go on a banner hung inside his jail cell.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:29 pmZooey Says:
Re Gonzo’s photo.
Is anyone else thinking “The 40 Year Old Virgin?”
Zooey, can we still call someone who has effed the Constitution and the legal system a “virgin”?
You made reference to “thezoo” in another thread–if you have a site, I’d love to visit it! I always scan every new thread looking for your posts, and get a particular kick out of your engaging the more egregious trolls. [LOVED the interchanges on another thread about having Obama's baby; you may have sen that I got to use your dialogue as part of my own zinger.]
January 26th, 2009 at 2:32 pmshoeless Says:
rmwarnick Says:
Magical thinking. If I shoot somebody, and get a lawyer to write me a note, then I have not committed a crime. Anyway, it’s all in the past so why dwell on it?
No, no, no. That’s not how it works. First, you get a lawyer to write a note saying it’s OK for you to shoot somebody. Then, you can start shooting.
Love it!
January 26th, 2009 at 2:35 pmWell, if simulated drowning is torture, he tortured me!!!!
Funny, that’s what our G.I.’s said about the Japanese Interrogators after WW2… and the courts agreed!
Why do you hate the Greatest Generation’s Vets?
January 26th, 2009 at 2:38 pmglezzery Says:
Funny,
Not really, sicko.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:40 pmI guess that proves it: The guy is still as delusional as he was while in DC and Attorney General for the most corrupt administration in recent history.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:41 pmThe jury is still out……
However, I agree with Gonzo……
INCOMPETENCE is not a crime.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:44 pmI suppose it is pointless to ask glezzery why it was torture when at the hands of the Japanese?
January 26th, 2009 at 2:44 pmglezzery Says:
Blahbiddy Blahbiddy Blah.
Your repeating yourself.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:45 pmso tell me again how I can tell a freedom fighter from a terrorist
January 26th, 2009 at 2:45 pmGreat, now we are comparing terrorist illegal combatants with US soldiers!
No, you are comparing U.S. soldiers with convicted War Criminals… why do you have to bring them down to your level? They’re good kids.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:45 pmLike Judas got the kiss from Jesus so Gonzo got the kiss for Satan aka Bush. Bush knows how to lie he’s done it for 8 years. Now Daddy Bush told his idiot son leave the followers to fight for themselves the only thing that matters is save the Bush Family Legacy. Cheney got so busy he dumped Scooter but hurt his back making sure his documents were protected. Rove is left hanging and now is looking for Democrat Law Makers who got pay offs to back him up against prosecution. Each person has paid at lease one or more of the Law Makers during the 8 year crime spree. Now those favoers are being called in and we can see the fear in alot of people.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:48 pmIf waterboarding is torture, i was protected under the Geneva Convention!
You sure are- and if you had been in the custody of a foreign government then it would apply. But you weren’t so it doesn’t, what you’re after here is criminal or civil prosecution for assault… but I’m guessing the statute of limitations is up- on second thought, based on your logic, perhaps you aren’t that far removed from this ‘childhood’ dunking after all…
January 26th, 2009 at 2:52 pmIllegal combatants can be executed on the spot during war.
Oh, was there a declaration of war that I missed?
January 26th, 2009 at 2:56 pmUp here in the piney north woods we have these tourist attractions with ponds of fish. Put a nickle in a machine and you get a handful of pellets to toss in the pond of captive fish and they react like piranhas, gulping down the handout. For another few bucks you can “catch’ these fish and take them home for dinner.
I know that it can be sort of entertaining to taunt these fish but isn’t that sort of a Repug thing? Ignore what needs to be done because it is so much more productive?? to distract?
There is more important work to do than pick on the handicapped.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:56 pmIllegal combatants can be executed on the spot during war.
Says who?
Geneva?
Prove it.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:57 pmOh, was there a declaration of war that I missed?
I mean- if we’re gonna get all technical and stuff…
January 26th, 2009 at 2:58 pmglezzery Says:
And then find any International law that extends civilian rights to illegal combatants.
“Illegal combatants” is a Bush fiction.
Not mentioned in Geneva.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:01 pmLet’s just hope Gonzo’s predictive ability is as good as his legal advice!
January 26th, 2009 at 3:03 pmLibs love to RAPE words and torture the language to make their points.
See above…
“Illegal combatants” is a Bush fiction.
Not mentioned in Geneva.
oops- barfly nailed ya before the words could even flow from your two hunt-n-peck fingers!
January 26th, 2009 at 3:03 pmZING!
glezzery Says:
So, in the pool, it is a prank, but at a detainee center, it is torture!
Such simplistic thinking is what got you in the minority. Please, continue.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:04 pmLibs love to RAPE words and torture the language to make their points.
Coming from a torture apologist, high praise, indeed!
January 26th, 2009 at 3:05 pm“A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.”
Okay, so we’ve established that Blackwater is fair game…
January 26th, 2009 at 3:08 pm“A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.”
Now if you can just streeeetch “mercenary” to include TERRORIST!
Please.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:09 pmSOT, when did it become acceptable for the US to employ mercenaries? About the time we decided classifying ‘terrorist criminals’ (I have always enjoyed that term) as torture fodder?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:12 pmglezzery Says: ‘At the time, mental anguish did not qualify as torture.”
At what time did mental anguish not qualify as torture?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:14 pmA dictionary does not define torture as it applies here. Federal policy does.
You mean Bush administration-interpreted federal policy.
Big difference.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:14 pmA dictionary does not define torture as it applies here. Federal policy does.
No one is talking about the dictionary… we’re talking about Federal Policy and International Law and how that doesn’t change just ’cause a President and AG say it does… hence the Supreme Court challenge… as RHF has pointed out already.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:14 pmGlezzary: you need to take a close look at what you’re defending.
Torture. As in the Spanish Inquisition.
You are (as always) yappingly defending the indefensible.
Shame on you, little worm. Shame on you. I hope your mother isn’t alive to see this.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:17 pmOh, and Gleezy- can you get back to me with that formal declaration of war date?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:18 pmI’m usually pretty up to date on this stuff but I must have been busy or distracted that day…
So how do Geneva statements about mercenaries pertain to detainees?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:18 pmBeyond all else, Alberto Gonzales failed to perform the duties of his office.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:20 pmHis job as attorney general was to prosecute lawbreakers. Instead he spent his entire tenure as a defense attorney for the Bush administration.
Yet you DENY THE REALITY that the SUPREME COURT HAS ALREADY DECIDED THEY DO QUALIFY!!
Please, we are obviously dealing with a legal mind that far outstrips the humble Supreme Court Justices, also he’s a great Climate Scientist! And married to Morgan Fairchild, who he’s seen NAKED!
January 26th, 2009 at 3:23 pmAll decisions were made to get information from terrorists in order to SAVE LIVES!!!!!
Your conniptions are childish and nihilistic.
The professionals say torture is ineffectual and counter-productive… so it may have cost us LIVES and certainly cost this country its SOUL!!!
So your defense is pathetic and incomprehensible.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:29 pmglezzery: please provide examples of how torture has benefited the United States in ANY WAY as it relates to the GWOT.
Oh right, you can’t.
Why are you defending techniques that are immoral AND ineffective?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:30 pmglezzery Says:
All decisions were made to get information from terrorists in order to SAVE LIVES!!!!!
Your conniptions are childish and nihilistic.
Please provide examples of how torture has saved lives. Be specific – support your answer.
Thanks in advance for NOT answering this question and therefore invalidating your “point.”
January 26th, 2009 at 3:32 pmglezzery Says:
Well, if we received information from Khalid Sheik Mohammed for 25 seconds of waterboarding and the Pros say torture doesn’t work, then Sheik was NOT tortured.
Did we receive information from Khalid? What usable information did we give him? Validate your position man!
January 26th, 2009 at 3:32 pm*what usable information did he give us.
typo
January 26th, 2009 at 3:33 pmMost bloodthirsty neocons started out as the nerdy kids who got picked on when they were young.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:33 pmglezzery, what usable information did we get from jose padilla?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:34 pmA Supreme Court ruling does not jump back in time to prosecute rules AT THAT TIME!
Ahh, but the Supreme Court ruled it was illegal AT THAT TIME.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:34 pmNo rules changed…
well, glezzery, what usable information did we get from jose padilla? anything?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:36 pmIt looks at “Harsh Interrogation Techniques”.
see your tortured language post above.
If we don’t call it torture, it can’t be torture- Q.E.D.!
January 26th, 2009 at 3:37 pmI can’t see the crime with my eyes closed, therefore it did not occur!
glezzery Says:
You folks are washouts. Even the latest Senate investigation does not talk about found torture.
It looks at “Harsh Interrogation Techniques”.
Not torture.
You like to play semantic games and fail to answer simple questions. What usable information did we get from Jose Padilla using “Harsh Interrogation Techniques?” How do you define torture?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:37 pmknowing lil’ albie’s vast knowledge of the law he probably is mistaking “prostitute” with “prosecute”. either way he’s wrong, he was bush’s whore for years and now it’s time to pay the piper
January 26th, 2009 at 3:37 pmglezzy isn’t off it’s meth binge yet? 48 hours of posting non-stop and still going! it must be a resident of wasilla.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:38 pmso glezzery, what useful information did we gain by torturing jose padilla?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:39 pmAhh, but the Supreme Court ruled it was illegal AT THAT TIME.
No rules changed…”
Really? Post it
Um, okay.
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/waronterror/p/hamdan.htm
January 26th, 2009 at 3:40 pmhere’s a summary:
The Court’s complex 73-page opinion, written by Justice John Paul Stevens and joined by justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and David Souter, holds that (among other things):
January 26th, 2009 at 3:41 pm“Enemy combatants” are protected by the Geneva Conventions.
The AUMF does not grant Bush the authority to create new tribunals without congressional mandate.
Conspiracy is not a war crime under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
142 – glezzery, in the pathetic article you posted, it clearly indicates that Bush protected himself from committing illegal acts with his “state secrets” provision. if he wasn’t worried about the legality of his torture techniques, then why take all the measures to safeguard his administration from war crimes charges?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:41 pmglezzery Says:
Someone said Geneva covers everyone.
It does not.
Specifically, it does not cover terrorist combatants.
Wrong. You and Gonzo got it WRONG. That’s what you asked for… here it is…
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/waronterror/p/hamdan.htm
Read it… learn… grow…
January 26th, 2009 at 3:42 pmwhy would the government ship prisoners to black prisons in countries where human rights is an after thought? why do you support the blatantly immoral and illegal torture program and secret prisons?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:43 pmGonzo’s taunt will surely result in criminal investigation now. This guy’s more of a village idiot than anyone could have ever imagined. He’ll have to be put in high security because some of them ‘boyz in prison will be ringing for him and have their way with him.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:43 pmglezzery, you should think long and hard about your advocacy of torture. you should be ashamed.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:43 pmARE, not WERE.
Seriously? Grow up.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:48 pmglezzery Says:
“Enemy combatants” are protected by the Geneva Conventions.”
ARE, not WERE.
What information did we get from torturing Jose Padilla?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:49 pmAgain, Gleezy- I ask… if tense and timing are SO important… when exactly did we formally declare war, you know, on terror or whatever…
January 26th, 2009 at 3:51 pmglezzery Says:
January 26th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Now you’re just flailing…
January 26th, 2009 at 3:54 pmglezzery Says:
Excuse me
There is no excuse.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:55 pmgelezzry, what useful information did we get from torturing jose padilla?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:56 pmThe Authorizations to use Force, passed by Congress is sufficient! Your point?
Then the Supreme Court ruling is sufficient poof of the prisoners rights under Geneva, no?
And therefore, their water boarding was illegal, no?
Since the crux of the Admin. argument is/was that they weren’t technically covered under Geneva one would seem to follow the other.
But if we want to only cover things EXACTLY as written (which the SUPREME COURT rejected as ridiculous, BTW) then, with no formal declaration of war (only an authorization to use force- not technically the same thing) are our Soldiers covered?
January 26th, 2009 at 3:59 pmYou are fishing with loaded questions.
And you are talking out of your @ss…
January 26th, 2009 at 4:00 pmNo, this is a patently FALSE argument.
Illogical
Prove it… ’cause that’s the ruling in Hamdan… so the SUPREME COURT found it logical.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:03 pmIt was OK because the DoJ provided “legal opinions” saying it was OK. Never mind that you were the guy in charge of providing these “legal opinions,” so it’s basically OK because you said it’s OK. Great legal opinion there, Gonzo.
.
StratRat Says:
And all those poor souls on trial at Nuremburg tried to say the very same thing. Guess what? We prosecuted them!
What’s so crazy bass-ackwards about it is they aren’t even trying to cover their butts by pointing at superiors, they’re pointing down the chain! Like how it’s the CIA’s fault we invaded Iraq, and everything else is the DoJ’s fault, so the White House is off the hook for everything… doesn’t work that way either way.
.
glezzery Says:
Maybe you could state the case for the prosecution of torture, under the definition defined by the government at the time.
That’s cute. The Executive branch doesn’t get to define what it can or can’t legally do. To believe otherwise is the very essence of fascism. Fascist.
.
glezzery Says:
Well, if simulated drowning is torture, he tortured me!!!!
I guess if i were an Al Qida terrorist, some of you folks would be my advocate.
Well, to be the same, he’d be holding you upside down in the pool until water was forced into your lungs. Technically, waterboarding is actual drowning. And I’d try to defend you from such assault anyways, if I were there.
The difference isn’t whether it’s being done to a suspected terrorist it’s, who’s doing it. When the government has you in captivity and is assaulting you, then that’s torture. When a private citizen assaults you, that’s assault. If they also have you in captivity, it’s kidnapping, and if they’re abusing you while you’re captive, that would be torture too. The DA prosecuting such a case certainly would call it that.
Just because a mean bully picked on you once doesn’t mean you get to have the government torture other people to make you feel better.
.
glezzery Says:
Blahbiddy Blahbiddy Blah.
Good point there. That’s the most sensible thing you’ve said so far.
.
glezzery Says:
Terrorists are not honorable soldiers protected by the Geneva Convention.
Bring back the waterboard!
Again, it’s not about who it’s being done to, it’s about who’s doing it. You are responsible for your own actions. Also, none of the people involved have been convicted of being terrorists. It would be a slightly different issue if it was a legal sentence resulting from conviction – at least then you’d be able to legitimately say you were doing it to the right person.
.
glezzery Says:
Why? because the Japanese ACTUALLY tortured soldiers, and women, children, Chinese folks, Marines…
Suspected terrorists all.
.
glezzery Says:
When Al Qida is cutting folks heads off and killing civilians, it doesn’t make much sense ADVOCATING for this scum while treating Gonzalez like a Nazi.
They are to be held responsible for what they do, and we are to be held responsible for what we do. We are better than them.
.
glezzery Says:
All decisions were made to get information from terrorists in order to SAVE LIVES!!!!!
Prove it. Show me one example. You’d think if that were the case, BushCo would be shouting about it from the rooftops, but they’ve got nothing.
On the other hand, there are scores of people who have been released from Gitmo after being tortured and it turned out they weren’t terrorists at all.
.
glezzery Says:
The policies were changed.
And you still want to go back in tim and put folks in jail for a few waterboards and some humiliation and sensory deprivation!
OK, you really need to understand this – the Executive branch cannot make or change law. A change in Executive policy does not change the law. It was illegal then, and it’s illegal now. The only difference is that now the Executive branch is now complying with the law.
Humiliation and sensory deprivation were torture when the KGB did it. They’re still torture when we do it.
.
glezzery Says:
Well, if we received information from Khalid Sheik Mohammed for 25 seconds of waterboarding and the Pros say torture doesn’t work, then Sheik was NOT tortured.
I’ll grant that it might work a few times in 100 cases. But that just means that any “information” derived is of low confidence. It’s better to have less, more certain information than a whole bunch of mostly (if not all) false information.
.
glezzery Says:
You folks are washouts. Even the latest Senate investigation does not talk about found torture.
It looks at “Harsh Interrogation Techniques”.
Not torture.
At present, the Senate are too wimpy to call it that. At least until enough findings come in that they can be certain they can back that accusation up. That will happen soon enough.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:04 pmNo, if you can come up with evidence that waterboarding is STILL going on AFTER the Supreme ruling, you have a case.
Well, we’ll see… I think you and Gonzo better be damn sure you’re right, ’cause Gonzo’s gonna be hung out to dry if you’re wrong… (oh, and most lawyers think you’re wrong…)
January 26th, 2009 at 4:06 pmglezzery Says:
No, if you can come up with evidence that waterboarding is STILL going on AFTER the Supreme ruling, you have a case.
That’s not how SCOTUS rulings work – they’re all on prior cases. A judicial ruling is not the same thing as ex post facto law.
You really should know things like that if you’re going to argue here. Go watch some Schoolhouse Rock or something.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:06 pmThat’s not how SCOTUS rulings work – they’re all on prior cases. A judicial ruling is not the same thing as ex post facto law.
You really should know things like that if you’re going to argue here. Go watch some Schoolhouse Rock or something.
We’ve been down this road, ElBruce… you can lead an Ass to water and all that…
January 26th, 2009 at 4:08 pmI stated the Supreme Court extended habeus corpus and Geneva rights to these terrorists.
Bull- the ruling says that they are covered under GENEVA- not that they are NOW covered- the Supreme Court doesn’t have the authority to change their status, only clarify it. Which is what they did.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:13 pmglezzery Says: “We found no WMDs AFTER we went there and searched the whole place, not before.
The UN searched for WMD’s before Bush invaded. They didn’t find any either. And they told us so.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:15 pmA lot of these arguments i see shift back in forth in time, just like the WMDs.
We found no WMDs AFTER we went there and searched the whole place, not before.
and actually, we found no WMD both BEFORE and AFTER… that’s kinda what people are upset about.
That’s why you hear things like ‘lies…’ and ‘inflated intelligence…’
January 26th, 2009 at 4:15 pmThe Supreme Court clarified THEIR STATUS!
If their status was already determined, there would be NO NEED FOR THE SUPREME COURT TO RULE ON ANYTHING!
But for water boarding to be ‘legal’ they needed to have ‘no status’ under the Geneva Convention… that was the crux of the White House’s argument… The Supreme Court ruled that the White House was WRONG when it said they weren’t covered… that means they WERE covered… that means it was illegal… follow?
January 26th, 2009 at 4:18 pmis the tense clear enough for you?
January 26th, 2009 at 4:21 pmWeren’t Covered = WRONG
Were Covered = RIGHT
Water Boarding in the Past therefore = ILLEGAL
Water Boarding in th Future therefore = ILLEGAL
Then and Now, it was illegal- and wrong- and counter-productive… see War Crimes trials after WW2 for a description of EXACTLY HOW illegal and wrong it was.
In fact, tons of Yellow Cake was removed AFTER we went in.
Link?
January 26th, 2009 at 4:21 pmIn fact, tons of Yellow Cake was removed AFTER we went in.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:23 pm’cause that seems like it might be a kinda big story…
Seems our buddy geaserly has a real problem with basic concepts such time/tense, future/past, facts/propaganda.
‘Tis a pity.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:26 pmOh, did you mean this yellowcake that wasn’t weapons grade and that the UN knew about and had secured???
Scary… I mean for you, ’cause it seems like the weapons inspectors were working then.
http://openleft.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=9D633984AC06759F77B44BADC81DE304?diaryId=6791
January 26th, 2009 at 4:26 pmThat would be “greaserly”
January 26th, 2009 at 4:27 pmglezzery Says:LMAO
but if it actually falls off, how will you talk?
January 26th, 2009 at 4:28 pmglezzery Says:
Why? because the Japanese ACTUALLY tortured soldiers, and women, children, Chinese folks, Marines…
That is the difference.
If waterboarding is torture, i was protected under the Geneva Convention!
Does this mean you think waterboarding was the only “extreme tactic” used?
January 26th, 2009 at 4:31 pmGreaserly says: “It’s a big mistake in my mind.”
BINGO!
January 26th, 2009 at 4:34 pmglezzery Says:
I never stated Policy is law.
Yeah, you pretty much did.
.
glezzery Says:
I stated the Supreme Court extended habeus corpus and Geneva rights to these terrorists.
And that changed the policy.
The SCOTUS doesn’t change the law either; it makes rulings on the law. Courts rule on events that happened prior to their ruling. What they rule then becomes the governing interpretation of law for events that occurred both before and after the ruling was made.
.
glezzery Says:
Gosh, is there anyone here who actually knows what they are even talking about?
By “here” are you referring to your mom’s basement there? Because, no.
.
glezzery Says:
Duhhhhhhhhhh
Exactly.
.
glezzery Says:
They had documented tons of the stuff!
Link please? I’m looking at the IAEA report, and I got nothing. Those would be the guys doing the inspecting, so you’d think they’d know. Or maybe they should have just asked Rush Limbaugh?
January 26th, 2009 at 4:35 pmglezzery Says:
Waterboarding has NOT been defined as torture by the law.
It has in many cases. They have been pointed out to you many times in this very thread.
.
glezzery Says:
It is no longer used.
Thanks to Obama.
.
glezzery Says:
What the **** more do you want?
For the people who authorized and committed acts of torture to be put on trial for their actions.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:38 pmElBruce,
I’ll leave you with this moron. Hats off to you; your patience is admirable and you certainly don’t need my help.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:40 pmglezzery Says:
What the **** more do you want?
What I’ve always wanted… the rule of law… I would have liked to prosecuted KSM- can’t ’cause he was tortured. Someone screwed up royally, shouldn’t they be prosecuted?
January 26th, 2009 at 4:42 pmElBruce: Google is a useful tool for this sort of thing.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:42 pmAgain- the inspector’s had found this, it wasn’t weapons grade and it hardly qualifies as a WMD… aren’t you seeking to prove that the U.N. Insepectors weren’t working? ’cause they caught this…
glezzery Says:
If waterboarding is torture, i was protected under the Geneva Convention!
Was the kid who dunked you a government agent of a Geneva signatory? If so, then yes, you should have been.
.
glezzery Says:
So, maybe it is the most EFFECTIVE tool to saving lives from terrorists.
Ooh, “maybe.” So we should do everything that’s “maybe” effective? Are you also now arguing for giving terrorists cookies and milk?
.
glezzery Says:
I have no problem with anything that went on at Abu Ghraib that wasn’t physical pain of an intense kind.
Dogs, Humiliation, Sleep deprivation, whatever.
Most of these things can – and are designed to – cause permanent psychological trauma. That’s bad.
And we are all well aware with what vermin like you “have no problem” with. We don’t care.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:43 pmglezzery Says:
Where? Link please.
Um, OK here’s your link?
Scroll up for the many, many references to international law decisions, specifically those regarding WWII.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:45 pmWhere? Link please.
Gleezy- google is useful for this sort of thing…
From Wikipedia:
January 26th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
Someone please remind Gonzo that he has been “WRONG” many times before.
I hope to hell that he is wrong now as well and “WILL” be prosecuted by the DOJ.
Oh, and another thing; no real law firm will this weenie.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:48 pmWaterboarding, as used, is NOT defined as torture.
Oh? Then why the convoluted logic re: Geneva Conventions? Let’s just say it’s not torture when we do it but is when used by others… oh, ’cause that’s ludicrous.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:51 pmglezzery Says:
ElBruce: Google is a useful tool for this sort of thing.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/05/world/main4235028.shtml
You know what else is useful? Actually reading all of the thing you linked to:
There was no need to invade Iraq because of a known amount of nuclear material that was being sat on by the U.N. If Bush had gone on TV and given that as the reason for invading, he would have been laughed out of the Presidency.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:51 pmThe intent was not just to inflict suffering.
So the ‘research’ conducted by the Nazi’s on Concentration Camp victims was not ‘torture’ in this case because the intent was not just to inflict suffering? All that cold bath immersion in the quest of ‘knowledge’ was excusable?
January 26th, 2009 at 4:57 pmglezzery Says:
Waterboarding, as used, is NOT defined as torture. Torture is defined as torture.
That’s retarded. Let me try: “the rack, as used, is NOT defined as torture. Torture is defined as torture.” Yeah, you could fill in any torture technique there and it scans just the same.
You know what, if before we found out that we were doing this, somebody had showed you somebody being waterboarded, you would have agreed it’s torture. You’re just playing this game because your political heroes decided to do it.
You might as well try to tell me that “shooting someone in the face with a shotgun” isn’t defined as shooting someone in the face with a shotgun.
.
glezzery Says:
When used once, quickly, as an interrogation tool, it is not being used to torture somebody.
Waterboarding CAN be used for torture, but Interrogators have not been accused of trying to cause prolonged intense and persistent terror with waterboarding.
Waterboarding can’t be used “quickly,” pig. It’s a sustained process. They have been accused of trying to cause prolonged intense and persistent terror with waterboarding. That’s precisely what we’re talking about here?
Do you even know what waterboarding actually is?
.
glezzery Says:
The intent was not just to inflict suffering.
Of course the intent was to inflict suffering, you mouth-breathing imbecile. If it didn’t inflict suffering, it wouldn’t be effective in getting vicims to comply.
January 26th, 2009 at 4:59 pmglezzery Says:
Waterboarding, as used, is NOT defined as torture. Torture is defined as torture.
When used once, quickly, as an interrogation tool, it is not being used to torture somebody.
____________
ya know, Glezz… just because you put the words together in a sentence, it doesn’t make what you say “true”.
If you put your hands over your eyes and can’t see the people in the room, it doesn’t mean they’ve “disappeared”.
Quite frankly, what you said is embarrassingly silly. We don’t even have to go to the Geneva Conventions, or what he SCOTUS has to say.
At a very basic level, it’s just friggin’ asinine.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:00 pmglezzery Says:
“Torture is defined under the federal criminal code as the intentional infliction of severe mental pain or suffering,”
__________
By that definition, you’re sure torturing us.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:00 pmhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201170.html
here’s some more people convicted of ‘water boarding’ including a Sheriff right here in the USA in 1983…
January 26th, 2009 at 5:01 pmglezzery Says:
“Torture is defined under the federal criminal code as the intentional infliction of severe mental pain or suffering,”
That’s very gracious of you to concede your entire argument like that. Usually you wingnuts don’t give up so easily.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:02 pmYou admit right above that it was “RESEARCH” in inflicting severe terror.
No, it was ‘research’ in hypothermia… the terror was incidental to the Nazi’s… not to the tortured, however.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:03 pmShow me the section were international terrorists are covered?
Seriously, again?
January 26th, 2009 at 5:07 pmSee Hamdan decision- read.
No, it was ‘research’ in hypothermia…
And that research has saved lives, BTW… still torture. Still wrong.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:08 pmglezzery Says:
“the United States prosecuted a Japanese military officer, Yukio Asano, for carrying out various acts of torture including kicking, clubbing, burning with cigarettes and using a form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian during World War II.”
This is a slick trick. In this case, he was found guilty of ACTUAL TORTURE, kicking, clubbing, burning with cigarettes.
And waterboarding is thrown in because he did that also.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do you have any evidence this is true? We prosecutedd SEVERAL Japanese officers for waterboarding which was CALLED the water torture
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201170.html
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.
We courtmartialed a US SOLODIER for waterboarding in Vietnam
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/national/main3441363.shtml
In 1968, a U.S. soldier was court-martialed for water boarding a Vietnamese prisoner.
Did he go to prison for the waterboarding or maybe it was THE BURNING and PHYSICAL BEATING he meted out. Have you seen the actual case?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
So cough up the details of ALL those given prison sentences for waterboarding INCLUDING the US soldier or show yourself out in disgrace.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:09 pmglezzery Says:
Show me the section were international terrorists are covered?
That’s another thing – you don’t just get to make up new categories of people to avoid following the law. If there was such a section, BushCo would just make up another new category to put detainees in, and then try to use that as another excuse to further evade the law.
That’s why determining the legal status of persons is the job of the judicial branch.
.
glezzery Says:
My point is does the finding of the court say what you say it says?
Yes. The court found that waterboarding is torture.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:10 pmglezzery Says:
Its not nonsense. YOU are a brainwashed idiot. The IAEA was monitering the yellowcake. IT WAS secured. Do you EVER know what you are talking about?
January 26th, 2009 at 5:11 pmglezzery Says:
He was charged with Water Torture.
I see nothing about Waterboarding.
So now that waterboarding’s illegal, you’re going to argue that the government gets to use “inverted beverage service?”
This is getting really ridiculous.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:12 pmglezzery Says:
Innuendo and stretched facts are cool!
Hey, is somebody hacking into your username? I’ve seen a couple of these types of posts, like “duhhhhh” and stuff. Are you really saying those, or is it just a lame attempt to make you sound even stupider than you are already making yourself sound?
January 26th, 2009 at 5:14 pmglezzery Says:
My GOD you are so stupid
The Geneva Conventions applies only to those mentioned in the Geneva Conventions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Geneva convention says IF there is a dispute a competent tribunal will make the decision whether or not they are POWs that did NOT happen and it also says NO ONE is beyond the rule of law.
Show me the section were international terrorists are covered?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Show ME where those waterboarded were convicted as terrorists in a court of law. Or do they become terrorists to you cowards as soon as the Bush administration ACCUSES them or CALLS them terrorists.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:14 pmInnuendo and stretched facts are cool!
gleezzy, you just said that Waterboarding and water torture are not the same thing ’cause they’ve got different names… you do know they are different names for exactly the same thing, right? That a ‘rose by any other name would smell as sweet…’ and that torture by any other name is still torture…
January 26th, 2009 at 5:14 pmglezzery Says:
My point is does the finding of the court say what you say it says?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well the finding of THIS court did
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15886834
Cases of waterboarding have occurred on U.S. soil, as well. In 1983, Texas Sheriff James Parker was charged, along with three of his deputies, for handcuffing prisoners to chairs, placing towels over their faces, and pouring water on the cloth until they gave what the officers considered to be confessions. The sheriff and his deputies were all convicted and sentenced to four years in prison.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:18 pmIn 1983, Texas Sheriff James Parker was charged, along with three of his deputies, for handcuffing prisoners to chairs, placing towels over their faces, and pouring water on the cloth until they gave what the officers considered to be confessions. The sheriff and his deputies were all convicted and sentenced to four years in prison.
I tried to get Gleezy to read this above… nothing.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:20 pmYes, Gleezy- we agree- it’s torture…
January 26th, 2009 at 5:25 pmglezzery Says:
“Defendant: Asano, Yukio
Docket Date: 53/ May 1 – 28, 1947, Yokohama, Japan
Charge: Violation of the Laws and Customs of War: 1. Did willfully and unlawfully mistreat and torture PWs. 2. Did unlawfully take and convert to his own use Red Cross packages and supplies intended for PWs.
Specifications:beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; water torture; burning using cigarettes; strapping on a stretcher head downward.”
He was charged with Water Torture.
I see nothing about Waterboarding.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Oh my GOD a miracle YOU are getting stupider. Waterboarding IS watertorture FOOL.
Here is a discription of what he did which the Japanese CALLED water torture or the water cure
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100402005.html
Twenty-one years earlier, in 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:26 pmglezzery Says:
Innuendo and stretched facts are cool!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Apparantly you think stupidity is cool too. I guess you would its all you bring to the table.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:28 pmAre you still going in here? I thought you gave up in post #234.
glezzery Says:
Beaten and waterboarded for FOUR HOURS!
That is one of the findings of the court.
To the point of unconsciousness and repeated for 4 hours.
Your point?
Where would you draw the line? How much torture does it take before you count it as torture?
January 26th, 2009 at 5:28 pmglezzery Says:
Sheik Mohammed lasted seconds before he cracked.
And began recounting pain-induced lies, to stop it. There was no actionable material gained that has ever been released to the public – meaning it was worthless.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:32 pmglezzery Says:
Sheik Mohammed lasted seconds before he cracked.
How do you know that? How many seconds? What information did he give? How much of it was true? How useful was it?
Are you just making stuff up again from your fantasy life?
January 26th, 2009 at 5:32 pmglezzery Says:
define torture as it applies here. Federal policy does.
At the time, mental anguish did not qualify as torture.
Otherwise, being forced to watch CATS for days on end would qualify as torture.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You are a flat out LIAR and glib stupidity will not replace logic
http://washingtonindependent.com/13453/waterboarding
The federal anti-torture statute adopted in 1994, meanwhile, defines torture far more broadly, as an “act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering
January 26th, 2009 at 5:35 pmHow many times a day do you piss your pants glezzery?
January 26th, 2009 at 5:40 pmPoor sleezy just doesn’t get it. The people who condoned and sanctioned torture got run out of Washington on a rail. People like you and Gonzo ruined the reputation of this country all over the world. You guys lost because the American people want our country back. You cowards who justify anything you do because you’re so afraid of everything make most of us sick. Maybe you should go find a country you’d feel more at home in, say North Korea, because you disgust most of us in this country. And you and the other 20 percenters contribute nothing at all.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:41 pmGlezzy I know you are ignorant and a disgusting fool with no concept of decency but even YOU cant be this stupid. You are just being a stubborn troll. You CANT get past the FACTS we prosecuted Japanese for waterboarding we courtmartialed a US soldier for participating in waterboarding during Vietnam we sent a sherriff to PRISON for doing it and it was considered torture when it was used during the SPANISH INQUISITIONS and if it wasnt torture they wouldnt have used it. You are just being a boring ignorant troll and not even TRYING to make sense
January 26th, 2009 at 5:41 pmWe all know why Glezz won’t admit that we tortured prisoners, or that Geneva is relevant: his mindset embraces torture as retribution, not as an effective, and legally acceptable method of interrogation. His arguments are windowdressing.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:43 pmWhat I find truly sickening in all of this is that we as Americans are having this conversation. It shows how far we have sunk as a people…..heck of a job Bushie! And what is most disgusting is that there are people who actually defend torture, the wingnuts who wave their flags and claim “my country, right or wrong.” Torture is wrong – and it always has been – no matter who is doing it and for what reason. Any American who defends torture is not a “real American.”
January 26th, 2009 at 5:53 pmglezzery Says:
Gosh, is there anyone here who actually knows what they are even talking about?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Plenty of us. YOU are just too stupid to be among that group
January 26th, 2009 at 5:54 pmgreen Says:
What I find truly sickening in all of this is that we as Americans are having this conversation. It shows how far we have sunk as a people…..heck of a job Bushie!
I know! Before Bush started doing all this crap, nobody – and I mean nobody, left or right wing – would ever condone any form of torture whatsoever. No matter how liberal or conservative you were, pre-Bush, all these concepts like suspending habeus corpus, “black sites,” pipelining intelligence, starting wars without exit strategies, were completely unacceptable. What made us the good guys is that’s the stuff we didn’t do. That’s what made America America. Bush has completely ruined that.
January 26th, 2009 at 5:58 pmElBruce,
January 26th, 2009 at 6:02 pmExactly! I wonder if we will ever heal and return to our better natures.
glezzery Says:
“Plenty of us. YOU are just too stupid to be among that group”
LMAO!!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, I think you are funny too. You’ve been spanked you moron. Ya got nothin. The fact you are so clueless you dont get this is further evidence just how stupid you are.
January 26th, 2009 at 6:04 pmglezzery Says:
LMAO!!!!
Ooh, good one!
January 26th, 2009 at 6:05 pmglezzery Says:
You have no knowledge of my mindset.
Yes we do. You’ve made it pretty clear throughout this debate.
.
glezzery Says:
More Progressive arguments!
Great Points! LMAO
Yes, they are great points, actually. That practice has always been considered as torture throughout history, and nobody ever disputed that point up until the Bush administration tried to.
Even if one grants the “everything changed after 9/11″ mindset, that should not apply to basic facts or logic.
January 26th, 2009 at 6:09 pmglezzery Says:
Your case sucks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Our CASE took you to school you mindless moron. You never refuted a WORD OF IT and ignored most of it. The only attempts at refutations showed how stupid you are and how little you know about the subject. Just precious trying to pretend that waterboarding and water torture werent the same thing when the point the Japense officer WAS charged with waterboarding blew one of your inane talking points out of the water. You argue like a mentally challenged ten year old or Rush Limbaugh its pretty much the same. Pulling idiocy out of your lower torso glib stupidity when you are blown out of the water then dancing and declaring victory like the tenth place finisher at the special olympics. I guess its the best wingnut morons like you can do. We should be nice everyone gets a trophy
January 26th, 2009 at 6:22 pmThey were not covered under Geneva until the Supreme Court ruled so.
You do not understand the law, not at all.
January 26th, 2009 at 6:25 pmglezzery Says: 289
My GOD you are an ignorant fool. That post was pure projection. It IS the progressives here bringing the facts and logic and YOU deflecting doing the two step, ignoring facts and frankly being stupider than I would have believed humanly possible. You got SPANKED. Your delusions notwithstanding the floor has officially been mopped with YOU. The fact you are just too stupid to KNOW you got pwned doesnt mean that isnt what happened. I am urging you to leave the world of Planet Wingnut where being stubborn and stupid equals winning a debate and joining us in the REAL WORLD. It may cause shock to your system what with facts and reality haveing ACTUAL MEANING and your delusional fantasies being only delusional fantasies but it has the advantage of being REAL as opposed to your world of make believe
January 26th, 2009 at 6:26 pmglezzery Says:
So who really doesn’t understand facts?
LMAO!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
YOU. You do not understand facts OR reality or frankly ANYTHING. You are a moron. By the way Mine-me called and said that creeply laughing at being spanked thing could be considered a copyright infringement
January 26th, 2009 at 6:27 pmglezzery Says:
WRONG! I demonstrate the Japanese were tried under Geneva applying to them and their victims.
I also demonstrate (and even researched and posted) the Asano case and the water TORTURE they were prosecuted for has no resemblance to the waterboarding of 4 detainees by the CIA!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You are a liar and a fool and ignorant beyond human comprehension. I posted the DESCRIPTION of what they called the water torture IT WAS WATERBOARDING. You are insufferably stupid. We prosecuted SEVERAL Japanese soldiers for waterboarding and you didnt show that ANY of the others were doing anything BUT waterboarding you didnt even ATTEMPT to address that we COURTMARTIALED A US SOLDIER FOR WATERBOARDING IN VIETNAM. You are just plain stupid YOU have been totally and completely refuted and debunked only the most comitted ignoramus could possibly believe otherwise
You lose.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
YOU wish, you have been spanked get over it. You are really very stupid it is going to happen again so get used to it
January 26th, 2009 at 6:32 pmYou are a liar and a fool glezzy. That is what comes from having rightwing screechmonkeys do your thinking for you. The GC says DIRECTLY that NO ONE is beyond the reach of the law. PERIOD. You can keep repeating the GC doesnt apply but the GC says it does. YOUR stupidity does not define reality
January 26th, 2009 at 6:35 pmglezzery Says:
Ya got it wrong again MORON. YOUR Bush Idolotry Syndrome has YOU parading your ignorance. If you ever had an original thought in your entire life you would mistake it for a cerebral hemorrage. You are a brainwashed idiot and it shows. It is time for us to remind you about the first rule of holes. It is definitly time for you to STOP DIGGING. You are simply embarassing yourself now
January 26th, 2009 at 6:36 pmglezzery Says:
Oh my GOD. Your ignorance is a sight to behold. Are you really making the point that it is ILLEGAL for a US soldier but it is OK for a CIA agent? Waterboarding is what WE call the exact same thing the Japanese called water torture or the water cure. I POSTED THE DESCRIPTION YOU SIMPERING BABOON. And YEAH you are unbelievably stupid.
January 26th, 2009 at 6:40 pmWhitehouse: As We Look Forward We Must Also Look Back
January 21, 2009
In short, when you have pervasive infiltration into all the halls of government – judicial, legislative, and executive – of the most ignoble forms of influence; when you see systematic dismantling of historic processes and traditions of government that are the safeguards of our democracy; and when you have a bodyguard of lies, jargon, and propaganda emitted to fool and beguile the American people…
Well, something very serious in the history of our republic has gone wrong, something that dims the light of progress for all humanity.
As we look forward, as we begin the task of rebuilding this nation, we have an abiding duty to determine how great the damage is. I say this in no spirit of vindictiveness or revenge. I say it because the thing that was sullied is so, so precious; and I say it because the past bears upon the future. If people have been planted in government in violation of our civil service laws to serve their party and their ideology instead of serving the public, the past will bear upon the future. If procedures and institutions of government have been corrupted and are not put right, that past will assuredly bear on the future. In an ongoing enterprise like government, the door cannot be so conveniently closed on the closets of the past. The past always bears on the future.
Moreover, a democracy is not just a static institution, it is a living education – an ongoing education in freedom of a people. As Harry Truman said addressing a joint session of Congress back in 1947, “One of the chief virtues of a democracy is that its defects are always visible, and under democratic processes can be pointed out and corrected.”
Entirely apart from tentacles of the past that may reach into the future, are the lessons we as a people have to learn from this past carnival of folly, greed, lies, and sabotage, so that it can, under democratic processes, be pointed out and corrected.
If we blind ourselves to this history, if we pull an invisibility cloak over it, we will deny ourselves its lessons. Those lessons came at too painful a cost to ignore. Those lessons merit discovery, disclosure and discussion. Indeed, disclosure and discussion is the difference between a valuable lesson for the bright upward forces of our democracy, and a blueprint for darker forces to return and do it all over again.
A little bright, healthy sunshine and fresh air, so that an educated population knows what was done and how, can show where the tunnels were bored, when the truth was subordinated; what institutions were subverted; how our democracy was compromised; so this grim history is not condemned to repeat itself; so a knowing public in the clarity of day can say, “Never, never, never, again;” so we can keep that light – that light that is at once America’s greatest gift and greatest strength – brightly shining. To do this, I submit, we must look back.
January 26th, 2009 at 6:43 pmI yield the floor.
glezzery Says:
——————————————————————————–
EugeneDebs Says:
glezzery Says:
“Ya got it wrong again MORON. YOUR Bush Idolotry Syndrome has YOU parading your ignorance. If you ever had an original thought in your entire life you would mistake it for a cerebral hemorrage. You are a brainwashed idiot and it shows. It is time for us to remind you about the first rule of holes. It is definitly time for you to STOP DIGGING. You are simply embarassing yourself now”
Whatever Your intellect shines through LMAO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I may not be a genius but compared to YOU I am Albert Einstein
January 26th, 2009 at 6:44 pmEnough trying to beat Q-tips into anvils. Glezzy skull deemed impenetrable. Unfortunatly for YOU Glezzy your stupid goes clear through to the bone and it is a lifesentence without the possibility of parole
January 26th, 2009 at 6:45 pmCase is now closed.
There will be no trials for folks fighting terrorism.
Gleezy- faced with certain defeat and humiliation, declares victory and goes home… good Republican, stay…
January 26th, 2009 at 6:50 pmI suppose you will say Gonzalez is prosecutable under the UCMJ next! A member of the JUSTICE Dept.
No, criminal court will do…
January 26th, 2009 at 6:51 pmIt all a lot of nonsense to get revenge on Bush and Co.
G-
Not revenge, justice… we aren’t interested in revenge… we are interested in the Law- and Bush and Gonzo broke it and they should be brought to justice- that’s the American way.
January 26th, 2009 at 6:54 pmGood luck finding someone to argue a dead case!
Are you joking?
January 26th, 2009 at 6:55 pmThere are lawyers chomping at the bit to argue this case…
WOW! When did we switch to this system? Get a lawyer to say it’s OK and, like magic, it’s perfectly legal?
So, why are we still paying all those judges? Are they unionized or something?
January 26th, 2009 at 7:04 pmNo he isn’t, because the detainees were NOT eligible under the Geneva till the Supreme Court said so.
again- you fundamentally misunderstand what happened in this case (in every case before the court, actually)…
Bush and Gonzo said they weren’t covered…
Hamdan argued that he was…
The Supreme Court agreed with Hamdan and ruled that he was covered, had been covered, and would continue to be covered by the Geneva Convention.
Bush and Gonzo don’t get to say, ‘well, from now on…’
Just like if you said your neighbor was responsible for dropping that rock on your head that impaired you and he said he wasn’t… if the court rules that he was it doesn’t magically make him responsible from the moment of the ruling forward- it just confirms that you were right all along and he was responsible for impairing your cognitive function.
And then you can use that ruling to sue him for damages, re-hab or whatever… ’cause you were right and he was responsible all along, get it?
January 26th, 2009 at 7:04 pmglezzery Says:
A nice display of logic and American Values today! Appreciate it.
Says the attempted torture justifier. I didn’t know irony was a specifically American value.
January 26th, 2009 at 7:04 pmGleezy-
January 26th, 2009 at 7:08 pmWhen tax-evaders say they don’t have to pay taxes ’cause they think they’re unconstitutional and then the court (inevitably and invariably) rules they are wrong… why does the IRS seek those back taxes?
After all, it wasn’t a settled question until the court ruled, right?
So they should just have to pay taxes going forward, right?
There really isn’t any other explanation, except Glezz gets a woody from the thought of dark skinned men being stripped and degraded. It must fulfill some twisted fetish, otherwise he’d surely see it is an awful interrogation technique, that offers nothing of proven value.
January 26th, 2009 at 7:10 pmglezzery Says:
At the time of the waterboarding, the detainees were NOT covered under Geneva, The Geneva case cited by folks here is a Geneva case.
They’re either military or they’re civilians. “Enemy Combatant” is not a legal status that can be sustained for more than a very short term. Particularly as most of the people being held have never been on a “battlefield” of any kind.
.
glezzery Says:
No finding of torture by any court or Federal investigations!
Case is now closed.
Obviously no federal investigation found torture. They were told not to look. And they dropped any cases that might have led to a judge finding torture.
None of these cases have been closed, because they have yet to be opened.
.
glezzery Says:
Your Bush/Republican Derangement Sickness is going nowhere past this stupid thread!
We’re just upholding the rule of law here. I’d say you were the one with B/RDS, since if it had been a Democrat in office, you’d be complaining about torture right along with us. You don’t actually believe in any of the legal arguments you’re so pathetically trying to cobble together. You just want to save your political heroes.
.
glezzery Says:
I am saying there are different laws applying.
Sure. And both of them prohibit torture.
.
glezzery Says:
It all a lot of nonsense to get revenge on Bush and Co. for aggressively interrogating Terrorists who would kill you given the chance!
I bet if it was Obama, wouldn’t hear a pip from you pipsqueeks
For the five hundredth time, none of the people being tortured have been proven to be terrorists. We have only the word of people who have lied to us and who have been staggeringly incompetent whenever they’ve tried to tell the truth.
If it was Obama, you’d hear more than a “pip.” We’d be saying the exact same thing.
We are against torture because it is both ineffective and morally repugnant. If Bush had prosecuted the GWoT without trying to destroy the foundations and fabric of America, I wouldn’t be nearly so upset with him at all.
And that’s the difference between us. You believe whatever you have to in order to support your “side,” and then justify the reasons from there. We look at the facts and use logic to determine what “side” that puts us on.
.
glezzery Says:
Do whatever you can to bring this matter to court.
Rest assured, we will.
You know, you’re starting to sound a bit desperate.
January 26th, 2009 at 7:15 pmrepublicans hate facts Says:
There’s a reason why the Haggards of the world are into fetish, S&M and in VERY UNHEALTHY ways!
That’s what extreme sexual repression invariably leads to. Not that S&M and the like can’t be healthy, but there’s a definite correlation between fetishistic sexual preoccupations and sexually restrictive cultures throughout history. Case in point: if you look at what tends to get the most fetishized, it’s most often things like Victorian era trappings, Catholic School outfits, etc. Cultures that aren’t particularly restrictive about sex also aren’t particularly interesting to fetish culture.
Sometimes I think that much of the reason that social conservatives are so extremely restrictive about sexual behavior is that they like to see it as filthy and nasty, or that takes all the fun out of it.
January 26th, 2009 at 7:22 pmG-
This ruling came down today…
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE50P4TG20090126
Now notice in the last sentence how it says that her lawsuit for lost wages and improper termination can now go forward?
January 26th, 2009 at 7:23 pmThat’s ’cause it was always illegal to terminate her- not from now on- always.
That’s how Supreme Court rulings work and that’s why Hamdan can now sue ’cause he was ALWAYS covered by the Geneva Convention…
Hey G-
January 26th, 2009 at 7:25 pmAny thoughts on damages and back taxes?
Why would those apply, etc?
Thanks
But the ruling is being applied retroactively!!
January 26th, 2009 at 7:31 pmThey said she had the right to sue!
Someone needs to tell the SCOTUS that this is only for people going forward!
From now on, people can’t be dismissed for co-operating in Sexual Harassment investigations but before it wasn’t settled which means it was A-okay!
LOL, ROTFL and LMAO for good measure…
She isn’t an illegal combatant.
No one is an ‘illegal combatant’ that’s a made up and illegal designation… that’s what the SCOTUS said in HAMDAN.
January 26th, 2009 at 7:33 pmDUH
But yeah, its the same as the detainees case!
Yeah, the same judicial process applies… that’s what HAMDAN says- that’s the RULING!
January 26th, 2009 at 7:34 pmThought you guys might like this one, I know Gonzo won’t…
On Monday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) issued a subpoena to Karl Rove, requiring him to testify regarding his role in the Bush Administration’s politicization of the Department of Justice, including the US Attorney firings and the prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman. The subpoena calls for Rove to appear at deposition on Monday, February 2, 2009.
January 26th, 2009 at 7:36 pmWhere did you get your legal training, Gleezy?
January 26th, 2009 at 7:37 pmYou might want to sue them- you got screwed…
Gleezy?
January 26th, 2009 at 7:39 pmThoughts?
Questions?
Did you read the ruling yet?
It might help clear things up…
glezzery Says:
Also, the courts ruled to extend habeus corpus to the detainees.
WHY? they weren’t covered under the Geneva Convention, American Law, International law, OR the UCMJ.
U.S. Constitution, Arcile 1 Section 9:
See, it doesn’t say who does or doesn’t get the right, it just says it shall not be suspended. Doesn’t matter who you’re detaining, or where. If an agency of the U.S. government is doing the detaining, then they have to submit to habeus corpus challenges, period.
.
glezzery Says:
At the time, waterboarding was NOT ruled to be torture, whether i like it or not!
The policy was changed, waterboarding ended and Geneva and habeus Corpus applied to terrorists.
You keep mixing up a judicial ruling with a “policy change.” A policy change is a decision made by the Executive branch. It isn’t retroactive. A new law passed by the Legislative branch can’t make something illegal retroactively either. But a ruling by the Judicial branch does apply to any and all similar cases that occurred prior to the ruling being handed down.
.
glezzery Says:
You make a mockery of what IS actually torture.
Don’t try to make like your concern here is to prevent more serious forms of bodily harm. If Bush had authorized sticking screwdrivers in peoples’ eyeballs, you’d be here defending that too.
.
belac Says:
Yeah, the same judicial process applies… that’s what HAMDAN says- that’s the RULING!
I think that one went over his little head, there…
.
Nevar Says:
Thought you guys might like this one, I know Gonzo won’t…
On Monday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) issued a subpoena to Karl Rove…
Karl Rove has his garage wallpapered with Congressional subpeonas. As far as I can tell, each one is as utterly meaningless as the last, unless and until Congress throws his corpulent posterior in jail for not showing up. I ain’t holding my breath.
January 26th, 2009 at 7:56 pmOkay-
From Wikipedia:
Hamdan had all charges dismissed!
January 26th, 2009 at 7:57 pmGreat Job, Bush DOJ! The court threw out your case!
Ok Fredo, what ever you say.
January 26th, 2009 at 8:36 pmsleazzery, why do you hate the United States military?
January 26th, 2009 at 9:37 pmWhen informed that he was already prosecuted and convicted by the American public, Fredo said, “Oh. I didn’t know about that.”
January 26th, 2009 at 9:38 pmWhen asked why he changed his name from Berto to Fredo, he replied, “I like annonymmity.”
January 26th, 2009 at 9:45 pmwaste money and throw it in the trash.
January 26th, 2009 at 9:54 pm—
Supervision of Bush administration taxpayer bailout funds = say what asswipe dumb ass who just parrots stupid shit ?
OH NO HE DIDN’T?
January 27th, 2009 at 12:16 amWell if that don’t beat all. That smug Bush thug has been going all over making all sorts of foolishness come out of that criminal lawyering mouth of his.
It is not only time; if the foot fits, you must convict.
.
Dear glezzery(for when you come back to gloat),
If I hired some eager to please lawyer to write me an opinion as to why murder is legal and I used that opinion as to why a few murders are legal the times I need them to be, does the very existence of those opinions change the law, making those few murders I’ve ordered, legal?
Oh, and glezzey, you do realize it’s torture you’re defending. Does this mean it can be used on… you, too?
Q U E S T I O N:
What is that redeeming quality to TORTURE?
.
January 27th, 2009 at 1:51 am#376 drick23 Says:
Can you say over a Ten TRILLION dollar deficit caused by your dear Bush, assessed to our children’s children to carry that burden of waste. Or can you say, “Saw us in TWO recessions and the emergence of one depression” on his watch? Or maybe the devaluization of the worlds economy by 1/2? Yep, like your boy didn’t know how to burn up money, NO?
.
January 27th, 2009 at 2:01 amThat he even needs to make that statement shows just how dreadful and dysfunctional the Bush White House really was. Gonzales is just singing a really sad GOP song.
January 27th, 2009 at 4:51 amso sad, really.
January 27th, 2009 at 1:44 pm