Bush signs law authorising harsh interrogation

[grandpa]

Bush signs law authorising harsh interrogation: Bush signs law authorising harsh interrogation : Mail & Guardian Online United States President George Bush signed a law on Tuesday authorising tough interrogation and prosecution of terrorism suspects and took an indirect, election-year swipe at Democrats who opposed the legislation.

It's getting more and more bellicose in America.
Amnesty International suggests this is a purely negative development.

Grandpa h.

[JohnMK]

I don't need Amnesy International to tell me that.

"Every member of the Congress who voted for this Bill has helped our nation rise to the task that history has given us.

Phew, finally, proof that our foreign policy doesn't encourage terrorism. Such a noble thing as "history" has in fact caused all this. We are utterly powerless, reeds in the wind. I'll sleep better at night.

And all this time I thought it was blowback . . .

[The Architect]

Its nothing new. He is just making it easier for soldiers to do it with out being questioned.

[xyzer]

Some are so naive as to not believe that terrorism is akin to war. War results in the combatants killing each other does it not?.
I think it ludicrous and naive to suggest that combatants who have sworn to destroy us and whom we are seeking to destroy before that happens, are to be treated with 'kid gloves' like our own citizens. Are to be afforded gentle handling and kisses when taken on the international battlefield of terrorism.

The propaganda coming from this news source can't even leave off the qualifying words, such as 'harsh","tough' and expressions such as "bordering on torture". It attempts to modify reality to fit its own version of truth! What sort of a negative generality is this?Balderdash and nonsense!

These enemy barbarians are lucky they are not killed outright. They may have valuable info that will forstall more of their senseless killing of innocents..maybe our own relatives and friends.

I take a much less sensitive view of those who would kill me. I feel they should be made to confess if they have any link to or knowledge of terrorist intent. I would draw the line on the rack or drawing and quartering or even ripping out finger nails but I see nothing wrong with the other methods mentioned?

Sleep deprivation? My neighbors sometimes induce that on me on a Saturday night? Water boarding isn't torture it just scares the s^#@* out of a person

Yep Ghengis Kahn had the right idea. don't even take prisoners and let them live. Kill then quickly to send a message to their compatriots..mess with me and you die!

[RickSp]

Quote by: xyzer Yep Ghengis Kahn had the right idea. don't even take prisoners and let them live. Kill then quickly to send a message to their compatriots..mess with me and you die!

Sure slaughter the innocent and guilty alike, creating more enemies than you ever manage to kill. Ghengis Khan is remembered as a savage barbarian whose empire crumbled not long after his death. Is that all you want for America? America should stand for more than Bush and barbarism.

This law also effectively strikes down habeas corpus was well as allowing prisoner abuse. We have moved backwards eight hundred years. The Bushbots must be so proud. The transition from republic to monarchy is almost complete, as his fool supporters stand by and cheer.

[xyzer]

Sure slaughter the innocent and guilty alike, creating more enemies than you ever manage to kill. Ghengis Khan is remembered as a savage barbarian whose empire crumbled not long after his death. Is that all you want for America? America should stand for more than Bush and barbarism.

Well his methods so scared much of Asia and Europe that his small bands of pony soldiers conquered a heck of lot of territory and scared the crap out of those who stood in his way. There were no terrorist afte him or his country because they knew what would happen top them if they resisted!

Anyway where did you invent that we were going to slaughter innocents? These prisoners are taken on the modern battlefield of internationa terrorism. No uniforms, no national allegience? Just slimnking around trying to figure out how to kill the innocents for ideological reasons? Citizens rights? What country are these people citizens of?

[JohnMK]

Innocents die in the implementation of our foreign policy. Of course this is not intentional but it's almost impossible to avoid. The terrorists do use this as a rallying cry for recruitment. It's their home, people are dying, foreigners are present. It's a very simple mindset.

[RickSp]

Quote by: xyzer Well his methods so scared much of Asia and Europe that his small bands of pony soldiers conquered a heck of lot of territory and scared the crap out of those who stood in his way. There were no terrorist afte him or his country because they knew what would happen top them if they resisted! Anyway where did you invent that we were going to slaughter innocents? These prisoners are taken on the modern battlefield of internationa terrorism. No uniforms, no national allegience? Just slimnking around trying to figure out how to kill the innocents for ideological reasons? Citizens rights? What country are these people citizens of?

I know the drill. If we kill them they must be terrorists. Of course the Red Cross and US personnel agreed that 80% of those in Abu Ghraib had been swept up at random and had no connection to terrorism. But hell, once we kill them, who is to say they aren't guilty?

As I noted before Ghengis Khan's empire collapsed in bloody chaos. Is that barbarism what you want for America?

[madprophet]

Yeah, Waterboarding isn't torture, just ask the old Khmer Rouge interrogators (it was one of their favorites.) I believe the North Koreans wil also testify on behalf of the much disparaged technique. Hell, the CIA wouldn't bother training their operatives to withstand torture, would they? So then it can't be torture!

Anyway, how else are we going to get confessions, er, I mean, "Information" from these people who are so evil we can't even bring charges against them in a court-of-law because they'll use their spooky terrorist powers to subvert any process with rules and oversight?

And who says we should even allow our own citizens to circumvent justice by using the rules and regulations of our Judiciary? Jose Padilla is an American, but that didn't stop us from torturing -- I mean interrogating -- him for three years without charge. Just wait until they go after the real traitors, you know the ones, Democrats and journalists, who are trying to destroy America from the inside.

[madprophet]

Quote by: JohnMK Innocents die in the implementation of our foreign policy. Of course this is not intentional but it's almost impossible to avoid. The terrorists do use this as a rallying cry for recruitment. It's their home, people are dying, foreigners are present. It's a very simple mindset.

Let's just tweak a word here and phrase there:

Innocents die in the implementation of our Jihad. Of course this is impossible to avoid, as we have no other means to fight the Imperialists. The Infidels do use this as a rallying cry for recruitment. It's their home, people are dying, foreigners are present. It's a very simple mindset.

Add in the bit about ultimate victory and repeat ad nauseum. Warmongers are the same in all cultures.

[madprophet]

Quote by: xyzer Citizens rights?

No, Human Rights. Human. Alleged terrorists are still human, right? Or have we reached the point that the Right-Wing is claiming that anyone our government accuses of being a terrorist is a member of a new sub-species. Or are we just going to consider all Muslims a new breed of Lemur now?

[JohnMK]

Quote by: madprophet Let's just tweak a word here and phrase there: Add in the bit about ultimate victory and repeat ad nauseum. Warmongers are the same in all cultures.

I was hoping someone would spot the irony.

[rmnunez]

And all this time I thought it was blowback . . .

I'm glad you've been enlightened, but am more interested in what made you think US foreign policy had somehow provoked terrorism. I realize this is what everyone says, but foreign policy is such a broad thing and US foreign policy includes lots of good things besides military intervention and support for Israel.

The US chaired the High Commission for Human Rights for decades incessantly calling for their respect and defending victims of oppression. The US has been, and remains, by far the most generous purveyor of development assistance to third world countries. Vital legal international frameworks for everything from commercial arbitration to patent protections have advanced through US foreign policy initiatives. US foreign policy has produced benefits for humanity; defeat of the Nazis and Imperialist Japan, Soviet containment, enhanced trade, development, medical, educational improvements around the world, all flow from US foreign policy.

have we reached the point that the Right-Wing is claiming that anyone our government accuses of being a terrorist is a member of a new sub-species.

I think this statement is mistaken on 2 counts; there is no pursuit of people merely accused of being terrorists, and no atribution of less than human characteristics in terrorists.

We have this formality with the presumption of innocence, but don't think suspects are rounded up on unsubstantiated allegations and tenuous suspicion. Having held them for some time and often subjected them to degrading treatment or torture, by now I'd expect the united statians know which are not actually terrorists. These should be let go, as some have been already. But the genuine article has to stay, they should be prosecuted, and as long as the sentence they get is longer than the time served it seems no harm will result.

I know this is supposed to be done more expeditiously, there are supposed to be defense counsel, evidence, testimony, witnesses, magistrates and complicated procedures to be followed in prosecution. I also realize that all of these could result in some of the accused getting off, despite their guilt. I suppose some of this could result in an innocent bystander getting exonerated too, but don't expect this would often be the case as I anticipate the suspects have been properly identified and are reasonably suspected of.

Critical lefties should lose this phobia the Bush administration as after them, the only thing Critical lefties and Islamic fundamentalist-inspired terrorists share is opposition to Bush, this alone does not make critical lefties terrorists.

[gallo]

Quote by: grandpa It's getting more and more bellicose in America. Amnesty International suggests this is a purely negative development.

This is how we can maintain the policy against torture. We just change the definition of torture.

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: gallo This is how we can maintain the policy against torture. We just change the definition of torture.

Just as we "redefined" what the Geneva Accords say. We've learned a lot from clinton's "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is", haven't we? The republicans pushed for impeachment based on certain actions, which they have now adopted for their own.

[BobbyO]

Quote by: madprophet No, Human Rights. Human. Alleged terrorists are still human, right? Or have we reached the point that the Right-Wing is claiming that anyone our government accuses of being a terrorist is a member of a new sub-species. Or are we just going to consider all Muslims a new breed of Lemur now?

But why should the Judiciary have the final say in making this determination? What knowledge do they bring to the table?

[RickSp]

Quote by: BobbyO But why should the Judiciary have the final say in making this determination? What knowledge do they bring to the table?

The Artcile III of the US Constitution perhaps? The balance of powers? If the Judiciary can't reign in the thugs in the Executive and the Legislative branch, what hope is there for the republic? Not much it would appear.

[underbear1]

Everything old is new AGAIN

One of ten camps at which Japanese American citizens and resident Japanese aliens were interned during World War II.

[madprophet]

Quote by: rmnunez The US chaired the High Commission for Human Rights for decades incessantly calling for their respect and defending victims of oppression.

And while we sat on the HCHR, proclaiming with sufficient pomp our commitment to Human Rights and condemning the crimes of our enemies, we quietly -- and sometimes not so quietly -- cultivated the most heinous of strong-men and torturers. Saddam Hussein. Pinochet. The Shah. The Contras. Rios Montt. Marcos. Suharto. The list goes on and continues into the present. There's a word for it -- starts with an "H" and ends with an "ypocrisy."

Quote by: rmnunez The US has been, and remains, by far the most generous purveyor of development assistance to third world countries.

This statement only holds true if you use the dishonest accounting tactic of counting only in real dollars, and not, as any sane and intelligent person would, by percent of Gross National Income. By this more reasonable standard, we are very near rock bottom among the other Western countries. Thanks to the generosity of our private citizens, we just barely beat out Italy. (To be fair, I don't think the IMF counts all the bombs we generously hand out to those nations who pledge fealty. We're surely number one at giving other people the developemental ability to kill each other.) We're not even close to the UN goal of 0.7 percent of GNI. I feel so generous.

[madprophet]

Quote by: BobbyO But why should the Judiciary have the final say in making this determination? What knowledge do they bring to the table?

On whether or not Muslims should be considered a species of Lemur? Do you think anybody should be allowed to make that determination? I sure don't.