Cheney Asks For Freedom To Torture

U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney personally appealed this week to Republican senators to allow the CIA an exemption under a bill to ban torture of terror suspects. The bill is sponsored by senator John McCain, who himself was tortured while a prisoner in Vietnam. McCain is said to have opposed Cheney's request. Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama is said to have been supportive of it.



Vice President Dick Cheney is pursuing an initiative that may be unprecedented for an elected official of the executive branch: He is proposing that Congress legally authorize human rights abuses by Americans.

"Cruel, inhuman and degrading" treatment of prisoners is banned by an INTERNATIONAL TREATY negotiated by the Reagan administration and ratified by the United States. The Department of State annually issues a report criticizing other governments for violating it.

Now, Vice President Cheney is basically throwing it all in the toilet, and is basically asking Congress to approve legal language that would allow the Central Intelligence Agency to commit such abuses against foreign prisoners it is holding abroad.

In other words, this vice president has become an open advocate of torture.

God save America.

Related News Links:
www.kfoxtv.com
www.dfw.com
ottsun.canoe.ca
www.oregonlive.com

[edit on 8-11-2005 by asala]

What do you expect from a psycho like Cheney?

Unfortunately a lot of sheeple won't mind because they figure it's paybacks for 9/11. :shk: Never mind about LOVE your enemy.

McCain was on Jon Stewart last night and they talked about this. Kind of a surreal picture of Cheney trying to convince McCain that torture is a good thing...

And all the while, Bush and Cheney are saying "We don't torture"! Hey, Americans have fallen for it before. If they do one thing and say another enough, the American people seem to believe what they say in spite of what they do.

It's whack!

Torture is the best way to get anybody they'd prefer to take the fall for a criminal offence (whatever it is) and confess to it. No wonder it's being touted as a necessity.

"Yessir, Mr Cheney...I did personally do exactly what you accuse me of...now would you please stop sticking bamboo under my fingernails?"

I'm surprised at the lack of comments on this issue...could it be that most people would agree with the notion of torture? Where's the debate?

IMO- It's only a small step from how Muslim extremists are treated to how little Johhny will be 'worked over' into confessing that, yes, he did indeed spray that graffiti on the back of the Walmart store.

I think this is a great idea, The writer of this piece thinks it was his idea but I though of it when Libby got busted and should further use it on the whole bush cabal.

If Cheney's for torture, why not use it on Scooter?

Nov. 7, 2005. 01:00 AM
LINWOOD BARCLAY


Here's an idea, and I can't believe I'm the first to come up with this modest proposal, but why doesn't the U.S. government just go ahead and torture Lewis "Scooter" Libby? And not just for that ridiculous name.


Some of you might find this position a bit extreme, but unless I'm reading the situation all wrong, this is exactly the sort of thing that Libby's boss, vice-president Dick Cheney, could get behind.

Just last week, Cheney met privately with Republican senators to make the case that the CIA should be exempted from any laws that would ban the use of torture on terror suspects.


Toronto Star

Originally posted by Sauron
I think this is a great idea,

The idea of using tortue on a prisoner is a great idea? Could you elaborate on your opinion and let us know why this is a good thing? I need to regroup for a minute and think about this... I mean, are we saying we are willing to torture another human? Long live the Red White and Blue if this was ever passed.



[edit on 9-11-2005 by chissler]

Originally posted by chissler

Originally posted by Sauron
I think this is a great idea,

The idea of using tortue on a prisoner is a great idea? Could you elaborate on your opinion

[edit on 9-11-2005 by chissler]

I am against torture, my point is if they can do it to you or I, why not Libby,

My apoligies

my faith is restored

No need, my dry humour does not come across to well at times.

What I find strange is Bush saying his government does not use torture, and then we have Cheney asking that the CIA be exempt from using torture. Which is it?






[edit on 9/11/2005 by Sauron]

Torture doesnt work. Stan B. Walters said not only arent you assured of whether you are getting correct info or not, this is also traumatic for the ABUSER. Interesting concept.

Presumably the ABUSER is trained to do something that will in the end cause him/her deep psychological problems and after their job is done they will go out in society and continue ABUSING. There is no help available to allow the ABUSER back into society. Thats our government.

As long as the CIA can legally torture Scooter Libby to find out the truth about the CIA leak and if indicted, the CIA can legally torture Cheney to find out the truth as well. Fair is fair.

where are the bush/cheny supporters on this one?

these guys have been watching too many movies to think torture is a route that should be taken.

reality is no longer a dimension they plan for

Originally posted by Sauron
I think this is a great idea, The writer of this piece thinks it was his idea but I though of it when Libby got busted and should further use it on the whole bush cabal.

Hahaha, great point by the author of that article. That should be on the front page of the washington post.

good find

Okay, I'll bite! I don't believe in torturing your basic foot soldier just to get troop movement info, but given the right circumstance then it can be a means to obtain information that the victim would not readily give up. Say for instance a WMD is planted on US soil and has a timing device. Suppose that the device will kill, thousands or more Americans if it detonates. Now you have a person in custody that may have information that will either lead to the device or to someone else that knows where the device is, yeah I know, sounds like your basic '24' plot but imho at least the President should have the authority to use it as a last resort in times of National Security. Now having said that I am not going to debate with anyone the moral side of torture. If you notice my avatar then you will see that I am a veteran. I wouldn't particularly like to have bamboo shoots shoved up my fingernails either, but as a soldier that was in situations were if captured, torture was guaranteed, I still say that if the situation is right then it is a necessary tool. My concern would be in saving the lives of the many innocents that will die from the attack rather than worrying about the rights of the person being tortured. War is not fun and games, we are fighting a ruthless enemy that has no regard for human life. You cannot tie the hands of our government or our soldiers just so you feel better about yourself. As a soldier I can honestly say that I wish that all weapons on the face of the earth could be rounded up and destroyed. I wish that no one every had to die in a senseless act of violence. I depise war and those that bring it on us, but if you put me on the battlefield, then I am going to be whatever evil bastard I have to be to assure my safety, that of my men, my Country and my loved ones.

I think you're missing the big picture here. He asked for permission! That's got to be some good news, doesn't it?

But let's think about this for a moment. Say they break up a terrorist cell and capture some terrorists. There's very good reason to believe a terrorist attack is imminent. Thousands of innocents could die. Maybe your city is the target. What lengths would you be willing to have our forces go to to extract enough information to prevent it?

I'm not sure "Ohh PLEEEZ Mr. Terrorist! Tell us of your plans," is gonna cut it. No, we WANT to be protected and safe. Someone has to have the will to ensure this is so. The general public just doesn't want to know what it takes. Like Nicholson's character said: "You can't handle the truth."

[Edit to add]-
Yorga, you're the man. I should have read your post more thoroughly before I posted. You said it better than I did.

[edit on 11/9/2005 by yeahright]

The problem with torture as a method of getting information is that a torturee will likely tell his torturer what ever he thinks they want to hear........whether or not it is the truth matters little, as long as it gets the pain and misery to stop for at least a little while.

Confessions are not even reliable when obtained under those types of conditions! Remember the Salem witch trials? Those old ladies confessed to flying on brooms and dancing with the Devil himself~!~?? Believable??

The guys at the CIA are supposedely among the higher IQ types......don't they know this already?? Couldn't they have other, less violent, more productive methods of getting info by now, something like sodium pentathol (sic)??

Yet they want to use torture?? IMHO, they must undoubtly be using it for revenge, punishment or ( most likely ) they just enjoy using it!!

My only concern is how will they define torture.

IMO, sleep deprivation, stress positions, loud music and sensory deprivation do not constitute torture. They can ban brutal treatment and bodily harm techniques, but as long as they don't go too far and ban everything it’s a good bill. I just hope they don't limit our options to, ask nicely, and say please.

Originally posted by frayed1 Confessions are not even reliable when obtained under those types of conditions! Remember the Salem witch trials? Those old ladies confessed to flying on brooms and dancing with the Devil himself~!~?? Believable??

Yet they want to use torture?? IMHO, they must undoubtly be using it for revenge, punishment or ( most likely ) they just enjoy using it!!

This post sums up my opinion on the matter.