Document: Cheney, Rice signed off on interrogation techniques

Document: Cheney, Rice signed off on interrogation techniques

news.yahoo.com

The narrative, posted Wednesday on the Senate Intelligence Committee's Web site and released by its former chairman, Sen. Jay Rockefeller , D- W.Va. , came as Attorney General Eric Holder told reporters that he'd "follow the evidence wherever it takes us" in deciding whether to prosecute any Bush administration officials who authorized harsh techniques that are widely considered torture.

(visit the link for the full news article)

This is pretty nuts. They are actually talking about prosecuting former Bush Administration officials.

On the one hand, I always thought that the Bushies were crooks, but this is really some radical stuff. I don't think this has ever happened before.

I think that the Obama Administration is setting a very nasty precedent by digging into the Bush Administration so much. What's next, Obama will tell us that 9/11 was planed by Chaney?

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

If this happens, I believe there will be an all out war between dems and reps from here on out and will carry over into many administrations to come.

Should people be held responsible? I say hell yea, but not just the Bush administration. They should go after every person, rep or dem, that had any knowledge of what was going on.

I find it hard to believe that members of Congress on the intelligence committee had no idea this was going on.

Originally posted by finemanm
I think that the Obama Administration is setting a very nasty precedent by digging into the Bush Administration so much.

This is actually the best precedent Obama could possibly set. We need to show that in America, if you knowingly commit war crimes, you will be prosecuted.

Originally posted by jam321
If this happens, I believe there will be an all out war between dems and reps from here on out and will carry over into many administrations to come.

Hopefully people will be smart enough to realize its not about democrats or republicans. It's about criminals.

In this case, the criminals happen to be republicans.

reply to post by drwizardphd


Do you really think that only Republicans signed off on the use of torture? Sorry to burst your bubble but I'm willing to bet that pelosi, reid and everyone else in the Senate new of this.

To say that only the Republicans are the criminals is naive.

reply to post by drwizardphd


I don't think its that easy to just say that the criminals were republicans. I am sure that there were plenty of democrats in the congress that were not only aware, by approved the use of these interrogation tactics.

I am really torn by this stuff. As a private citizen, I spent eight years wishing that these people would be prosecuted for their crimes, e.g. abu graib etc... But on the other hand, I just don't think that this is good to be airing this country's dirty laundry for all the world to see.

My question is how far will this go? Will they start prosecuting members of the military and CIA who were just trying to keep the rest of us safe?

reply to post by drwizardphd


Do you really believe that the last Bush administration was the first to use torture to try to get the info they needed?

IMO, it has been a family tradition for many of our presidents.

Originally posted by finemanm

I don't think its that easy to just say that the criminals were republicans. I am sure that there were plenty of democrats in the congress that were not only aware, by approved the use of these interrogation tactics.

Cheney and Rice are Republicans. The article doesn't mention anyone else. If Democrats are guilty as well then they should be prosecuted to the same extent the republicans are.

As I said before, it's not about left and right. It's about criminals.

Originally posted by finemanm
I am really torn by this stuff. As a private citizen, I spent eight years wishing that these people would be prosecuted for their crimes, e.g. abu graib etc... But on the other hand, I just don't think that this is good to be airing this country's dirty laundry for all the world to see.

I hate to break it to you, but we've been flinging our dirty laundry at the rest of the world for more than 40 years now. The fact that we torture is already out there. The fact that we readily violated international law is well-known.

You would prefer we cover it up, and become even more guilty in the eyes of other nations? What kind of logic is that?

I say we get it all out there, prosecute every last person who authorized torture, whether they are republicans, democrats or independents. We need to show the rest of the world that we're not going to stand for the despicable actions of these officials. We need to show the world that we can be the bigger man.

I dont think they have grounds to prosecute them. AlQuaeda doesnt fall under Geneva conventions because they are not an established military from another country.

Beyond that, I think it is stupid to have rules for war. Its war. You are suppose to kill and torture the other side until they give in. Its not football.

If they prosecute anyone from the Bush admin they should dig up FDR and Truman for the crimes against humanity they committed. They bombed cities, nuked people etc... Not that their is anything wrong with that in a state of war. Its not like they wouldnt have done it to us if they had the chance. I just bring it up to make the point that what the Bush admin did was not any worse. I say if someone is going to attack your country it is your job to torture the hell out of them until you get what you need to protect yourself.

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
I dont think they have grounds to prosecute them. AlQuaeda doesnt fall under Geneva conventions because they are not an established military from another country.

Beyond that, I think it is stupid to have rules for war. Its war. You are suppose to kill and torture the other side until they give in. Its not football.

No, you're not. We aren't supposed to torture period. The Geneva convention is NOT the only law prohibiting torture.

On December 10, 1948 the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Article 5 states, "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."

Source

Article 2 of the convention prohibits torture, and requires parties to take effective measures to prevent it in any territory under its jurisdiction. This prohibition is absolute and non-derogable. "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever"[5] may be invoked to justify torture, including war, threat of war, internal political instability, public emergency, terrorist acts, violent crime, or any form of armed conflict.[6] Torture cannot be justified as a means to protect public safety or prevent emergencies.[6] Neither can it be justified by orders from superior officers or public officials.[7] The prohibition on torture applies to all territories under a party's effective jurisdiction, and protects all people under its effective control, regardless of citizenship or how that control is exercised.[6] Since the Conventions entry into force, this absolute prohibition has become accepted as a principle of customary international law.[6]

Source

As you can see, international law states quite clearly that NO ONE can be tortured, for any reason whatsoever.

I humbly invite you to eat your words.

Well we should have never signed it in the first place. Its war for god sake. You should kick the living crap out of the other side. So I guess you are going to say that FDR fire bombing Tokyo wasnt way more immoral then sticking a rag in someones mouth and pourng some water down their throat. Hell, we water board our own pilots just to prepare them for torture. So it cant be so terrible as to scar them for life.

What amazes me is that we are suppose to play fair but our soldiers and citizens get their freakin heads cut off when they are captured. What would you rather endure getting your head cut off or feeling like you are drowning for a few hours.

I just hope that when Obama pussfies our nation that the next attack only kills the people that want the Bush people to be tried for this. This is just such BS. Everybody whining because we took some pictures of some naked iraqui war prisoners while our guys are getting a car battery connected to their balls.

What is your great plan to protect the country? You going to give a terrorist some Reese cups and hope that he likes them so much he tells you what you need to save your fellow countrymen?



[edit on 22-4-2009 by justsomeboreddude]

You guys really think anything will come of this? there is no way the Administration will let this go any further then this.Any special prosecutor or so-called independent commission will simply be a white-wash in order to protect the guilty parties.

[edit on 123030p://4326 by mike dangerously]

Oh, joy! Darth Vader, the Son of Satan was running our country until the Messiah showed up. Uh, Obama needs to consider that he, in turn, will be investigated. Not saying that bad things don't need to be investigated. Just that things have a way to come back and bite you in the butt. I figured, much to my realization, that what the previous administration had done, will not be undone by the next, because the next will see their own value in their own agenda. Like, oh, I dunno, now wiretapping without a warrent is illegal again. NOT.

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
So I guess you are going to say that FDR fire bombing Tokyo wasnt way more immoral then sticking a rag in someones mouth and pourng some water down their throat.

The repeated firebombings of Tokyo was one of the most horrible atrocities our nation has committed, in many historians opinions even more devastating than both nuclear weapons combined.

Does that somehow make it OK for us to torture people? I fail to see your point. Two wrongs never make a right.

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
What amazes me is that we are suppose to play fair but our soldiers and citizens get their freakin heads cut off when they are captured. What would you rather endure getting your head cut off or feeling like you are drowning for a few hours.

By torturing, and not "playing fair", we are becoming no better than the terrorists themselves. Decapitations is more despicable than waterboarding, but not by enough to justify either.

There is no more despicable act than to TORTURE a helpless victim and no one....absolutely no one who participated in these illegal acts should escape punishment. If we condone this type of behaviour by our elected officials and our military then we are condoning the use of this type of behaviour as a weapon against us. When a nation becomes an outlaw from the accepted and agreed up on morality that regulates our treatment of PEOPLE considered to be our enemies. When it violates its own laws for specious purposes than it is time to reevaluate the authority granted them. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it....but when your own Nation is the criminal it behooves us to take action and punish these miscreants and try to recapture our national honor.

reply to post by justsomeboreddude


boreddude....WWII was a war. as the saying goes, "All's well, in love and war..."

Actually, Shakespeare was being ironic...sarcastic, cynical even.

Your examples....excessive 'fire-bombing' of Tokyo (or maybe someone else brought it up) is simply what was the result of a hard-fought war in the Pacific....in the Japanese Emperor's own 'back-yard'. AND, the Allies prevailed....and were able to launch devastating conventional retaliation attacks....because it was win, or be conquered.

EVERY side was fighting for their version of 'life'....of course, we NOW know that the Japanese people were fooled by their 'Emperor'....and the culture that revered him.

We should also not discount the aid brought by the Australians, in the region. A thorough historical account is empty without their mention.

The Chinese? They had been down-trodden by the Japanese Empirical society for centuries....they were, truly...third-world at this time...but, they've certainly bounced back!!

Really, the sad part is, the civilians of Japan paid such a heavy price for the decisions of a few 'elites' that decided to take that opportunity to attack a U.S. territory....for a perceived 'matter of honor' because of certain USA policies in the Pacific area.

Fast-forward to 2003....a certan 'elite' decide to start a pre-emptive battle over perceived notions that by exerting a force in a region and establishing a stronghold they'd somehow have a stronger base to work from, to further an agenda of conquest....sound familiar???

*edit*....forgot to add...the Japanese were in retreat, but their culture was unlikely to allow them to concede...then, along comes the A-Bomb technology. Call it more retribution....pleaqse notice that the first drop was NOT on a major industrial area....yes, in hind-sight, it was callous. BUT, destroying the entire manufacturing areas would have been short-sighted.

The drop on Nagasake....well.....THAT was the big mistake, to me....shold have waited, and watched, for Japanese response to Hiroshima....but, history is history. It hastened surrender.....and ultimately saved lives, paradoxically.....



[edit on 4/23/0909 by weedwhacker]