It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by johnsky
I agree completely.
But why only call for the Bush Administration to be brought up on charges?
Like I said, we would have to dig as far back as possible and bring all living politicians who have ever been involved in torture to stand trial.
But from what I have seen on here people are only interested in charging the previous administration.
Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by drwizardphd
You have to take into the account of the amount of cameras that are present now. They are everywhere compared to even 10 years ago.
Will it be harder to find evidence for past administrations? Of course it will be. But we cannot be naive enough to think that it didn't occur. Thats why I said that we would have to treat the Government as a buisness and dig back through the years, a kind of audit.
If they do this and we find that the past 4 Presidents and their Administrations hands are clean of any form of torture then I will be extremely suprised.
Originally posted by Intelearthling
We've all got a choice here in the matter.
Waterboard these bastard terrorists; save you childrens' lives.
Use no enhanced interrogation methods; attend your childrens' funeral.
It's clearcut as black and white. There are no areas of grey.
If I had it my way, waterboarding would be the mildest thing I could do to these bastard son-of-bitches!
Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Frankidealist35
That's actually true. There is no "law" in the US that says torture is "illegal" in reference to the Armed Forces, especially during war and not on American soil.
We have "treaties" but the President has the authority through sovereignty to break those treaties. There is no such thing as a binding International Law.
In short: Bush may have been immoral, but not illegal in his actions.
Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
The whole reason she said this is because Jay Bybee wrote a legal opinion on torture and even detailed how many times per day per person they could waterboard legally. Interesting that the Senate Judiciary Committee then unanimously CONFIRMED him with NO questioning as a federal judge AFTER this!
So, yeah, if a federal judge (the one that would hear the case) says it's legal, then IT IS LEGAL until he's taken off the bench!!
He MUST be taken off the bench! I put together a thread on him and this subject and not one single person responded to it. It's here: Jay Bybee - The real reason why Bush will not be prosecuted for torture
[edit on 1/5/2009 by Iamonlyhuman]
Originally posted by Maxmars
The only one who even hinted that this was not appropriate in the Bush cabinet was Rumsfeld
Originally posted by Intelearthling
Waterboard these bastard terrorists; save you childrens' lives.
Use no enhanced interrogation methods; attend your childrens' funeral.
Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Someone needs to hit people who think like this with the 911 commission report.
Originally posted by whatukno
Torture should not be condoned however I doubt seriously that anything will come of this.
BBC
Former Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and five other ex-Bush administration officials are accused of being the legal architects of a system that allowed torture of prisoners at Guantanamo, in violation of international law.
Originally posted by gaslaugh123
Now we have Obama who without a legal birth certificate
Originally posted by Maxmars
Jaybe was just pandering to Alberto Gonzalez for a job on the 9th Circuit.
Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by MysterE
You are exactly right. The buck has to stop somewhere or government cant function. If the President says its legal after getting legal advice then its legal. Now if the President is wrong then he could face prosecution, but not the people below him who were given orders by him.
And if International law is not 'binding' why does it exist, and for whom?
If not already, this will soon describe obama, as well. Forcing business executives to resign? Where is that listed as a presidential power?
“The president instructed us that nothing we would do would be outside of our obligations, legal obligations under the Convention Against Torture.” .... “By definition,” she repeated, “if it was authorized by the president, it did not violate our obligations under the Convention Against Torture.”