Obama to Take On Torture?

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: GeorgeC_74 @ 11/24/2008 4:20:01 PM

    F**k democrats. Kill them all.

    • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 11/24/2008 4:42:53 PM

      Again, where do you Yanks get nutters like this guy?

      • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 11/24/2008 5:15:28 PM

        They come from women having sex with pigs.

        • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 11/24/2008 5:19:41 PM

          Ah. I thought it had more to do with leaving small families alone in the Appalachias for too long, but that works, too.

  • Posted By: davie divergent @ 11/24/2008 3:43:17 PM

    Bush the joke is at the end of his run. The cleanup is about to begin. High on the list should be a moral cleansing of ending torture as policy of the United States.

    You rebiblicans should reflect on that. This is what you and your moralizing gave us.

  • Posted By: doctorfixit @ 11/24/2008 10:25:45 AM

    What about the torture that liberal fascists are doing to the Constitution. The GItmo detainees are enemy combatants, they have no Constitutional rights. I don't really care what Anthony Kennedy says. He's a liberal fascist, and liberal fascists have no legitimate place in this discussion. Liberal fascism is the real war crime that needs to be addressed.

    • Posted By: RO in Reno @ 11/24/2008 3:37:43 PM

      The term Liberal and Fascist are diametrically opposite; the people you refer to can only exist in your head,
      Take two aspirin a get a good nights sleep it may help but I doubt it.

    • Posted By: labman57 @ 11/24/2008 12:41:03 PM

      Yeah, let's just arrest all liberals and line 'em up and shoot them in the head. That's the American way. Yee hah!

    • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 11/24/2008 12:39:51 PM

      Where do Americans like this nut come from? Do you people have lead in your plumbing?

  • Posted By: 771979 @ 11/24/2008 1:53:22 PM

    Even Tom & jerry would have done a better job in the Oval Office than by G W Bush miserable eight years as the president of USA. President George W Bush's shock-and-awe in Iraq was not about Saddam Hussein's nuclear ambitions, or the alleged link to the al-Qaeda network which the US blames for the September 11 2001 attacks, it was for the greed and looting of Iraqi oil wells, about defending the dollar, and setting an example that anyone who seeks payment for oil in currencies other than US dollars, which is what Saddam did in 2000, would be likewise punished. History teaches that an empire should go to war for either defending itself or benefiting from war; otherwise, as Paul Kennedy stated in his The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, "A military overstretch will drain its economic resources and precipitate its collapse." Crime is contagious; if the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt.

    President Bush committed war crimes as an institutional necessity to terrorize the world and in consequence propagated law of jungle, where the strongest attempts to kills the weaker. I remember reading that US Colonel Steve Butler was suspended from duty after he wrote to a newspaper calling Bush "a joke" whose presidency was going nowhere before September 11. "He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism. His daddy has Saddam Hussein and he needed Osama." Mr Bush alleged silence about intelligence failures was "sleazy and contemptible", the colonel added. There is no doubt in the fact that wisdom to G W Bush is as alien as it would be slippers to a snake and, because of this slowness, he has never been in total control of his senses during his inept presidency. President G W Bush has wasted over 2.5 trillion dollars of American taxpayers money fighting an illegal war and occupation of Iraq war and still considers US is wining.

    He should be impeached for his and his warmongering administration's crimes against humanity.

    I believe that under Mr Bush's leadership, America has become notoriously belligerent and is intimidating the world when its political and economics interests are challenged. It has lost the respect and benign goodness that was once was an essential part of its foreign policy. On the other hand, Obama offers hope, reconciliation, aspiration, and optimism to the American people, which have been dreadfully missing because President Bush has divided America's political divisions into cultural war. America is hated more than ever before in the world now and Obama can restore honour to America's name.

  • Posted By: Doc HowI @ 11/23/2008 2:27:42 PM

    When this country is attacked by terrorists under an Obama administration it will be interesting to see what his response will be will it not. So far I think the rest of the world sees Obama as an apologist not a strong leader, but then Obama has 4 years to change that perception. When the attack comes will he apologize and bring on apocalyptic doom, or will he act as Bush and stand as a strong leader?

    • Posted By: marley07 @ 11/24/2008 11:55:09 AM

      wtf..you usually are picking off peoples' comments and ripping anyone who is against Obama, now you call Bush a strong leader, which I agree with when it comes to terrorists and 9/11, but what is your deal?

      • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 11/24/2008 12:16:49 PM

        It's not the same guy. Take another look at the name.

    • Posted By: AmateurHistorian @ 11/23/2008 4:23:55 PM

      Yes, that would/will be interesting. I believe that Obama has moral integrity beyond any President in office during my 51 years -- with the possible exceptions of Kennedy and Eisenhower -- and several orders of magnitude above our leadership of the past 8 years. We don't know what Obama would/will do, but I feel more confident that he'll do the right thing than I've felt about any other President in my lifetime.

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 11/24/2008 12:03:01 PM

    You do not need to ''start''with ''domestic criminals''with a Gonzales. AMNESTY International observes it is already being done,in places that include Obamas Illinois[where several Chicago police were already investigated for committing torture]. California is under a federal lawsuit for willfully denying state prisoners medical attention,a form of torture as concluded by the Geneva Conventions and the UN. RIKERS ISLAND in Hillarys New York. OSSINSING [Sing Sing] in the same state. ELY in Harry Reids Nevada. CORCORAN and PELICAN BAY in California. NEW MEXICO STATE in Richardsons New Mexico,JOILET in Obamas Illinois,ANGOLA,HUNTSVILLE,ATLANTA, SAN QUENTIN,FOLSOM, and dozens of other state and federal American prisons under investigation,under lawsuits,and under state and federal probes for torture,maltreatment,and abuse,[including sexual at womens lockups], of prisoners. Oddly enough,Bushs inquisitors would find that they have enough blood on their own hands,beginning with the leaders of both houses of Congress.

    www.amnesty.org

    www.aclu.org

    • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 11/24/2008 12:15:32 PM

      But there's no need to leave Torture Boy Gonzales out of the fun, is there? After all, he was the one that made the case for torture to be official US policy...why shouldn't he have a little time kneeling on a broom handle or getting waterboarded? It's all fun and games, after all, and nothing more than a "frat prank".

      Dick Cheney, too.

  • Posted By: Horrible Bastard @ 11/24/2008 11:39:23 AM

    Why stop with Gitmo detainees? Why not torture domestic criminals?

    We can start with Alberto Gonzales. I'm sure he'd being singing like a canary within 2-3 minutes, and give up the dirt on the rest of the Bush administration.

  • Posted By: paulsongs @ 11/24/2008 11:13:23 AM

    It's not true that nobody died from torture and abuse. Just look at the real story of what happened at Abu Ghraib and the torture and abuse that happened secretly in foreign countries after the extraordinary renditions and kidnappings conducted by our CIA. I believe the Bush administration is the most un-American administration in the history of our country. If these things make you proud, then you weren't listening in elementary school when your teacher taught you what it means to be an American.

  • Posted By: Allm900 @ 11/24/2008 10:14:29 AM

    --"If there was any effort to have war-crimes prosecutions of the Bush administration, you'd instantly destroy whatever hopes you have of bipartisanship," said Robert Litt, a former Justice criminal division chief during the Clinton administration."--

    Are you kidding me! You'd lose bipartisanship for calling Bush "a bad guy" or "a bad leader". But these are WAR CRIMES! Only a Fake Democrat like the the Clintonistas would want bipartisanship with people who have (Search MANNING MEMO) committed WAR CRIMES. If I were a law abiding republican, I'd also be insulted. Not all republicans commit WAR CRIMES.

    --"A new commission, on the other hand, could emulate the bipartisan tone set by Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton in investigating the 9/11 attacks."--

    What's wrong with you Newsweek! The 9/11 commission was a failure. Buildings don't explode and planes don't "atomize". The 9/11 commission was denied documents and was thwarted every step of the way. But don't take my word for it. Ask Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton who said so themselves. By the way, Lee Hamilton is also the guy who deep-sixed the Iran-Contra TREASON investigation. You're leaving out a lot of history your readers already know about Newsweek!

    But don't worry Newsweek, if there was any effort to lambast Newsweek on my part, I'd "instantly destroy whatever hopes I'd have of bipartisanship." So don't worry. We're all good buddies here, aren't we.

  • Posted By: BillKeller @ 11/24/2008 9:17:32 AM

    It is more than a call on torture. It is a comprehensive trade process of enslavement that has lasted over seven years - long past the exposure and embarrassment of Abu Ghraib, long past calls from the legislatures and allies for termination. It has expanded from its sources of kidnapping and bounty, to rendition, thru smuggling routes that violates allies sovereignty and terminating at a dungeon call Camp Justice at Gitmo. It probably has its death squads. It has its illegal courts.

    From private to general, seamen to admiral, clerk to department secretary, individual to corporation; it has been sustained by an army of enablers. These are what must be identified, understood and power, positions, careers and commissions terminated. It is only then will we understand where the bottom of our morals, our ethics and our character lies. First step..

  • Posted By: rmatile @ 11/24/2008 8:48:23 AM

    How about doing some actual reporting instead of regurgitating a week-old Salon piece by Mark Benjamin? Just asking...

  • Posted By: Trooper101st @ 11/24/2008 8:25:56 AM

    HARLEY maybe "REPUKE" is a better term? LMAO!!!

  • Posted By: Trooper101st @ 11/24/2008 8:24:36 AM

    I would LOVE to see Cheney, Rove, Tenet and a handful of other assorted NEO-CONS in shackles. Its where they belong. Send them to Lewisburg and let some pipe hitt'in ni99a's go med-evil on thier a$$....burn baby BURN!!!!

  • Posted By: mugsi66 @ 11/23/2008 6:10:44 PM

    funny, just hillarious that any discussion of wether we should even discuss the possibility of investigating the current criminal Bush administration, we retreat because we dont want to look backwards or cause unecessary bipartisanship.
    your server couldnt handle the documentation of the still growing list of criminal acts exhibited by this administration. the USA, as self appointed moral highwater mark in the world, exemplifies the lack of moral perfomance by NOT prosecuting this adminitration.

    our only saving grace is that they will be judged on the final day by there own "good book"!

    yeah, right................

  • Posted By: AmateurHistorian @ 11/23/2008 1:05:42 PM

    @ Vypurr: So you're saying that we should ignore what we've done just because it's no longer happening, and in any case it doesn't matter compared to how much worse the other people are?

    • Posted By: Vypurr @ 11/23/2008 3:02:08 PM

      No, the reason you're asking me this is because I did not indicate that. My question was while the left is comfortable in continuing pounding on our government for water boarding (something we used on three terrorist and no longer do) there's nary a peep about the horrendous acts terrorists have perpetrated on us and no call for them to stop. No mention of 9/11, no mention of beheadings... nary a peep. I just found that a little odd.

      At any rate, I've made my point here and seen all of yours, so that's my last word.

      • Posted By: AmateurHistorian @ 11/23/2008 4:11:10 PM

        And I find it odd that your emphasis is 180 degrees opposite from mine. You seem to be all about denouncing the horrendous acts of the terrorists, and barely want to talk at all about your own government's moral responsibility. That's my point and I've seen all of yours. My last word as well.

  • Posted By: Titonwan @ 11/22/2008 6:42:16 PM

    We can't let the past eight years of civil rights abuse and crimes against humanity go unpunished. How can we proceed with this administrations flagrant abuse of the Rule of Law- we can not. The Constitution doesn't provide for a two tiered Justice System. Everyone must follow the same rules. If the President (and Vice President) do not follow the law, why should we?

    • Posted By: Vypurr @ 11/22/2008 7:48:35 PM

      As an apologist, you simply can't see that you can't move forward with any of this nonsense because there have been no laws that were broken.

      Name one, and I don't mean your perceived "laws against humanity."

      • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 11/23/2008 8:50:17 AM

        They may very well have violated our code of military justice. They also violated the Geneva Concvention, which we are signatories to and thereby subject to. Lastly their actions vitiated our right to call others on human rights violations.

        • Posted By: Vypurr @ 11/23/2008 11:01:25 AM

          They did not violate their military code of justice, or violate the Geneva Convention While Gitmo may not be the Hilton, their "human rights" are being served there and they're being treated humanely. Over two hundred have been released, others cannot be released as no country wants them, (would you like for them to come live with you?) and still others don't want to leave for fear of torture or death in their home country. Even Bin-Laden's own son can't find a country that will have him... and he's denounced terrorism and his father! The remaining 85 or so will be tried. Gitmo is not as easy as you think.... Knowing this, Obama won't close the facility until these problems can be addressed.

          • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/23/2008 11:07:55 AM

            "They did not violate their military code of justice, or violate the Geneva Convention "

            Of course the Geneva Convention was violated, several times. Just begin with the fact that illegal combatants are required to be treated as POWs until a competent tribunal decides otherwise...we did that backwards. Waterboarding is also a violation of the GC.

            • Posted By: Vypurr @ 11/23/2008 11:48:01 AM

              They have no Geneva rights, as we were not attacked by any one nation, or by any military armed forces. We didn't violate the Geneva Convention.

              http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005144

              • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/23/2008 1:17:22 PM

                The GC applies to all signatory nations in all circumstances. I notice you linked to "OPINION journal", instead of the text of the GC. Interesting.

                • Posted By: AmateurHistorian @ 11/23/2008 3:20:45 PM

                  Actually this is a better link, at the International Committee of the Red Cross. It has overview and discussions as well as links to multiple parts of the Geneva Convention (which the earlier link did not).

                  http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/genevaconventions

                • Posted By: AmateurHistorian @ 11/23/2008 1:40:43 PM

                  That's an excellent thought, Doc:

                  Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, on the website of the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner on Human Rights:

                  http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm

          • Posted By: AmateurHistorian @ 11/23/2008 1:24:08 PM

            First, what make you think we're no longer torturing? We have no idea; no matter what our government says, they lie to us routinely. Second, what is the point in screaming about what terrorists do? We can't control what they do except by capturing them, eliminating them, or changing their behavior. We're doing the first two vigorously, and almost anyone other than our current president has a better chance at the third. Finally, why are you so eager to sweep U.S. behavior under the rug? What difference would it make even if we have stopped torturing? We did it (and I believe we still are), and we need to be accountable for that, and that's *our* job. That's why I keep talking about it.

    • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/23/2008 8:56:10 AM

      "Name one, and I don't mean your perceived "laws against humanity."

      Gee, why'd we hang all those Japanese officers?

  • Posted By: marley07 @ 11/22/2008 7:01:15 PM

    God bless democrats. They want all these rights for terrorists who want to kill you. They want to close gitmo and bring all these terrorists here. Do you see any of these democrats volunteering to bring them into their district or state or town? If they proceed with this non-sense than all those terrorists should be put in the most liberal areas and then lets see if they still like this idea. The world has never been "Fair" and it never will be so give it up.

    • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 11/23/2008 8:36:03 AM

      "God bless democrats. They want all these rights for terrorists who want to kill you. They want to close gitmo and bring all these terrorists here. Do you see any of these democrats volunteering to bring them into their district or state or town? If they proceed with this non-sense than all those terrorists should be put in the most liberal areas and then lets see if they still like this idea. The world has never been "Fair" and it never will be so give it up."

      That is garbage. No one has ever said let actual terrorists go. And no one has ever said let them roam the streets of the US. So since the other guy is evil we shold lower ourselves to thier level. That is idiotic (and so Cheney-like).

      • Posted By: marley07 @ 11/23/2008 10:38:28 AM

        Do you think they should be brought here for trial just like the rights of everyday americans who commit crimes? What do you think is going to happen? We close it down and we bring them here. Great idea.

        • Posted By: ghostmasseur @ 11/23/2008 1:05:22 PM

          No, I do not want them brought here. IF (repeat IF) gitmo was used a detention facilty without torture and IF legitimate military trial had been undertaken there, I would have no problems with that. It is that fact none of that occurrred that makes the US wrong and this admin criminals.

      • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/23/2008 9:01:46 AM

        "That is garbage. No one has ever said let actual terrorists go. And no one has ever said let them roam the streets of the US. So since the other guy is evil we shold lower ourselves to thier level. That is idiotic (and so Cheney-like)."

        What were you expecting? Honestly?

    • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/23/2008 8:56:52 AM

      " God bless democrats. They want all these rights for terrorists who want to kill you."

      Okay, that's one vote from the torture freak contingent.

    • Posted By: chris s. @ 11/22/2008 11:40:50 PM

      Arm chair warriors, like Bush and Cheny are the loudest saber rattlers. Good christian men of peace. In our both republican and democrat family,both have and are serving in our military. You see, both parties can be patriotic and we're not talking about wearing flag pins here. I'm sure you have served honorably too. Enough of the stereotyping, ok?

  • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/22/2008 5:15:12 PM

    It's really very simple: Anyone who uses or supports terror is a barbarian, and diametrically opposed to 220 years of American principles.

    • Posted By: Vypurr @ 11/22/2008 7:50:32 PM

      We no longer support or condone torture, including water boarding.

      • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/23/2008 8:55:24 AM

        Why did you in the first place? You don't get useful intel, and it makes you a pariah in the rest of the civilized world.

        • Posted By: Vypurr @ 11/23/2008 11:52:57 AM

          Of course it works. Disgusting, but the point is it has worked. I'll say it again, we no longer use the practice nor condone it. I will go ahead and once again your usual "why did we use it in the first place" question... Because we gained valuable information from using it.

  • Posted By: junkmail7 @ 11/22/2008 8:03:02 PM

    Send the legal bills to the DNC.

  • Posted By: Randeaux @ 11/22/2008 7:33:08 PM

    This is the Bush administration's version of what the word "is" is. If making someone feel like they are drowning isn't torture; if sensory deprivation and sleep deprivation aren't torture; and if degrading people by posing them naked in front of the opposite sex with attack dogs present isn't torture, then there must not be any such thing.

    Lest you say, "there goes another democrat", I voted for Mr. Bush twice. The first time I hoped he would be a good president. The second time, I thought he was the better of two bad choices. But knowing what we all know now, Mr. Bush led us into a war on false pretenses, taken away constitutional rights, and finally took away America's standing in the world as the bright, shining city on a hill. It is no wonder that the American people turned Republicans out when we've sold out on values that have made this country great. If another country did these things to our troops, we would call for war crimes tribunals.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse