Once again the Democrats demand the Attorney General, Michael Mukasey, to label waterboarding torture. Once again Mukasey tells them to shove it:
Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said Tuesday that the harsh C.I.A. interrogation technique known as waterboarding was not clearly illegal, and suggested that it could be used against terrorism suspects once again if requested by the White House.
Mr. Mukasey’s statement came in a letter delivered Tuesday night to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has scheduled for Wednesday its first oversight hearing for the new attorney general. The conclusions of the letter are likely to be a focus of severe questioning by Senate Democrats who have described waterboarding, which creates the sensation of drowning, as torture.
“If this were an easy question, I would not be reluctant to offer my views,” Mr. Mukasey wrote to Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who heads the committee.“But with respect, I believe it is not an easy question,” he said. “There are some circumstances where current law would appear clearly to prohibit the use of waterboarding. Other circumstances would present a far closer question.”
Mr. Leahy and the nine other Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee wrote to Mr. Mukasey last week to insist again that he answer the question of whether waterboarding was torture. The attorney general suggested in comments to reporters at a news conference last Friday that he might never feel compelled to answer the question, no matter how often it was asked by lawmakers and the press.
You know all these letters and questioning could be saved if the Dem’s would do their jobs and pass a law saying its illegal. But we know they won’t do it. That would mean their positions on this war would be forever etched in stone.
Mukasey goes on to tell the Dems that he has reviewed the techniques currently deployed against high level al-Qaeda members and waterboarding is not one of them.
Now isn’t that grand?
A technique that worked spectacularly well against some of the worst of the worst has been put on the shelf because of the liberals in this country. Nice.
A silver lining tho:
He suggested that waterboarding might be reintroduced under the “defined process by which any new method is proposed for authorization” in the C.I.A.’s interrogation program.
“That process would begin with the C.I.A. director’s determination that the addition of the technique was required for the program,” he continued. “Then the attorney general would have to determine that the use of the technique is lawful under the particular conditions and circumstances proposed. Finally the president would have to approve of the use of the technique.”
Yeah, but with the future President being either John McCain or Hillbama, its all but guaranteed waterboarding will never see the light of day again.
And it’s back to the days of treating this war as a law enforcement issue.
See author page
What it boils down to is do we want to win the war or not? The enemies have no rules other than kill kill kill. Why handcuff the good guys? Our own Soldiers, Sailors, Marines and Airmen are subjected to it in SERE training. In some cases, going even further should be acceptable. But not as a general rule!! If Osama’s #2 were captured, or they had a guy that knew when a nuke was going to go off in Las Vegas? Should they give him a falafel and coke and ask gently? Hell, no, pull his fingernails out and peel his skin off until he started squawking!
Could it be that those so opposed to waterboarding are criminals that fear it will be accepted in the U.S. and used on them. 90% of the politicians would get life in prison if questioned and waterboarding was used to get the truth. That’s how I honestly feel about the current U.S. congress. Criminals united.
Conservatives now believe in torture.
That is where they have brought our country.
Didn’t American once stand for a set of ideals that meant something?
No longer. Now we only claim that we do not torture as badly as the worst people in the world. It is OK to torture human beings, just as long as we do not go as far as the worst people in the world do.
That is how low Conservatives have brought our country. And they are very proud of having done it.
“That is how low Conservatives have brought our country.”
No, some understand the nature of a pitiless enemy that cannot be dealt with rationally, if at all. I could post a link of images of a ROP practitioner holding the head of an INFANT he severed, but I won’t. The infant’s crime, being born into a Buddhist family. Tell me that we can remain “above” that without dealing with it in a realistic manner. Save your tears for our soldiers, not the enemy!
Hey Philly Steve: Do me a favor… Move to the Library Tower in L.A. after McCheese or Hillabama gets elected.
Since we won’t be waterboarding the terrorist monsters who sought to bring that building down the first time, we won’t miss you as much when it gets struck.
Tell me Steve.
If it were your wife, or your son or your daughter whose life would be saved by this “torture” treatment would you still be against it?
I know I wouldn’t. In fact, I would be more than willing to conduct the interrogation myself in order to save my family. Fortunately, we have professionals who do this for us so that we don’t have to.
We Conservatives live in the real world, where real people are in danger and must be protected not some fantasy land where we have to worry about hurting someone’s feelings.
I would even be willing to protect your wife and children Steve.
One more thing Steve.
Our guys (you know, the good guys) captured Bin Laden’s security coordinator earlier this month.
Would you say that a little tough questioning might be in order for this guy?
Or should we just ply him with falafel and Diet Coke and hope that he fills us in on what we need to know out of the goodness of his heart?
I’d vote for peeling his toenails off slowly one by one if that’s what it took to keep my family (or yours) safe, but then again that’s just me, the evil Conservative.
What say you?
Conservatives always base their beliefs on what works in the movies or on TV. Because torture worked on “24”, it must be great. Just as Conservative hero DanQuayle cited the movie “Red Dawn” for his belief in American might.
How about the real world?
Can any of you Conservatives cite an actual, documented case, where a real ticking time bomb (just like in “24”) was found?
Real life is: You have a hundred people that were “rounded up”. An anonymous tip says that “some” of them might “know someone” who might plant a bomb, someday.
You Conservatives would gleefully subject every one of them to torture, including children. And you are proud of it.
I repeat: Conservatives are disgracing everything that America once stood for to the world. And they are justifying it based on Hollywood movies.
Steve,
In your idiotic, fanatical attacks on conservatives, you forget that “waterboarding” or any other such method is a last resort and was cleared for use by Democrats in Congress.
You also fail to note how rarely it was used (3 cases). We are not talking Saddam’s electric torture rooms. We are talking about something more than a stern talking too.
BTW, what is your glorious plan to defend us from real threats? Your socialist democratic party has failed repeatedly to have any plans. Maybe in your hate-filled bile, you have one?
And having just read your latest moronicy:
AT NO TIME HAVE WE EVER STATED WE WANT TO TORTURE CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HOW THE HELL CAN YOU EVEN THINK THIS???
Let me guess, your “final solution” is to silence us “evil conservatives”?
You want a “discrace”, look left.
You really are a pathetic, insane, hateful moron!!!
The ticking time bomb was found Stevie!
Here’s a photo of the Library Tower in L.A.
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j191/mikesamerica/us_bank.jpg
That building is still standing because we waterboarded Abu Zubayda.
I stand by my recommendation that you move into the Library Tower after either McCain or Hillary is elected.
Since we will no longer be using enhanced interrogation tactics, we will not be able to gain the information necessary to protect you. And we know from experience with the 1993 World Trade Center attack that terrorist keep trying until they achieve their murderous objectives.
And as sad as the loss of the Library Tower would be, we can all be consoled that even though you and the other victims of that attack lost your lives, the civil liberties of terrorists were protected.
Demonstate the courage of your convictions ,if you have any courage, and put yourself in the line of fire Steve!
Some actual laws and regulations on dealing with illegal combatants, spies, etc. This is US Code, derived from various sources including the Geneva Conventions. This is in addition to the obvious points of the legal costs and the propaganda effect for the leftists and jihadists.
From FM 27-10 “Law of Land Warfare”
61. Prisoners of War Defined
a. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
(1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided
that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:
(a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) that of carrying arms openly;
(d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
73. Persons Committing Hostile
Acts Not Entitled To Be Treated as Prisoners of War
If a person is determined by a competent tribunal, acting in conformity with Article 5, GPW (par. 71), not to fall within any of the categories listed in Article 4, GPW (par. 61), he is not entitled to be treated as a prisoner of war. He is, however, a “protected person” within the meaning of Article 4, GC (par. 247). (See paras. 247 and 248, concerning the status of such
“protected persons” who have engaged in conduct hostile to the opposing belligerent.)
74. Necessity of Uniform
Members of the armed forces of a party to the conflict and members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces lose their right to be treated as prisoners of war whenever they deliberately conceal their status in order to pass behind the military lines of the enemy for the purpose of gathering military information or for the purpose of waging war by
destruction of life or property. Putting on civilian clothes or the uniform of the enemy are examples of concealment of the status of a member of the armed forces.
75. Spies
a Treaty Provision.
A person can only be considered a spy when, acting clandestinely or on false pretences, he obtains or endeavors to obtain information in the zone of operations of a belligerent, with the intention of communicating it to the hostile party.
Thus, soldiers not wearing a disguise who have penetrated into the zone of operations of the hostile army, for the purpose of obtaining information, are not considered spies. Similarly, the following are not considered spies: Soldiers and civilians, carrying out their mission openly, intrusted with the delivery of despatches intended either for their own army or for the enemy’s army. To this class belong likewise persons sent in balloons for the purpose of carrying dispatches and, generally, of maintaining
communications between the different parts of an army or a territory. (HR, art. 29.)
b. American Statutory Definition. The first paragraph of the foregoing Hague Regulation
has been in effect somewhat modified, as far as American practice is concerned, by the
subsequently enacted Article 106 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (64 Stat. 138; 50 U. S.
C. 700), as follows:
Art. 106. Spies.—Any person who in time of war is found lurking as a spy or acting as a spy in or about any place, vessel, or aircraft, within the control or jurisdiction of any of the armed forces of the United States, or in or about any shipyard, any manufacturing or industrial plant, or any other place or institution engaged in work in aid of the prosecution of the war by the United States, or elsewhere, shall be tried by a general court- martial or by a military commission and on conviction shall be punished by death.
c. Article 106 Governs. Insofar as Article 29, HR, and Article 106, Uniform Code of Military Justice, are not in conflict with each other, they will be construed and applied together. Otherwise Article 106 governs American practice.
79. Aiding the Enemy
a. American Statutory Definition.
Any person who—
(1) aids or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other thing; or
(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to, or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly; shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct. (UCMJ, Art 104; 64 Stat. 138; 50 U.S.C. 698.)
b. Interpretation. In time of war, the rule of the above article is general in its application to all persons whether or not otherwise subject to military law and without regard to citizenship or military or civil status, who give aid to an enemy overnment or persons adhering to it. It may be that this statute, should it be subjected to judicial interpretation, would be held to authorize the trial of civilians by military tribunals only when the offense had been committed in territory under martial law or military government, or within the zone of military operations, or within areas invaded by the United States, or within or in the vicinity of a military installation, or in a place otherwise subject to military jurisdiction. Cases occurring in the United States outside military jurisdiction are triable by the civil courts under the espionage laws mentioned above (par. 76) and laws relating to treason (18 U.S.C. (chap. 115)).
******THIS ONE IS VERY IMPORTANT
80. Individuals Not of Armed Forces Who Engage in Hostilities
Persons, such as guerrillas and partisans, who take up arms and commit hostile acts without having complied with the conditions pre-scribed by the laws of war for recognition as belligerents (see GPW, art. 4; par. 61 herein), are, when captured by the injured party, not entitled to be treated as prisoners of war and may be tried and sentenced to execution or imprisonment.
81. Individuals Not of Armed Forces Who Commit Hostile Acts
Persons who, without having complied with the conditions pre-scribed by the laws of war for recognition as belligerents (see GPW, art. 4; par. 61 herein), commit hostile acts about or behind the lines of the enemy are not to be treated as prisoners of war and may be tried and sentenced to execution or imprisonment. Such acts include, but are not limited to, sabotage, destruction of communications facilities, intentional misleading of troops by guides, liberation of prisoners of war, and other acts not falling within Articles 104 and 106 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and Article 29 of the Hague Regulations.
82. Penalties for the Foregoing
Persons in the foregoing categories who have attempted, committed, or conspired to commit hostile or belligerent acts are subject to the extreme penalty of death because of the danger inherent in their conduct. Lesser penalties may, however, be imposed.
So, in short, these terrorists should be more than thankful that the USA is not half the monster the left and their islamofascist allies makes us out to be as we are well within our rights to shoot them. Also, we should ask why many of these “anti-war” groups are not punished for providing aid and comfort to the terrorists. But that is a different topic.
This is US Federal Code and UCMJ regulations. If the Dems in Congress are so outraged by decades old laws, then they should change them, as more than a few of them have been around long enough to have written parts of these current regulations.
Steve,
I notice that you totally evaded, ignored, or missed the questions that I posed to you in post number 6 and 7.
Your silence speaks volumes about you.
By the way, can you cite any credible source of information which would lead you to believe that anyone would be willing to torture children?
Probably not and I won’t hold my breath waiting.
Just thought it would be fun to show that you are talking out of your ass again.
As far as calling “waterboarding” torture….I’d say there are gradations of what we might label as constituting torture. There’s a difference between, say, sleep deprivation, and scooping someone’s eyeballs out with a spoon.
Aside from Mike’s example, there’s also a case where a German police captain saved the life of a boy who was buried alive, with the mere threat of torture to an uncooperative kidnapper. The police captain was fired, but because they did not have the luxury of time, his actions saved the life of the boy.
This is mentioned about in Mark Bowden’s piece, In Defense of Waterboarding. It’s a fair and balanced piece, which basically has Bowden (author of “Black Hawk Down”) believing that torture (including waterboarding) should be illegal, but is morally justified in extreme cases where time is of the essence. And in case anyone misconstrues his position, he also offers a clarification. It’s worth the read.
Re: “Here’s a photo of the Library Tower in L.A.
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j191/mikesamerica/us_bank.jpg
That building is still standing because we waterboarded Abu Zubayda.”
I see the picture of the building. Where’s the picture of the bomb?
Re: “By the way, can you cite any credible source of information which would lead you to believe that anyone would be willing to torture children?”
To quote Conservative dogma, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” Conservatives here are screaming to “torture everyone”. I do not see a single post where they add “except children”.
So my direct question, if someone pointed to a six year old child, and told your “informant” that her father was going to plant a bomb, and she was the only person you had, would you torture her?
My betting is your answer will be, “Yes, enthusiastically!”
Re: “Aside from Mike’s example, there’s also a case where a German police captain saved the life of a boy who was buried alive, with the mere threat of torture to an uncooperative kidnapper. The police captain was fired, but because they did not have the luxury of time, his actions saved the life of the boy. ”
Re: “I notice that you totally evaded, ignored, or missed the questions that I posed to you in post number 6 and 7.”
A known action (kidnapping) had taken place. In the Conservative Hollywood world, they always “see” the bomb being planted, as well as the person doing it, before the first TV commercial. Then everything is OK.
In real life, authorities do not “see” any bomb being planted. They just have informants, who may just be settling old scores telling them things. And every single Conservative here would be willing to torture those who are fingered in such a way, just to honor the memory of the TV movie “24”.
IF you can document, without a doubt, that a bomb had been planted.
IF you can document that the person in front of you had planted it.
IF you can document that the bomb, if it goes off, will kill people or cause massive damage.
Then, I could forgive someone who goes ‘beyond the limit” in getting an answer.
However Conservatives believe that if.
PERHAPS there is a bomb somewhere
PERHAPS the person in frot of you might know something about it
PERHAPS the bomb, if it exists, might cause damage
The any form of torture on any person is justified.
Torture has been justified in “defense of the state’ on vague gounds such as these for centuries. And Conservatives have a tradition going back to the Spanish Inquisition (where waterboarding was practiced) to uphold.
There is not one single Conservative with the moral fortitude to say “torture is wrong”, without the “Bush escape clause” that has served so many others over the years.
“There is not one single Conservative with the moral fortitude to say “torture is wrong”, without the “Bush escape clause” that has served so many others over the years.”
Actually, it’s not a conservative bit. That’s almost verbatim Senator Barack Obama’s latest comment on the torture issue, and it mirrors at least one of Senator Clinton’s comments.
btw, I’m against torture. I think when a person’s caught shooting at American troops, and they’re not wearing a uniform then they should be simply asked questions once, then shot on sight per the rules of capturing a spy.
Poor Steve.
All those gyrations, permutations, equivocations, and wild unfounded statements just go to prove that he is talking out of his ass again.
Still no direct answers to the questions posed in #6 or #7. Guess he doesn’t have the stones. Who knew?
More flopping and flailing and twisting on display when he said that some here are “screaming to “torture everyone””.
Um, Steve, let’s begin again. This time with a really, really easy one and I’ll type it slowly so you can follow along with reduced difficulty. Show me where anyone “here” has screamed “torture everyone”.
That should be simple for you. Single website. Small amount of info to filter through.
While you’re working on your research project can you cite for us any comment where the poster is in favor of “torturing children” because I’m really still curious about that.
Then, once you have completed (and failed) in your attempt to support those assertions we’ll know for sure from where you are speaking.
By the way, I have the cajones, or the stones if you prefer, to answer a direct question. You asked if I would be in favor of torturing a six year old girl. The answer is no.
Somehow, I don’t see a six year old girl as being a criminal mastermind of a Islamic extremist terrorist cell that’s planning to build bombs on planes and have them simultaneously explode over the Atlantic, BUT HEY…maybe on Steve’s planet that happens.
I wonder how long a poster like Steve would last if they went to DU, KOS, or any leftist blog and spouted the same nonsense he does, but replace “conservative” with “liberal” or the far more accurate “leftist”?
My guess is one to two posts. Yet here he is, repeatedly spewing hatred and lies about conservatives, even to the point of making the insane charges he continues to make on this thread. One would think that fact alone would open his eyes to the fallacy of his claims and the his blind allegiance to the left.
But that requires shedding his ideological chains.
But back on topic. No one advocates torturing children and US Military in Iraq and Afghanistan have lost their lives holding fire to protect children. Hate-filled leftists like Steve, with is fanatical bile and vitriol, cannot see this simple fact.
As stated before, these tactics are last resort and only used when important information could be gained (like where Osama’s lead officers are in Pakistan… unless that missile which killed them yesterday was the Power-Ball lucky shot).
And as also stated in previous posts, Congressional dems had full knowledge of these programs and policies and had NO problems with them until they could make political hay with their equally hate-filled base on it. Also, reading through the Law of Land Warfare, these terrorists fail to meet the qualifications of legal combatant and are subject no protections.
Re: “btw, I’m against torture. I think when a person’s caught shooting at American troops, and they’re not wearing a uniform then they should be simply asked questions once, then shot on sight per the rules of capturing a spy.”
However that is not the circumstances under which Americans are tortutring prisoners now. Citing as justification circumstances that do not apply to the situation at hand is desceptive.
Oh cool!
Stevie is back and still avoiding the difficult questions just like always.
(They’re in #6, #7, and #16 on this thread just in case you need a reminder.)
Perfect non-answer as usual Steve. Now, as stated before in previous topics, these methods are only used after ALL others are exhausted and these methods were reviewed by congress and there was no problems then.
So, oh “brilliant” progressive elitist, what is YOUR solution?