Check out some similar questions!

Dark_crow · Feb 12, 2008, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by Skell

Yes, and then maybe more people will understand the Military Commissions Act and exactly what it means.

These criminals should be brough to justice no doubt. And if the death penalty is what justice is then so be it. The death penalty is another debate.

But no matter what these men's crime shouldnt they be entitled to justice just as any other criminal? Oh thats right. these men aint criminals. They are enemy combatants. The type of people that can be held for 6 years or more without charge, the type that can be tortured and treated like animals.

In that case they should just do what they like to em then. Maybe make a game show of it and get that guy of Millionaire to host it.

No, they are terrorist not enemy combatants, and what they do is no different than a person changing into their enemies’ uniform in order to kill them at will and escape notice. That calls for an immediate firing squad unless it is believed they have important knowledge. What they do is the lowest place a human can sink to and they have forfeited any rights at all.

Skell · Feb 12, 2008, 03:15 PM

I think raping and killing your own child sinks to the lowest form of human. That's what I think. That's my opinion. Your opinion is that these "terrorists" are. That's your opinion. The law doesn't work on opinion.

Do you miss the point or just choose not to respond to excons posts? Just because they are really bad men and they did something that you and the rest of the world really didn't like doesn't mean they don't deserve a fair trial and justcie.

Where do we stop?

Dark_crow · Feb 12, 2008, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by Skell

I think raping and killing your own child sinks to the lowest form of human. Thats what i think. Thats my opinion. Your opinion is that these "terrorists" are. Thats your opinion. The law doesnt work on opinion.

Do you miss the point or just choose not to respond to excons posts? Just because they are really bad men and they did something that you and the rest of the world really didnt like doesnt mean they dont deserve a fair trial and justcie.

Where do we stop?

Is this directed at me…in case it was…I understand Excon, I just don’t agree with his fear of a “Slippery Slope.” You apparently agree with that because you say, “Where do we stop?” In view of the fact that all knowledge and every pursuit aims at some good, and in War, that good is to win- and not lose our families at home to the evil of those who would take them from us.

George_1950 · Feb 12, 2008, 04:23 PM

There is no constitution on the battlefield and the enemy brought the battlefield here.

Dark_crow · Feb 12, 2008, 04:33 PM

George

A little time spent in Israel, dodging rockets and crazy bombers with their families and these Idealistic moral giants would realize an attitude adjustment very quick. Well, at least most of them.

excon · Feb 12, 2008, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by Dark_crow

these Idealistic moral giants would realize an attitude adjustment very quick.

Hello again, DC:

We agree. But, that would make you a moral midget with no ideals at all, wouldn't it? I think it would.

excon

Galveston1 · Feb 12, 2008, 06:37 PM

Where does anyone get the idea that these terrorists are entitled to due process under our law in the first place? Our Constitution does not extend its benefits to foreigners, and certainly not to foreigners who want to destroy this country. The Geneva Convention does not extend benefits to those who act as these terrorists did. We have people whining about their "rights". I do not wish harm on anyone, but when these people hit us again, maybe these whiners will be at ground zero. If waterboarding can save even one innocent American life, then I am for it. Our people knew who these men were. What they had to find out was what further plans they had for us. It's not like they may have been innocent.

excon · Feb 12, 2008, 07:42 PM

Hello again, Allheart:

I offer the following for your edification.

In 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding called the “water treatment” on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk.

For that act, Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

Others who were found guilty of the “water treatment”, including the officers who directed the torture and those who carried it out, were guilty of war crimes. Some were executed.

The bottom line is that when the “water treatment” was practiced against our side, it was called a war crime. Now, we justify its use.

excon

Flying Blue Eagle · Feb 12, 2008, 08:18 PM

ANSWER TO EVERYONE AS TO MY THOUGHTS ON THIS MATTER:: - I WILL SAY THAT WE ,THE usa STARTED THIS , THEY BROUGHT IT TO US ,AND I MEAN ON usa SOIL WE DID NOT POVOCK THIS, AND IT WAS NOT THE FIRST TIME THEY HAVE DONE THIS, A FEW YEARS EARILER THEY TRIED ,BUT IT Didn't WORK THAT TIME. I THINK THIS cOUNTRY was TO SOFT ON THEM I THINK THEY SHOULD HAVE TOOK SOME (b52s) AND LAID SOME EGGS IN ABOUT 6 COUNTRIES, I Don't THINK THAT I WOULD HAVE ANY SEVERE AFTER THOUGHTS ABOUT DOING IT . I'm NOT A RADICAL ITS JUST THAT WE ( america ) HAVE FOUGHT A USELESS WAR THAT WILL BE CALLED A POLICE ACTION ,JUST LIKE KOREA,& VETNOMand aMERICA HAS LOST A LOT OF PERSONNEL OVER THERE FOR NOTHING , GET THE HECK OUT AND LET THEM KILL EACH OTHER, BUT JUST LIKE KOREA, GO SO FAR AND STOP, THEY GET OVER THAT GET BUILT BACK UP AND HIT US AGAIN, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED IN THE LATE 90'S WHEN BUSHS DADDY WAS OUR PRESDIENT, GEORGE WANTED TO TRY TO OUT DO DADDY.:: noW LETS GET TO THE 6 CHARGED FOR 9-11, I THINK THEY SHOULD BE TRIED UNDER WAR REASONS, THEN TOOK OUT AND given a very slow death <by hanging > , or ANY WAY THAT WOULD BE very slow , you TALK ABOUT HOW THEY HAVE BEEN TREATED IN PRISON, have you stopped to think of what they have done to some of the americans over there they sure did show care for them that they be headed <some were beheaded and hung upside down from a bridge now who is really at the wrong?? F.B.E. hELLO EXCON ; I know ,lets round up their familys and bring them over here and put them to death right in front of them and let them live about 6 mo's. Before putting them to death so that they bwill have time to think about what they done to america on 9-11??

Fr_Chuck · Feb 12, 2008, 08:33 PM

They should be having the same trial all of the WWII POW's had, stay confined till the war is over. Or even better why not turn them over to the Iraq government for them to put them on trial ?

Allheart · Feb 13, 2008, 01:28 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Allheart:

I offer the following for your edification.

In 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding called the “water treatment” on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk.

For that act, Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

Others who were found guilty of the “water treatment”, including the officers who directed the torture and those who carried it out, were guilty of war crimes. Some were executed.

The bottom line is that when the “water treatment” was practiced against our side, it was called a war crime. Now, we justify its use.

excon

Thanks Ex. And I now am completely convinced. It's torture and we SHOULD NOT use it.

Guess what? If I read that being done to one of ours, in this current day, TRUST me, my curls be in a swirl and I'd be none to pleased.

I now can safely say, in my opinion, it's wrong and we should not use it.

Ex - thanks for making it clear and explaing sharing that history with me.

In no way should we use it and would made us start up to use it? We need to have more confidence and faith in our civilized tatics to get the answers we need.

NO WATER TREATEMENT -

I'd be furious if it were one of ours -

tomder55 · Feb 13, 2008, 04:51 AM

Well that is a nice narrative spreading around the web and by Ted the swimmer Kennedy in debate in the Senate (how ironic that he was the one who mentioned water torture) ;but the facts are more revealing .Yes "water torture" was one of the charges against him but more likely he served the bulk of his time for multiple incidences of real torture like beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; and burning using cigarettes.

Defendant: Asano, Yukio

Docket Date: 53/ May 1 - 28, 1947, Yokohama, Japan
Charge: Violation of the Laws and Customs of War: 1. Did willfully and unlawfully mistreat and torture PWs. 2. Did unlawfully take and convert to his own use Red Cross packages and supplies intended for PWs.
Specifications:beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; water torture; burning using cigarettes; strapping on a stretcher head downward
Verdict: 15 years CHL

Yokohama Reviews - Asano

excon · Feb 13, 2008, 05:20 AM

Originally Posted by tomder55

more likely he served the bulk of his time for multiple incidences of real torture like beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; and burning using cigarettes

Hello again:

Tom appears to be saying that waterboarding is OK, but THOSE things above are war crimes and we'd NEVER do that.

However... Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia defends that stuff. In an interview broadcast on Tuesday, he said that interrogators can inflict pain to obtain critical information about an imminent terrorist threat.

He used the "24" scenario that I debunked earlier. He says, "...it would be absurd to say you couldn't, I don't know, stick something under the fingernail, smack him in the face. It would be absurd to say you couldn't do that", Scalia told the British Broadcasting Radio Corp.

I guess we were absurd after WWll to think that someone shouldn't do that to our boys...

Yup. We're torturers, and we should be ashamed. If you're not, I'm ashamed for you - very VERY ashamed.

excon

tomder55 · Feb 13, 2008, 05:31 AM

You did not debunk the ticking time bomb scenario at all.

What is your answer... ok we know another 3000 civilians will be incinerated in a mass murder soon . We have someone who knows the when, where ,and how ,but that person will not talk... now what ?

excon · Feb 13, 2008, 06:27 AM

Hello tom:

In legal terms, you are assuming facts not in evidence.

"ok we know another 3000 civilians will be incinerated in a mass murder soon." Where did that information come from? Why don't you torture the guy who told you THAT??

"we have someone who knows the when, where ,and how" How do you know that? Again, why don't you torture the guy who told you that? Obviously HE knows.

Finally, how do you know that the guy you're about to torture KNOWS something about it? The fact is, you don't.

Indeed, your want to torture scenario falls apart under real world scrutiny. You can't know ANY of the facts you have presented AS fact. It's all make believe.. What you forget to insert was the IF word. Don't worry. I did it for you.

IF you knew thus and so, and IF you knew that the guy you have knows something……. IF that was so, then I'd say go ahead. But you don't know, of course, and you never would know.

It's a great plot. But, in the final analysis, those things are only going to happen on TV. I would have thought, however, that our Supreme Court Justices weren't getting their law from the tube.

I would have thought wrong.

excon

tomder55 · Feb 13, 2008, 06:39 AM

Forget judges . No jury would ever convict the interrogator if that person prevented a TTB . But when the bomb goes off you can feel content that you did not sink to the terrorist level ;which is another false platitude.

This week the terrorists strapped bombs on Down's Syndrome women and sent them into a crowded Baghdad market. You can equate getting them wet with such a despicable act. I can't .

excon · Feb 13, 2008, 06:59 AM

Hello again, tom:

We're going round and round here. The thing is I DON'T equate the two behaviors. You're the one doing that. You think it should be tit for tat.

In fact, YOU want us to base OUR behavior on how the enemy is behaving. I don't agree at all.

I want to base our behavior on how WE behave (or at least used to). I know you remember how that was.

excon

PS> You keep on dodging too. What about Scalia? The old under the fingernail thing is OK with you too??

Allheart · Feb 13, 2008, 07:13 AM

Hi Tom and Ex,

Again, thank you both for sharing all your knowledge - I do apprecite it.

Tom, I do have two questions;

1) If they did that to our POWs or even when they do torture are men and women who are captured... how does it make you feel? Honestly?

2) Tom, sadly, in today's day, if someone is willing to give their life or support those and believe in the same things as those who are willing to pilot a plane into our buildings etc. knowing they will die, are they going to really give up what they know, if they know anything because they are being tortured?

3) Tom with today's technology, if someone we think knows something and won't talk,
Between our technology and intelligence, there has to be other avenue and resources
That we can now take, that were not available in years passed.

tomder55 · Feb 13, 2008, 07:16 AM

I'll reply with Scalia's words (in the same interview )

"Is it really so easy to determine that smacking someone in the face to find out where he has hidden the bomb that is about to blow up Los Angeles is prohibited by the Constitution?
"Is it obvious, that what can't be done for punishment can't be done to exact information that is crucial to the society? I think it's not at all an easy question, to tell you the truth."

"How close does the threat have to be, and how severe [would the] infliction of pain be. I don't think it's easy at all, in either direction, but I certainly know you can't come in smugly and with great self-satisfaction and say 'oh, well it's torture, and therefore it's no good.' You would not apply that in some real life situations. It may not be a ticking bomb in Los Angeles, but it may be where is this group that we know is plotting some very painful action against the United States. Where are they and what are they planning?"

I think he makes a valid point in that it is not as black and white an issue as you make it appear to be.

tomder55 · Feb 13, 2008, 07:22 AM

1) I am leaving my feelings out of this . That is why I favor harsh interrogation and not torture. Emotionally if I knew someone was going to do harm to my family then anything goes. That is not what I am suggesting .

2) The proof is in the results . KSM was the lead man on the 9-11 plot . He is a top al-Qaeda leader . He knew a lot about their organization structure and other plots in the works . With this technique that did him no harm he started singing like a canary in 30 seconds .That after being tight lipped and non-cooperative before.

3) Are you suggesting truth serums ? Why would they not cross the line if the bar is being set at tea and crumpets ?