Comments on: Depends on What the Meaning of the Word “Torture” Is

By: Akston

Akston — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:15:59 +0000

Sorry, that link should have been here.

By: Akston

Akston — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:14:30 +0000

Immoral, illegal, and ineffective.

By: tarran

tarran — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:48:39 +0000

Kent,

Do you know *why* the FBI pulled out of the Guantanamo Bay interrogations and ordered its agents to stop participating in CIA interrogations?

The FBI agents were complaining that the CIA officers were systematically torturing the people they were interrogating.

Now, it could be that George Bush is merely incompetent, that his underlings did these things without his knowledge. The paper trail linking Donald Rumsfeld to the Pentagon’s torture program is pretty well established, and Rumsfeld and the CIA both were part of the faction led by Dick Cheney, a faction that was defended and enabled by George Bush’s approval throughout.

If Bush had fired Rumsfeld, and Gates and relieved Gen Sanchez at the outset of the Abu Ghraib scandal, you might be able to make the case that he wasn’t to blame for the crimes committed by U.S. forces. However, his actions in the aftermath of the scandal make it clear that at a minimum he was an accessory after the fact, and was probably part of the conspiracy from the outset.

IF you want to know why one of the few surviving members of the conspiracy that murdered 3,000 U.S. citizens on 9/11 is about to walk free, you don’t need to look very far. All you have to do is thank George Bush for allowing that would-be murderer to walk free.

By: Stephen Gordon

Stephen Gordon — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:11:46 +0000

Certainly members of the Bush administration attempted to redefine the word torture in order to make the claim that their actions weren’t covered by legal definitions. I personally heard John Yoo do so in a debate with Bob Barr at CPAC.

There is a clear difference between a few random agents of the US government acting in a rogue manner and a systemic use of such policy on a wider scale (it seems to have happened in multiple countries by various organizations) and over a sustained period of time.

Whether or not torture is to be considered immoral is a personal issue, I suppose. I continue to stand behind my strongly held belief that torture is indeed immoral.

Whether or not torture is legal is only a question in the minds of people like John Yoo and Alberto Gonzalez. It’s been outlawed as a matter of US policy for quite some time.

That the use of torture is irresponsible is the purpose of quoting the Crawford article. Now there likely will be no conviction of the suspect in question.

I’ve not stated that Bush is directly culpable for any torture-related crime. I’m not in a position to know what he knew nor hear every word which fell from his lips during his presidency.

However, torture did occur and I placed the political blame where it should lie (based on the information available to me, at least): his administration.

By: kent beuchert

kent beuchert — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:45:45 +0000

Sorry, but providing one instance doesn’t even remotely come close to making the case that the Bush administration either knew of, or condoned torture. Any half-assed lawyer would rip your argument of blame to shreds. Are you now going to assume you can pin the blame on Bush for any crimes that any of the 3 million Federal employees have committed over the past 8 years?
There is ZERO difference between that and what you are claiming. This article shows why you should know something about the law (or even simple logic) before making such silly and brainless claims.