The interrogation technique kown as waterboarding simulates drowning and can cause excruciating mental and physical pain; it has been prosecuted in U.S. courts since the late 1800s and was regarded by every U.S. administration before this one as torture.
2007-10-31 07:10:11 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
"The fault for this evasion lies as much, if not more, with President Bush and Congress as it does with Mr. Mukasey."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/29/AR2007102901849.html
Billy boy chew on the link!
2007-10-31 07:20:11 · update #1
I block uncivil posters. Namecalling is unacceptable behavior
2007-10-31 07:40:32 · update #2
FACT: "it has been prosecuted in U.S. courts since the late 1800s and was regarded by every U.S. administration before this one as torture." THIS IS NOT OPINION. CAN'T YOU DISCRIMINATE BETWEEN FACT & OPINION? Who is to blame for using waterboarding is the editorial opinion!
2007-10-31 08:07:27 · update #3
Bull, gov't sanctioned torture is unconstitutional and immoral bec it is cruel and unusual punishment. Where do you torture justifiers and apologists come from. I dare say you would justify any immorality if you could argue it preserved order--that is one definition of a fascist or else it is ethics ignorance. I shall presume the latter.
2007-10-31 12:15:06 · update #4
Billy boy edited his previous request and now resorts to Q's & unsupported assertions. Ask your Q's & don't carp the askers. It's a cheapshot!
2007-10-31 12:20:39 · update #5
"You are equating torture with the term "unconstitutional" nonsense, I'm saying torture is not constitutional-- that violates the contitutional rights set out in the costitution. Don't misuse words or iappropriately miscategorize my Q. No strawmen!
2007-10-31 13:25:53 · update #6
Waterboarding was a form of torture during the Spanish Inquisition.
2007-11-05 00:29:49 · update #7
"According to Republican United States Senator John McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, waterboarding is "torture", "no different than holding a pistol to his head and firing a blank" and can damage the subject's psyche "in ways that may never heal."[13]"
The above Quote is from Wikipedia's entry on Waterboarding
2007-11-05 00:34:08 · update #8
" Water boarding does not appear in the Constitution." So? The rack and thumb screws don't either! You want to name every form of torture to make it costitutionally illegal? Were do you people live? I don't want your kind running things.
2007-11-08 05:10:10 · update #9
I am sick and tired of criminals infiltrating our government, and so far every single person associated with bush, placed into positions of power and authority by bush, has turned out to be criminal and/or incompetent.
How can someone be Attorney General when they do not even acknowledge precedent?
2007-10-31 07:13:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 4⤋
In my opinion, an interrogation technique that makes the detainee believe that their death is imminent is torture. That would include waterboarding.
But my definition is not universally accepted, especially in the GW Bush administration.
That aside, your link is merely to an editorial opinion piece, from which you quote when phrasing your question. But that piece does not include any support or references for the claims you are repeating here.
If want to persuade, it's best to use facts.
EDIT for your most "civil" additional details - the quoted language that "it has been been prosecuted in the U.S. courts since the late 1800s and was regarded by every U.S. administration before this one as torture" is taken verbatim from the link you provided us. At the top of that page the article is clearly marked as an editorial opinion piece. The writer of the piece is asserting these "facts", but there is no reference or support for these assertions. Where did that writer get that information? How do you know that the writer has any proof at all to back up the claims? Just stating it does not make it true. If I write a letter to the editor claiming that George Bush stole my car to rob a liquor store, it might get printed. You might even find it on the internet and be able to copy and paste it onto another site. But it doesn't make it true.
2007-10-31 07:32:04 · answer #2 · answered by raichasays 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
You are equating torture with the term "unconstitutional!"
One is not the other. Torture is a practice one person does to another. "Unconstitutional," is a lay term for government practices or policies that people think are prohibited by the US Constitution. The US Constitution does not in any way prohibit any actions of US nationals abroad (except those that constitute treason which is defined in the Constitution). U.S. statutes (or rules & regulations enacted pursuant to such statutes) may make specified actions abroad illegal; but it does not make them "unconstitutional."
The only thing that's bad is that the Senators asking this question haven't the foggiest idea what they mean & are only concerned with bashing the administration by bashing its nominee. That's ALL they care about.
2007-10-31 09:29:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Absolutely, as soon as you show me where:
a. it has been shown that waterboarding violates the 8th Amendment
b. in the Constitution the provisions of the 8th Amendment have been extended to foreign terrorists
You can feel what you want, but don't disparage someone who has forgotten more Constitutional law than you will ever know!
Still waiting to see how you apply the 8th Amendment to foreign terrorists being held at foreign bases?
2007-10-31 07:22:16 · answer #4 · answered by bewerefan 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Number one ,if this war didn't have to be media and politically correct it would have been over with.
the enemy uses a lot worse on our troops. Believe me been there done that. Between the media with their right to know
and the arm chair politicians who don't have a clue but a few.
There is no such thing as politically correct in war.
2007-10-31 07:27:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
You get my "Kool-aid Kook" of the night award. Just about all of what you said is totally bogus except for stating that it simulates drowning. But I suppose we can just serve terror suspects tea and cookies and ask them nicely to tell us where Osama is hiding.
Where did you get this garbage anyways? Move-on, Dailykos, or maybe NYT?
Edit: So you copy and pasted this from an OPINION piece from the Washington Post, one of the most liberal and anti-American news publications in the country. You are the poster-child for Kool-aid drinking propaganda vaccums.
2007-10-31 07:26:30 · answer #6 · answered by crackah 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Of course it is. The current administration is evil. Clearly, this pushes the line. What won't they do to get their way?
We shouldn't be worried about the terrorists so much as this current administration.
Impeach Bush and Cheney now.
2007-10-31 07:44:37 · answer #7 · answered by Unsub29 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
He has clearly identified his personal position on it. He's against it, by the way. It is the legal aspect of it that isn't entirely clear. Is it torturous? Maybe. Is it acceptable when national security is on the line? Can't say.
2007-10-31 07:17:03 · answer #8 · answered by Wonderputz 3 · 4⤊ 3⤋
No. Water boarding does not appear in the Constitution. I think it is a valuable tool. Whether you consider it torture or not, it should be used if it works. It should not be ruled out.
2007-10-31 07:14:57 · answer #9 · answered by regerugged 7 · 5⤊ 4⤋
Your premise for this question is blatantly false.
It causes no physical pain
It has not been in the courts since 1800s
It has never been defined as torture,
If you have facts and references please post your sources.
2007-10-31 07:16:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋