What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
203 Comments
- youareretarded, on 12/18/2008, -11/+178When someone admits to authorizing torture and nothing happens it says America is in a sad state of affairs.
- ChappyChaps11, on 12/18/2008, -13/+98He did, and what's more he didn't seem to upset about it either. I say we send him to Guantanamo before Gates shuts it down.
- principle, on 12/18/2008, -11/+73Cheney is maneuvering Bush into grating him a blanket pardon.
- apastafarian, on 12/19/2008, -14/+57Torture's not the worst thing he's done in office. He'll be pardoned for all crimes by his assistant, Mr. Bush.
- algaeturd, on 12/19/2008, -10/+37He clearly did. However, Americans don't care whether their government commits torture or not. Even if it does break war crime laws.
I think the inaction of the government and the people is just as appalling as the torture itself almost. Definitely insures that during the next war (Iran, maybe?) that torture will be A-OK then too.
So, so sad. - inactive, on 12/19/2008, -8/+25Yep, this is what happens when you give the government more and more power and keep the people apathetic. How any republican can sleep at night with this oil stain on their party is beyond me.
- algaeturd, on 12/19/2008, -4/+21A little waterboarding never hurt anyone? Prove it?
Well, then...thanks for volunteering. Let me set everything up and you can help us illustrate how innocuous it is.I'll be glad to help out with that... - rald84, on 12/19/2008, -0/+17Supreme Court has ruled decades ago that accepting a pardon is tantamount to admitting guilt. that's why they're reluctant to issue them unless they think prosecutations are likely. it opens the door to civil suits.
* A pardoned man must introduce the pardon into court proceedings, otherwise the pardon must be disregarded by the court.
* To do this, the pardoned man must accept the pardon. If a pardon is rejected, it cannot be forced upon its subject.
* A pardon carries an 'imputation of guilt', and accepting a pardon is 'an admission of guilt'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_Sta ... - jeremyduffy, on 12/19/2008, -2/+17Though we all agree, what can we do about it? How do you wake up the people and have them take action if nothing else has done it so far?
- grungegbunny, on 12/19/2008, -7/+22Cheney is the devil.
- inactive, on 12/19/2008, -0/+13Actually, about half of us care deeply about this issue. Unfortunately, the justice department has been politicized and the candidates we've elected to congress view it as a political issue and don't want to risk the backlash from the other half.
- johnboycanada, on 12/19/2008, -1/+14Or we could let the Iraqis try him. That would be more fair.
- kiwiboyus, on 12/19/2008, -1/+14I'm sorry but are you trying to say there is noting wrong with torture? Idiot.
- oldhick, on 12/19/2008, -1/+14@edrodgers731,
It hurt American soldiers enough during WWII to warrant us convicting Japanese soldiers of war crimes for doing it.
I've experienced tear gas too. It's not relevant.
Some soldiers do experience waterboarding during SERE training. However we have a volunteer army which means they volunteered for the training and everything that comes with. As such you have some confidence that your own military won't actually kill you, nor hurt you. That is NOT relevant when compared to actual POW's. Simulations are simulations.
I'm not sure what thought process you have going on aside from illogical rationalization. - algaeturd, on 12/19/2008, -0/+12Honestly though, the people keep themselves apathetic. Nobody is doing that. Corporations create convenience, banks allow people to buy convenience and wallow in it, television makes people stupid. Fast food makes them fat. As a result they become lazy.
All decisions made by Americans who just want the easiest path of least resistance available to them, even if they can barely afford it. - dilpil1, on 12/19/2008, -8/+20I doubt any evidence would be enough to convict Cheney short of him admitting to it... er... excuse me, replace "short of" with "even".
- oldhick, on 12/19/2008, -4/+16We convicted Japanese soldiers of war crimes for doing it to our soldiers during WWII.
- StupotAce, on 12/19/2008, -2/+14I honestly don't see why a President can give people blanket pardons in the first place.
What's the purpose of it? It doesn't have anything to do with checks and balances, it's just an unnecessary perk of the job and I don't think it should exist. At the very least, it should be limited to pardoning specific crimes and not crimes that the President's administration was involved in. - inactive, on 12/19/2008, -3/+15He's just going to get his boyfriend George Bush to pardon him. Here's how it's going to happen, Bush pardons Cheney for every crime he's ever committed, then Bush resigns, followed by Cheney pardoning Bush, making Obama the 45th President and ruining all this 44th President merchandise that has been already sold.
The US can't punish Bush or Cheney if they get pardons, but they can be called into UN court. - inactive, on 12/19/2008, -8/+20Cheney needs to face a firing squad or the noose.
But he will not, because the rest of the US government is made up of cowards, and no US politician is held accountable for their crimes, even when they are clear for all the world to see. Until such time as they are, the abuse of law and human rights will increase slowly and inevitably. - grungegbunny, on 12/19/2008, -1/+12America does not torture. Period. PERIOD. There are no circumstances EVER to justify it.
- inactive, on 12/19/2008, -2/+13I don't think you'd see a lot of public descent if Cheney was to get indicted.
- algaeturd, on 12/19/2008, -2/+12Not my administration, pal. Not mine at all.
- JenniferInMO, on 12/19/2008, -7/+17Why didn't Cheney just think of that? In one comment on a Digg post you unilaterally overturned international and Federal law. BRILLIANT!
Let's just put this matter to bed then. - inactive, on 12/19/2008, -0/+10It's not okay to torture now. It was not okay to torture then. Many Americans aspire to be better people than the terrorists. I guess you're not one of us.
- LeftieLucy, on 01/09/2009, -1/+11It's taught in SERE (Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape) training in the military so that troops know what to do if they end up captured by an enemy that tortures its prisoners. It's not taught in SERE because it's easy to endure, it's taught because it's extremely hard to endure.
Look at what crazy-pants Democrat John McCain, who has probably been waterboarded, has had to say on the topic. Is he making it up?:
“Anyone who knows what waterboarding is could not be unsure. It is a horrible torture technique used by Pol Pot and being used on Buddhist monks as we speak,” said McCain.... “People who have worn the uniform and had the experience know that this is a terrible and odious practice and should never be condoned in the U.S. We are a better nation than that.”
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/26/mccain-mukasey ...
"Of presidential candidates like Mr. Giuliani, who say that they are unsure whether waterboarding is torture, Mr. McCain said: “They should know what it is. It is not a complicated procedure. It is torture.” "
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/26/us/politics/26gi ...
Japanese war criminals who were found guilty of waterboarding after WWII were hanged for the crime. The world agrees that this is torture. - inactive, on 12/19/2008, -1/+9WRONG
"The Bush administration has agreed to apply the Geneva Conventions to all terrorism suspects in U.S. custody, bowing to the Supreme Court's recent rejection of policies that have imprisoned hundreds for years without trials.
The Pentagon announced yesterday that it has called on military officials to adhere to the conventions in dealing with al-Qaeda detainees. The administration also has decided that even prisoners held by the CIA in secret prisons abroad must be treated in accordance with international standards, an interpretation that would prohibit prisoners from being subjected to harsh treatment in interrogations, several U.S. officials said."
And look, at cite to a real source:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ... - madgrizzly, on 12/19/2008, -0/+8Nor even dissent.
- inactive, on 12/19/2008, -1/+9Bent Sørensen, Senior Medical Consultant to the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims and former member of the United Nations Committee against Torture has said:
"It’s a clear-cut case: Waterboarding can without any reservation be labeled as torture. It fulfils all of the four central criteria that according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) defines an act of torture. First, when water is forced into your lungs in this fashion, in addition to the pain you are likely to experience an immediate and extreme fear of death. You may even suffer a heart attack from the stress or damage to the lungs and brain from inhalation of water and oxygen deprivation. In other words there is no doubt that waterboarding causes severe physical and/or mental suffering – one central element in the UNCAT’s definition of torture. In addition the CIA’s waterboarding clearly fulfills the three additional definition criteria stated in the Convention for a deed to be labeled torture, since it is 1) done intentionally, 2) for a specific purpose and 3) by a representative of a state – in this case the US."
Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, concurred by stating, in a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, that he believes waterboarding violates Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. - rowjimmy, on 12/19/2008, -0/+8& not really getting any useful information
- AndrewMoyer, on 12/19/2008, -1/+8Yeah, the people that read about this stuff and care about it are already informed and have already been outraged for a while... it's the uninvolved, apathetic masses that we would need to get engaged before anything serious can change on a matter like this, and frankly, too many Americans just couldn't care less.
- madgrizzly, on 12/19/2008, -0/+7Then you, too, would be violating the principles that America was built on.
- absurdist, on 12/19/2008, -3/+10Finalist, Stupidest Statement Ever On Digg Competition.
- digger0007, on 12/19/2008, -2/+9Not only is Cheney ready to revise history. He is ready to revise the definition of torture.
- bullhead2007, on 12/19/2008, -0/+7Spoken like a true fascist.
- Thuktun, on 12/19/2008, -3/+9Wait until after 1/20/09, otherwise he'll get immediately pardoned.
- oldhick, on 12/19/2008, -1/+7edrodgers731, I don't give two craps about who would or wouldn't complain about anything. I also could care less what other countries would do.
You have no idea when and how many times water boarding has been used. You have no idea how many people of interest we used "extraordinary rendition" to torture. You have no idea how their psyc evals would come out and since most of then are BEGGING for the death penalty or have already tried to kill themselves, I think you're wrong.
You speculate with no foundation. You make claims that you can't support.
I for one believe that the U.S. has a moral obligation to not engage in such behaviors. It's my opinion. Clearly you are fine with torture. Good for you. Also, simply because you would rather do more harm to them, your faulty logic in your original comment remains. - johnboycanada, on 12/19/2008, -0/+6Cheney would commit suicide before he let anyone arrest him for Human Rights crimes. Besides, I always thought he die of a heart attack after office... probably the next day. He's taking the Kenneth Lay way out of this.
- zip000, on 12/19/2008, -4/+10Cheney didn't exactly admit to approving torture: he says he approved of the methods used. He doesn't admit that those methods are torture. This is the same tactic that they've been using all along..."the United States doesn't torture, so if we're doing it it isn't torture."
Sure this argument is ridiculous, but it has worked in the past and it will probably work now.
All the headlines saying that "Cheney admits approving torture" are misleading; he admits approving this technique which he says isn't torture. Most of the rest of us think that it is torture, and he should go to jail for this, but he doesn't...or at least says he doesn't. - jgzman, on 12/19/2008, -0/+6It is impossible to put a man on trial when he controls (or influences the control of) access to the evidence. It is a tricky place, kind of like the issue of tolerating the intolerant.
- jefu, on 12/19/2008, -0/+6Any idea how might that affect proceedings in a civil suit from one of the torture victims?
- unixfg, on 05/23/2009, -0/+5Pardoned in the US. I wonder if courts in other countries would take it as implying guilt as well.
- darkamster07, on 12/19/2008, -1/+6all human beings have unalienable rights. its that simple.
- thepoliticalcat, on 12/19/2008, -3/+8Much as I dislike Rod Blagojevich, it is beginning to seem more likely that that story is being loudly spun by our media lapdogs to keep our eyes and minds off this revolting piece of filth.
- oldhick, on 12/19/2008, -1/+6@edrogers731, I provided you with the support for my claims. You still have provided nothing.
It certainly is my opinion that it is torture. It was also the opinion of the allies in WWII as well as currently the opinion of the international community (see the Wiki footnotes on the topic for a LIST of international agencies that list it as torture). How you interpret my usage of the word and the vivid imagery you conjure up are your issues.
Explain how voluntary and involuntary are the same. There is NO similarity between tear gas and water boarding. I never feared I was going to drown or die nor have I ever met anyone in my long life who did. Everyone that has gone through water boarding, be it during WWII or SERE training describes the imminent fear of death and drowning.
I have no idea what you're getting with your suicide comments so until you clarify I can't really respond.
Why is this conflict taking so long? Because we are un-welcomed occupiers. We are NOT weak. We have the bravest and most powerful military the world has ever seen and unfortunately they are led by less than honorable civilian commanders who refused to listen to their generals pre-war recommendations about requiring 2 to 3 times the number of troops on the ground as we brought.
Your logic is flawed. You can insult me and call me a wimp all you want. I probably am. I'm not nearly as tough as many men. I'm proud and I will never back down, but tough is a relative term. Behind a keyboard on the internet, I'm sure you think you are tough. And I hope you are. This country needs toughness and resolve. We need people willing to stand up for what is right and what is moral. During times of crisis it is MOST important that we take the sometimes hard road of keeping our dignity, adhering to the rule of law and the Constitution. I hope that you and many more will stand strong. - shipwreck58, on 12/19/2008, -2/+7It is time for the charges to be drawn up against Cheny and Bush and Rumsfield for treason as well as other violations of the Constitution they swore to protect and defend.
- jgzman, on 12/19/2008, -1/+6Your point is irrelevant. Nuking Hiroshima and Firebombing Dresden were borderline atrocities. Do we use that as a reason not to prosecute lesser horrors?
- Bones97698, on 12/19/2008, -4/+9dugg for Carl Levin being a badass
- kismetropolis, on 12/19/2008, -2/+6There you have it, admitted war criminal. From his own lips.
Now "are we going to do anything about it?" is the big question. - tamman2000, on 12/19/2008, -0/+4I think we should send him to the Hague... I hope the see to it that he gets what is coming to him...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 206 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is