What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Private Online Shopping Clubs Work view!
howlifeworks.com - How to become a member and get discounts of up to 80% on must-have luxury goods
452 Comments
- ramilehti, on 04/19/2009, -25/+303They should start the investigation at the top and work their way down. All the way down.
Torture is illegal. Period. - travelon77, on 04/19/2009, -27/+184Obama, I like you but you better inundate yourself with international law, and specifically those the US is obliged to uphold. Looks like you may have to once again eat your words. PROSECUTE and teach them immoral bastards a lesson! Americans DO NOT APPROVE OF TORTURE, NO MATTER HOW YOU POWER MONGERS DEFINE IT.
- GeordieRacer, on 04/19/2009, -5/+118er...wasn't it against international law to torture people anyway?
Where was your outcry when it was all happening Manfred Nowak? - dreamtiger, on 04/18/2009, -7/+97Hot Potato!
- cjolley, on 04/19/2009, -16/+100Part of Obama's job is to restore the damage done by Bush Admin to America's reputation and that includes upholding laws that it has sought to enforce upon others. Milosevic anyone? He must, and he needs to park the ridiculous notion that Americans need to "come together and move ahead, not backwards". This isn't about Jon Benet. We're talking about torture, a crime against humanity, that is outlawed worldwide.
- TheTruth1, on 04/19/2009, -22/+85Haha. Do you people really think the US will ever allow "international law", whatever that means, to threaten its sovereignty? Honestly, folks, you can keep on dreaming, but that just will not happen. The UN will once again demonstrate its ineptitude to accomplish anything of substance. The UN is not powerful enough to carry out orders to the United States (or any other super power for that matter). It's a good thing, in my opinion. I'd much prefer the UN had less power than it has already.
- Dustin00, on 04/19/2009, -3/+60Start at the bottom -- nail the easy targets, then with those convictions and court evidence, work their way up to the harder targets.
- Bulletbillx, on 04/19/2009, -6/+56If we aren't prosecuting torturers including those just taking orders don't we owe all those Nazis we're hunting down to this day an apology?
- chthonical, on 04/19/2009, -1/+50I am inclined to agree. Start at the bottom and rally up to get more information to use against the people responsible. Don't give the soldier following orders a life sentence and the guy who gave a mandate 6 months and a slap on the wrist.
- adam07, on 04/19/2009, -2/+46I don't think that's how you use the word "inundate"...
- fatfreddyscat, on 04/19/2009, -8/+48I voted for change.
- poidh, on 04/19/2009, -5/+41If you want to reply to someone, then reply to them like I have done to you. That's what the reply function is there for.
Unless of course you want to be more visible and get more diggs. - Volath, on 04/19/2009, -1/+32Welcome to the UN!
- broncfan23, on 04/19/2009, -7/+37The UN is a joke, always has been, and always will be.
They can't even arrest al-Bashir for the horrors in Darfur, what makes anyone think they will lay a finger on any US citizen. - BrandonEagan, on 04/19/2009, -3/+32Well, CIA operatives who refused to engage in torture were never in any danger of getting thrown in Guantanamo. You've seen too many movies or something. Their careers might have been negatively affected, but they wouldn't have suffered any real penalties.
The other thing you seem to miss is that it was the low level operatives often chomping at the bit to use aggressive interrogation techniques, demanding permission or even taking action without permission. High level officials generally weren't demanding that operatives do this, but rather figuring out just how much of it to stop and to put some controls on it. - charm803, on 04/19/2009, -3/+30Well, that was quick! Obama has been in office for not even 100 days, and he is being called out on breaking international law.
Bush wasn't even called out after 8 years! - theonlywizdum, on 04/19/2009, -2/+27Nether does engrish.
- jfreeman, on 04/19/2009, -17/+42I don't give a ***** about "international law," and who in the hell is the UN to tell us what to do? Torturers should be prosecuted because they did something wrong, not because the UN demands it.
- TheTruth1, on 04/19/2009, -5/+30Chhhaaannnge....Chhannngee? Anybody got any Chhaannge?
- murdockat, on 04/19/2009, -18/+42I don't know, put yourself in the shoes of the low-level CIA pawns. You receive orders from the President of the United States to carry out torture. Are you going to disobey and risk getting thrown in Guantanamo? Punish the superiors for ordering the torture, not the pawns who were ordered to do so.
- mickstephenson, on 04/19/2009, -4/+281. Those laws we largely put forward by America.
2. UN Countries can exert their power through sanctions, as America has done to any country whose politics it didn't like for the last 60 years, the question is who is America to meddle in other countries affairs, and then whine like a spoilt child when they realise it works both ways. (Not that I am suggesting that's what America is doing, that's just your suggestion) - EarlOfLade, on 04/19/2009, -9/+32So USA does not have to follow international law because Al Qaeda is not a country who has signed the Geneva convention? Gotcha!
Now I'll start an organization and then I can torture Americans as much as I want since I didn't sign the Geneva convention, right?
You, sir, is a ***** idiot! - inactive, on 04/19/2009, -13/+34Well, I feel like I have a unique perspective to this. During my 8 years in the Navy, I was in situations, such as SERE school, in which I was waterboarded a total of 6 times. And it was the real deal, no taking it easy on us.
Waterboarding is to real torture what driving a golf cart is to driving. Yes, it sucks. Its uncomfortable. But is is a far cry from what most people, especially Diggers, think about it. When you are done being waterboarded, it takes about 5 minutes to feel perfectly fine again, when you are actually tortured, you usually won't survive more than an hour.
Real torture, and I know the left hates this, involves unbearable physical pain. I know its difficult to understand this from your studio apartment in San Francisco, but being uncomfortable, and in the most extreme pain that a human can experience, are actually two different things. You think there is no difference to causing discomfort and extreme pain? By this new definition of torture, almost everyone of us are guilty. Did your kid want that candybar and you said no? Torture. You caused them mental anguish by denying their human right to a sweet snack.
We need to make an absolute, no gray area, definition of what torture is. We can say any president is guilty of torture using the current definition. If you don't believe waterboarding was going on before Bush, then you need to get off the huffpo. I was waterboarded for the first time in 1998. But I guess if it happens to Americans, it isn't torture. - jfreeman, on 04/19/2009, -2/+22We prosecuted Nazis that claimed they were "just doing their jobs." It is not an excuse.
- AuditorTux, on 04/19/2009, -15/+34Finally, someone who uses their brain. International "law" is a nebulous thing at best. As much as they want to consider themselves, the "World Court" is not. As much as it seems to the contrary, there is no "agreement" whether what the US did amounted to true torture. Torture is only that which causes lasting, physical pain. Ripping off fingernails, stretching, etc. As horrible as everyone seems to think waterboarding is, once they stopped, the guy was back to normal. Torture intentionally does not include psychological or emotional stress.
- JackSchittt, on 04/19/2009, -7/+24You're right, but expect to get dugg down by a whole bunch of people who think that screaming buzzwords like "BUSH CRIME FAMILY" makes them sound like they're accomplishing something.
FACT: Bush and those who were under him will NEVER be subject to any meaningful* trial. You don't have to like it, but you do have to accept it and move on with your lives. All the bitching and moaning and posting on Digg in the world will not change that.
The US has already thumbed its nose at the UN before, though admittedly in a case that was less important. The UN has already ruled that the US ban on online poker/gambling is in violation of international law and has demanded that the US lift it. The US response was basically the equivalent of "Um.....No. The ban stays. What are you going to do about it?". The UN basicall stuck its tail between its legs, whimpered away, and said "Well, we tried".
The UN is all bark and no bite. Countries like North Korea have long since learned this, which is why they continue to give the rest of the world the middle finger. The US knows this too, which is why it uses the UN to its advantage when it suits them, and completely ignores the UN whenever it doesn't.
*things like Spain putting on some trial for some of Bush's underlings doesn't count because Spain has no way of enforcing whatever the court rules, which makes this "trial" little more than circus spectacle. No country with any competent leadership is EVER going to arrest any US diplomat because of this. To do so would be political and economic suicide. - Gonthim, on 04/19/2009, -2/+18Fine Zarchon, lets imagine that.
Question 1: Is this a time sensitive thing? If you're trying to play the last-minute Jack Bauer thing, anyone could hold out. My grandmother could hold out against torture for 3 hours to let a plan go off without a hitch.* She'll give you a bunch of false information, and then laugh her ass off the next day when her friends blow up the towers.
Question 2: If you don't know the when and how of the attack, who are you going to confirm it with? Is there another guy being tortured that you'll use to corroborate the story?
Question 3: How do you know the guy knows anything? You can't be sure, obviously, because he hasn't told you anything. If you had overheard him talking to someone about the when and how, you wouldn't need to torture him for it. You just suspect that he knows something. Which means any information he gives you could be false. But you have to treat them all seriously.
Question 4: What if you grabbed the wrong guy? Then you suspect that he knows something, but he doesn't actually know anything. And you're going to torture him to get what you suspect he has. Good luck with that.
It boils down to the fact that you can't trust any information you get. He'll give you false leads. Name fake people. Give you the wrong times and places. If possible, he'll try and get you to go after his enemies. You might not even have the right guy being tortured and you'd never know. You'll find that out in a few weeks when the guy you were really after goes thru with his attack while you're sitting in a basement with his waiter or something.
*: Assuming my grandmother was an ideological or religious terrorist. - Skooma714, on 04/19/2009, -2/+17Laws are only for the little people to follow.
- Justin676, on 04/19/2009, -6/+21HAHAHAHAHA him being to decent? Give me a break. You don't really think that do you?
This is a textbook case of "I don't want to prosecute the people on the other side of the isle because it will no doubt come out that people on my side of the isle who support ME will were responsible too."
Too decent? Ha. That'll be something to laugh about later. - TheTruth1, on 04/19/2009, -7/+20Just as a clarification, I'm not a fan of either Obama or Bush. I think they're two birds on the same rotten tree, just on different branches. However, I think it would be insanity to allow our citizens to be extradited to some international court.
- kurttrail, on 04/19/2009, -1/+14@Zarchon
Gonthim has already shot your argument to *****.
What I want to know how can you live with yourself being so frightened that you'd rather sink to the level of a terrorist, than be a moral person who eschews all terroristic acts, including torture?
Rush was sorta right when he said torture works and using McCain as an example. Torture works in getting people to say what the torturers have predetermined that they want their victims to say, but then that kind of torture is more about dehumanizing the victim, than eliciting any real information.
How can you live with yourself following in the footsteps of the Romans who tortured Yeshua, the Spanish Inquisition, the Nazis, the Commies, and all the others throughout history, who used institutionalized torture as a means to an end?
Has your fear so corrupted your morals?
Personally, I'd rather be a dead idiot, than living in so much fear that I'd rather corrupt my morals, than stand up against my fears! - EarlOfLade, on 04/19/2009, -4/+17So...
What will USA say when some Americans are tortured by some foreign power tomorrow? It's not like USA can condemn another nation for torturing Americans when they will not prosecute Americans who torture.
USA just lost their standing and it's now free for all to torture Americans without the fear of reprisals. - revisrev, on 04/19/2009, -1/+14Yes.
- inactive, on 04/19/2009, -4/+17At the risk of Godwin - claiming "I was just following orders" didn't wash when we tried the Nazi war criminals. It was a ***** excuse then, it is a ***** excuse now.
We hanged those *****, btw. - inactive, on 04/19/2009, -2/+14I think I was misunderstood. My comment was never "waterboarding is not torture." I'm 100% behind labeling it as torture. My original point was that if it is torture, then many other things are as well.
If waterboarding on American's was torture in Viet-nam, then we damn sure shouldn't be doing it to our prisoners.
All I can do is speak from personal experience. When it happened to me, while it did suck, It wasn't as bad as many think. That doesn't mean I'm saying its not torture, but if it is torture, its on the low end, the opposite spectrum of shoving bamboo splinters under your fingernails, or other excruciating forms. - jgtg32a, on 04/19/2009, -6/+18So did I, I wrote in "None of the Above"
Which is the only way real change is going to happen in this country. - MWeather, on 04/19/2009, -2/+14The constitution says that treaties we sign are the law of the land so long as they don't violate the constitution. That's why the UN can tell us what to do: We agreed to let them, and that agreement is legally binding.
- faskippy, on 04/19/2009, -2/+13Oh ***** please.
- IKORKYI, on 04/19/2009, -1/+12obama has broken international law as much as the UN did when they ignored the surfacing of it when Bush was in office.
i mean, the American people have been arguing about waterboarding since like 2007
at least the memo's are shaming all those involved...except cheney...he's still proud of them...which is scary in itself. - BrandonEagan, on 04/19/2009, -6/+17No country follows international law at all. In fact, the U.S. is the only country that even gives any effort to it. International law is really a big crock, with many treaties and conventions being passed that are literally impossible to comply with. The U.S. often objects and doesn't sign on, and gets reamed for it, but then the signatories call the "law" "merely aspirational" and refuse to follow it after signing it.
- arvvvs, on 04/19/2009, -5/+16And toture doesn't wokr
- inactive, on 04/19/2009, -4/+14Watch out for the UN! They might sanction you!
- motters, on 04/19/2009, -5/+15Whether Americans like it or not, as a signatory to treaties which make torture illegal, legally the Obama administration cannot just pardon offenders or look the other way. I think the crux of the matter here is that the US is not a signatory to the international criminal court, so even if serious human rights violations were committed under the Bush administration if these are not dealt with at a national level there probably are no other avenues to bring prosecutions (except perhaps retrospectively at some point in the future).
- Karmashock, on 04/19/2009, -4/+14First, you've clearly never read the conventions because they explicitly do not protect spies, sapers, terrorists, insurgents, or pirates. So, you're ignorant right out of the gate... that isn't an insult, it's a fact that you just proved.
Second, if the US signs a treaty then we're obligated to uphold it. We did not sign the international criminal court treaty and thus are not obligated to it. The fact that we did not means that actually "Americans" are with me and not you. Because if they were with you, WE would have signed it. We didn't. So on top of being ignorant, you're in the minority.
Third, your whole "if you disagree you should leave the country" line is comical. What country do you think you're talking about? This a free republic nitwit... I have a right to disagree with you even if I'm wrong. And since you're clearly a fairly clueless individual I have a responsibility as a person with a functioning human brain to disagree with you.
In short, try again twit. - EarlOfLade, on 04/19/2009, -3/+13Great!
Then I guess you have no problems when nation A next time torture and behead Americans. Not like you have the moral high ground or something.
You sir, is bumbling frotting moron! - wissler, on 04/19/2009, -4/+13This makes Obama a co-conspirator.
- sfelton, on 04/19/2009, -0/+9And you got change, change of appearance.
- henri915, on 04/19/2009, -4/+13Why doesn't the U.S. follow international law just as well as the french do?
Raison D'Etat is still alive and well... - Guydevice, on 04/19/2009, -0/+8"Start at the bottom...work their way up to the harder targets."
"I am inclined to agree."
See what you did there? -
Show 51 - 100 of 459 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is