Author |
Topic: Rigged election and manipulated poll (Read 957 times) |
|
kathaksung
Full Member
member is offline
 
Posts: 116
|
 |
Re: Rigged election and manipulated poll
« Reply #15 on: Apr 27th, 2009, 7:48pm » |
|
Value for torture
It's kind of funny to argue on such a moral topic. Morality can't be traded. But American enable it with a value.
Torture/waterboarding works. Yes, so are other illegal things. You will have proof that Rape/murder works too. And you can defend that FBI imposed very tight restrictions on the use of torture.....
Only please you don't accuse Hitler for Facist or Saddam for torture, because they just do same thing you approved.
And because some people who think they are the outlaw and can do what ever they want to and justify their crime by "it works" or "value".
That's why President Kennedy was assassinated, so was Rober Kennedy. And Dr. Martin L. King. Because for insiders, the victim are " subject to additional limits" and up to someone's "value".
Thanks for those who boast "patriot" admit of the two standards. Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tze Tung and Kin Jong Ir gave themseves the same right openly. That's totalitarian. Bush is justified by someone like Yoo, that's democratic. Is there any difference when they did same thing? In the name of value? Or you will find some excuse to say if it was done by "them", then it's savage, inhuman but when "I" did it, it's for the value of ... eh "pratriotism", "democracy"?
|
|
 Logged
|
|
|
|
kathaksung
Full Member
member is offline
Posts: 116
|
|
Re: Rigged election and manipulated poll
« Reply #16 on: May 11th, 2009, 4:36pm » |
|
Quote:WASHINGTON (Reuters)
The Times said a 2005 Justice Department memorandum showed that Abu Zubaydah, the first prisoner questioned in the CIA's overseas detention program in August 2002, was waterboarded 83 times, although a former CIA officer had told news media he had been subjected to only 35 seconds underwater before talking.
The Justice Department memo said the simulated drowning technique was used on Mohammed 183 times in March 2003. The Times said some copies of the memos appeared to have the number of waterboardings redacted while others did not.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE53H0DG20090420 |
|
The purpose of torture
Zhubadh talked after 35 seconds. Why still being waterboarded 83 times? --CIA wanted some "desired words". What kind of "desired words"?
Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times in March 2003. -- Still remember the time to invade Iraq? March 23 2003.
Now read the following comment, you know what the purpose for torture:
Quote:The Rachel Madow show (MSNBC) tonight interviewed Pulitzer prize winning author Ron Suskind (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Suskind> who alleges that the Bush White House authorized torture, not to ward off future terrorist attacks in the U.S. like they claim, but to force lies out of suspects, connecting Saddam Hussein's Iraq with the 9/11/2001 attack! These "Confessions" would be used to justify the Iraq war. |
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
kathaksung
Full Member
member is offline
Posts: 116
|
|
Re: Rigged election and manipulated poll
« Reply #17 on: Jun 7th, 2009, 3:54pm » |
|
To legalize the torture, government issued document in mid 2002. Then we saw Libi, Zhubadah, and Mohammed were tortured until March 2003 when Bush invaded Iraq. Obviously to force "desired words" from the victime to justify Iraq war.
Bush's 'Smoking Gun' Witness Found Dead
Global Research , May 13, 2009
IndictBushNow.org
A prisoner who was horribly tortured in 2002 until he agreed - at the demand of Bush torturers - to say that al-Qaeda was linked to Saddam Hussein is suddenly dead. Several weeks ago, Human Rights Watch investigators discovered the missing inmate and talked to him. He had been secretly transferred by the administration to a prison in Libya after having been held by the CIA both in secret “black hole prisons” and in Egypt.
Under conditions of extreme torture, the prisoner, Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi, agreed in 2002 to supply the Bush-ordered interrogators what they sought as a political cover for Bush’s marketing of the pending war of aggression against Iraq. Mr. Libi agreed to tell them whatever they wanted in exchange for an end to the torture. The now famous Torture Memos providing legal cover for the torture were written at the same time starting in the summer of 2002.
Libi’s tortured and knowingly fabricated testimony was the source of information used by Bush to sell the war to the U.S. Senate, and the source for Colin Powell’s bogus and lying presentation to the United Nations in 2003.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice are now running around saying that the torture regime “protected the country from terrorist attack.” But the torture was used for the personal political goals of Bush and Cheney: namely, to sell their Iraq invasion to a very skeptical and disbelieving country.
Having been discovered by human rights investigators two weeks ago, Mr. Libi’s story coincided with the release of the Torture Memos and the growing clamor for criminal prosecutions of Bush officials.
His testimony is the smoking gun that would reveal that the torture regime was not for “national security” but for the personal political aims of Bush and Cheney.
He was Exhibit A in the indictment that alleges that tortured confessions and the contrived legal justifications of torture set up by Justice Department lawyers in July/August 2002 were central to the launch of the war against Iraq.
Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died and tens of thousands of U.S. service members have either been killed or badly wounded in a war that was based on lies fortified and promoted by the most sadistic torture.
Mr. Libi is suddenly dead. A Libyan “newspaper source” says that his death is an apparent suicide. His friends don’t believe that.
We are building a movement for the appointment of a Special Prosecutor. This is not a political choice. It is a legal imperative. Mr. Libi’s death must be the first business of the investigation. When other prisoners who had been kept at secret sites were sent to Guantanamo, the Bush administration and the CIA intentionally kept Mr. Libi from being part of that transfer. Mr. Libi was publicly stating that the Iraq-al-Qaeda links attributed to him from his torture sessions were not true.
“Who was the beneficiary” from his death? Why was he spirited away by the Bush administration to hidden foreign prisons after he recanted his tortured testimony and revealed that he was forced to make false statements about Iraq
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13613
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
kathaksung
Full Member
member is offline
Posts: 116
|
|
Re: Rigged election and manipulated poll
« Reply #18 on: Jun 24th, 2009, 7:13pm » |
|
Waterboarding as Torture in U.S. Law
The former Bush/Cheney administration and its apologists in the media continue to claim that it is an open question as to whether “waterboarding” (immobilizing a person, pouring water over his/her face and breathing passages, suffocating him/her and leading him/her to believe he/she will die) is torture and forbidden in U.S. law. The question is ridiculous.
Waterboarding (as it is now called) is one of the oldest known forms of torture. In the 1500s it was used in the Spanish Inquisition.
In 1898, an American soldier (Captain Edwin F. Glenn) used the technique (then called the “water cure”) on a prisoner captured in the Philippines during the Spanish-American War. When reported, Americans were shocked and protests led to Elihu Root, U.S. Secretary of War (now called Secretary of Defense) ordered Glenn court-martialed in 1902 and imprisoned. A general under whose command this and other tortures occurred was court-martialed and removed from the army.
During WWII, both the Gestapo and some Japanese soldiers used waterboarding as a form of torture. The Japanese were tried after the war and at least one hung by U.S. forces for waterboarding U.S. Airman Chase J. Nielsen.
Waterboarding was declared illegal by U.S. generals during the Vietnam War. When a journalist photgraphed an American soldier helping two South Vietnamese soldiers waterboard a captured North Vietnames soldier, and published in the Washington Post in 1968, it caused outrage across the United States. The soldier was court-martialed and dishonorably discharged from the U.S. army.
In 1983, Texas sheriff James Parker was sentenced to ten years in prison and his deputies to four years apiece for waterboarding prisoners. When his case came up for clemency years later, then Gov. George W. Bush refused to pardon Sheriff Parker, specifically stating that no one is above the law.
In 1988, U.S. President Ronald Reagan signed the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment, or Punishment of 1984. It was ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1994.
Since the U.S. Constitution classifies all treaties that the U.S. signs and ratifies as sharing the Constitution’s status as “highest law of the land,” then the U.S. must follow the Convention Against Torture’s provisions, including those which demand prosecution of those who authorize and those who implement torture. It also forbids the U.S. to ship people to other countries that practice torture (”rendition”) and the Bush administration was guilty of that, also.
The reluctance of the Obama administration to try those responsible is rooted in several factors:
Such trials would be highly controversial. The Washington Post published a poll today showing that Americans are about evenly divided over whether or not to have such trials. Although law enforcement is not decided by popularity, the Obama administration has to pass many pieces of legislation that will take all the public support he can muster.
The Republicans have already hinted that if the Obama administration tries anyone in the Bush administration, they will consider it “engaging in criminalizing policy differences” and they will investigate Democratic administrations when they get back in power.
But the consequences of refusing to try these cases could be even worse:
Members of the Bush administration could be indicted by the International Criminal Court or by the courts of other nations under the “global jurisdiction” where human rights violations are concerned. This would put the Obama administration in the awkward position of either arresting and extraditing former Bush officials, including, maybe the former president himself or of defying international law. If nothing else came of that, it would, at the very least, impede Obama’s attempts to rebuild America’s alliances abroad. It also undermines his attempts to re-set our relations with the Muslim world.
Failing to prosecute violaters of human rights, no matter how highly placed, invites human rights abuses on Americans traveling abroad, whether civilian or military.
If members of the Bush administration travel abroad, they could be arrested and prosecuted by others with potential for a huge international incident.
Failure to prosecute violaters of human rights in the Bush administration makes it likely that a future administration will repeat these practices. In fact, by calling them “policy differences” GOP torture apologists are already hinting that they will restart torture when their party wins the White House, again. And their horror at the release of the torture memos as “exposing to our enemies the limits of American practices” seem to indicate they will try other practices in their place (electric shock to the genitals? bamboo shoots under fingernails? ).
Not too long ago (before 11 Sept. 2001), this was not controversial. No one argued for the U.S. using torturing. Nor did anyone argue that “enhanced interrogation techniques” were not really torture. This was not a liberal vs. conservative, left vs. right, or Democratic vs. Republican issue. So, the current debate means that America has lost its way morally. To that extent, the use of these torture techniques by the Bush administration and the fact that Americans find the use of torture or prosecution of torturers controversial, means that the terrorists have won-at least in part. Trying torturers, no matter who they are, is necessary for us to regain some degree of moral clarity.
http://levellers.wordpress.com/2009/04/26/waterboarding-as-torture-in-us-law/
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
kathaksung
Full Member
member is offline
Posts: 116
|
|
Re: Rigged election and manipulated poll
« Reply #19 on: Jul 11th, 2009, 2:07pm » |
|
Spy country
FBI boss defends use of mosque spies
Associated Press
Tuesday, 9 June 2009
FBI director Robert Mueller defended the agency's use of informants within US mosques amid complaints that worshippers and clerics were being targeted instead of possible terrorists.
Mr Mueller's comments came days after a Michigan Muslim organisation asked the US Justice Department to investigate complaints that the FBI was asking the faithful to spy on Islamic leaders and worshippers.
Similar alarm followed the disclosure earlier this year that the FBI planted a spy in Southern California mosques.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/fbi-boss-defends-use-of-mosque-spies-1700367.html
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
kathaksung
Full Member
member is offline
Posts: 116
|
|
Re: Rigged election and manipulated poll
« Reply #20 on: Nov 2nd, 2009, 2:49pm » |
|
Obama and Nobel Piece Prize
The US is going to start war on Iran for the reason of patro-dollar. Bush activated Iraq war for the same reason. Now it's Obama's turn.
European doesn't want war base on their opinion. That's why they give Obama the peace prize - wish to stop the war before it happens.
It really embarrassed Obama and the US Inside group. That's why there are so many negative comments on the reward Obama gets. It will make the war intention more difficult to come true.
Now will they still start the war? Your bet.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
_
