Bush knowingly ordered torture

[Harte]

Wiki;

The Geneva convention clearly prohibits the use of torture against Civilians and enemy combatants. Its not really ambigious on the matter. George Bush attempted to side step the Geneva convention by using the term "unlawful combatant", a term with no legal standing in international law.

If you can be so ignorant of the Geneva convention its not surprising you would support the use of torture.

The USA has openly declared in its actions over the last decade that no international treaty is binding on itself. Maybe Americans should try to remember that when they consider travel abroad.

Br Cornelius

From your quote:

"civilian persons who take no part in hostilities, and who, while they reside in the zones, perform no work of a military character

Persons captured on the battlefield and subjected to EI were NOT protected, as your own source clearly states.

These persons were not part of any recognized armed force. They did not display any scrap of a uniform of any recognized armed force. They were, in fact, civilians who did regularly "take part in hostilities" and "perform(ed) work of a military character."

Dream your dream. I prefer reality.

Harte

[Guest]

From your quote:

Persons captured on the battlefield and subjected to EI were NOT protected, as your own source clearly states.

These persons were not part of any recognized armed force. They did not display any scrap of a uniform of any recognized armed force. They were, in fact, civilians who did regularly "take part in hostilities" and "perform(ed) work of a military character."

Dream your dream. I prefer reality.

Harte

How does that cover the many people who are purely citizens and never took part in any military operation - formal; or informal. The Geneva convention prohibits torture of civilians.

Most of the people subjected to extrordinary rendition have never been shown to have any terrrorist or military affiliations.

Br Cornelius

[Guest]

Seems like the 'masses' were celebrating the death of Thatcher pretty well.

I celebrated. Hateful women who destroyed lives and set the train running to destroy the UK as a viable country. Nice work.

The wicked witch is dead .....

Br Cornelius

[Harte]

How does that cover the many people who are purely citizens and never took part in any military operation - formal; or informal. The Geneva convention prohibits torture of civilians.

Most of the people subjected to extrordinary rendition have never been shown to have any terrrorist or military affiliations.

Br Cornelius

Please list the names of the civilians who underwent EI that never participated or aided in any military (or paramilitary - since there exists no official military for radicals) operation.

In the meantime, I wonder if blowing up a grammar school bus counts as torture?

Harte

[RavenHawk]

I celebrated. Hateful women who destroyed lives and set the train running to destroy the UK as a viable country. Nice work.

The wicked witch is dead .....

On the contrary, she was a lady full of passion and love for her nation and tried to set it free. But like a solitary flower, it blooms and then eventually withers and dies. England is less viable today than it was then. But that’s what happens, a slow degradation.

You have a very destructive worldview. What the EU should do is split Europe into two camps, one would be Socialism and the other would be a free market under a Republic and see what happens in the next 50 years. Oh wait, they did that. The Socialist half was also known as the Soviet Bloc and East Germany was the showcase piece of what happened. Of what is happening now for all of Europe. And the US is close behind. At what point will you see that your worldview is a failure? Someone should figure that out soon and start turning things around before it’s too late.

[Guest]

On the contrary, she was a lady full of passion and love for her nation and tried to set it free. But like a solitary flower, it blooms and then eventually withers and dies. England is less viable today than it was then. But that's what happens, a slow degradation.

You have a very destructive worldview. What the EU should do is split Europe into two camps, one would be Socialism and the other would be a free market under a Republic and see what happens in the next 50 years. Oh wait, they did that. The Socialist half was also known as the Soviet Bloc and East Germany was the showcase piece of what happened. Of what is happening now for all of Europe. And the US is close behind. At what point will you see that your worldview is a failure? Someone should figure that out soon and start turning things around before it's too late.

You analysis of Europe is flawed to the core. The dominant form of government is social democratic - which takes the best of socialism and capitalism and makes something better.

Thatcher broke the social contract with Britains citizens and set in train the bubble burst scenario we are living with today. Free markets without constraints, as you advocate, have always lead to the place we are now - economic ruin and massive wealth disparity.

The balance has currently swung to NeoLiberalism, but its inherent flaws and weaknesses will inevitably cause it to swing back again. Lets hope it finds the middle ground and we can move beyond hollow rhetoric of perfect capitalist and socialist states that never were and never can be.

Br Cornelius

Edited April 19, 2013 by Guest

[Babe Ruth]

Please list the names of the civilians who underwent EI that never participated or aided in any military (or paramilitary - since there exists no official military for radicals) operation.

In the meantime, I wonder if blowing up a grammar school bus counts as torture?

Harte

How can blowing up a grammar school be torture?

Torture is assault on a person, an individual.

Blowing up a grammar school, is demolition of a building.

I can understand how a person defending the Bush/Yoo sophistry has trouble with the language and logic, but gee.....

[RavenHawk]

You analysis of Europe is flawed to the core.

Really? You are so funny…

The dominant form of government is social democratic –

Correct and one would have thought Man would have caught on by now. Our Founding Fathers talked about this trap. It was one of the main reasons behind our Revolution.

which takes the best of socialism and capitalism and makes something better.

No, it doesn’t make something better. Anytime you mix Socialism with anything, it degrades the whole. That has been the case proven throughout history. The only question is how long till failure? After the Great Wars, you’d think that Europe would have learned how to keep their Freedom but all they did was exchange one form of Socialism (Monarchy) through a transitional period of another form(s) (Nazism, Fascism, and Communism), finally to Social Democracies. Entire peoples are still enslaved. And it’s not much better here as Socialism has been creeping into our system for over a Century now. Hindenburg released an ugly virus on the world and it would appear that soon we are all going to pay the price.

Thatcher broke the social contract with Britains citizens and set in train the bubble burst scenario we are living with today.

She broke the strangle hold that the unions had. Deregulated the banks. Encouraged privatization of state owned companies. All the things needed to build up the wealth of a nation. One of her most famous quotes is “sooner or later, you’re going to run out of someone else’s money”. Now it is clear she is talking about when Socialism controls the purse strings and what happens. That is the scenario you are living with today. We are seeing those fruits ripen. Wealth redistribution only dissipates the wealth. It’s not used, it’s wasted. The Wealthy cannot sustain that kind of confiscation for very long. Today, your bellies are full with somebody else’s money but some day soon you will hunger for freedom just as what happened in Eastern Europe under the Soviet Union.

Free markets without constraints, as you advocate, have always lead to the place we are now - economic ruin and massive wealth disparity.

This economic ruin comes from Socialism trying to control the game. Socialism and Capitalism are not compatible. The mindsets are completely opposite they are actually both greedy algorithms. It can only be one or the other. No, I do not advocate free markets without constraints. I advocate free markets without government infringement. There needs to be constraints and these constraints need to be controlled by the consumer and not the government. Now the government can aid to empower the consumer indirectly with education and information.

Here’s a clue. In a prosperous nation, there will always be wealth disparity. The rich will always get richer. But the poorer do not necessarily have to get poorer. Their rate of growth may not be as much. It is up to them. The act of the rich getting richer raises all boats provided everyone is aware of that opportunity. Nobody gives you anything, you have to go out and get it. No one is the same. Nobody shares the same talents. There will always be people that are more talented than you. When they use their talents to the fullest, they should expect to get more out of it. Money represents the expenditure of that talent. People with few talents will have little to show. Those with many talents will have much to show. Socialism is a means to steal this talent. It says to those that have a lot that their talent is not important. It disrespects them. This creates an atmosphere where the more talented will begin not to use their talents to the fullest. And in time, they use it less and less. It weakens the entire race. Jesus was big on us using our talents to their fullest to gain the fullest possible reward. Anything less is a sin. Not to squander them but if the reward is taken, what is the reason to use those talents? If one has the talent and takes the risk, then they should receive the full reward. That is so basic to the Human condition. Without it, we stagnate and die. Socialism makes people dependent on the government, taking away their talents and in the end is more cruel to those it says it is trying to help than the perception of wealth disparity. It strips them of their GOD given inalienable ability to support themselves.

The balance has currently swung to NeoLiberalism, but its inherent flaws and weaknesses will inevitably cause it to swing back again. Lets hope it finds the middle ground and we can move beyond hollow rhetoric of perfect capitalist and socialist states that never were and never can be.

Interesting that you speak of inherent flaws yet you can not see them in Socialism. I’ve spelled them out here and other places many times and you remain clueless. Swinging back and forth in Socialism is still Socialism. The middle ground would be to move away from anything that resembles any Oligarchy of any form. And yes, that includes Democracy. The perfect Socialist utopia is 100% control over the people and I’ve just explained why that doesn’t work. The perfect Capitalist system is chaos. It is up to the individual to find peace and harmony within. That is the only way Man is truly free. We are individuals in a community, not cogs in a collective.

[Guest]

RavenHawk, we could spend a long time discussing your irrational hatred of anything other than rabid capitalism, but I think we could all agree that its boring keeping discussing the shortcomings of your beliefs.

Br Cornelius

Edited April 20, 2013 by Guest

[Harte]

How can blowing up a grammar school be torture?

Torture is assault on a person, an individual.

Blowing up a grammar school, is demolition of a building.

I can understand how a person defending the Bush/Yoo sophistry has trouble with the language and logic, but gee.....

Good one!

Probably hurts the bus, dontcha think?

Harte

[Babe Ruth]

Harte

We can always take solace in the notion that if the President says it's OK, if the President says it's legal, if He says it is moral, then it most certainly is, eh?

[Harte]

Harte

We can always take solace in the notion that if the President says it's OK, if the President says it's legal, if He says it is moral, then it most certainly is, eh?

"Moral?"

Since when has any government been able to claim that trait?

Harte

[Ryinrea]

Torture at will, just don't complain when the so called dictators of the world do the very same to their people, then try and justify it for war.

Has it crossed your mind that those who are tortured typically have no evidence against them? That they're plucked from their lives and put through that hell because they have the wrong skin colour? Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Some of you Americans bang on about how important your constitution is until it suits you to disregard it.

Bush and his comrades should rot in a prison cell but we know *they* won't allow that. It's only naughty when we're talking about the middle east or North Korea.

I am an American and have been screaming at the top of my lungs they should be brought to justice for war crimes. I also agree that were not at Hitler level yet. I also would put Raven Hawk on my ignore list too since he seems to not have anything to say but insults and talking points.

My thoughts

Oh I am not socked at all that he knowingly did torture on people. He was Hypocritical, when it came to torture calling it special integrations. Why has he not been arrested for war crimes yet? .

[Dan'O]

[media=]

[/media]

[Bavarian Raven]

RavenHawk, we could spend a long time discussing your irrational hatred of anything other than rabid capitalism, but I think we could all agree that its boring keeping discussing the shortcomings of your beliefs.

Br Cornelius

And yet your beliefs are flawless? ROFL

[Babe Ruth]

"Moral?"

Since when has any government been able to claim that trait?

Harte

As far as the claim being truthful, it has probably never been able to make the claim.

But it does make the claim all the time, especially in these last several years. Don't you know we were helping the Iraqis when we invaded their country and destroyed its infrastructure? We were their salvation when we got rid of Saddam.

By waging our Global War On Terror, we are beneficent and just and moral for the entire world. Have you not been paying attention? The US is the agent of Good, and we will make that claim directly and indirectly pretty much anytime the government issues a press release.

[Babe Ruth]

Ryinrea

He has not been arrested for war crimes because the federal government, all 3 branches, are utterly corrupt and in contempt of the rule of law.

True, he was convicted in absentia in Malaysia, and is wanted for questioning in some other countries around the world, but here in the Land Of the Free and Home of the Brave, he is home free.

[Harte]

By waging our Global War On Terror, we are beneficent and just and moral for the entire world. Have you not been paying attention? The US is the agent of Good, and we will make that claim directly and indirectly pretty much anytime the government issues a press release.

You seem to me to be quite confused.

The U.S., like any other political state, takes care of its own interests. Nothing more.

It is in our interest to have a stable Middle East. It is sometimes just not in our power to assure this sort of stability.

The mistake most states make is the inability to recognize the above fact.

Harte

If we claim to be "moral," what happened to Somalia, etc.?

[RavenHawk]

RavenHawk, we could spend a long time discussing

We have. But you still haven’t shown any indication that you’ve understood.

your irrational hatred of anything other than rabid capitalism,

No, it is very rational and logical. It is rabid hatred, complete abhorrence of anything other than capitalism. The same hate that our Founding Fathers had. They warned us to keep Socialism out of our system. And today, we are failing them. I’ll include a key quote from my reply that obviously went over your head. ”No, I do not advocate free markets without constraints. I advocate free markets without government infringement.” We all know you don’t understand that, that’s ok.

but I think we could all agree that its boring keeping discussing the shortcomings of your beliefs.

It’s only boring to you because you have no counter to what I’ve stated, because it is over your head. I can never seem to get an intelligent conversation with you. You’re mindset prevents you from seeing the light. As BR said: “And yet your beliefs are flawless?” Socialism only has excuses. You still refuse to answer a very simple question. Simply because it would shatter your foundation.

[Babe Ruth]

You seem to me to be quite confused.

The U.S., like any other political state, takes care of its own interests. Nothing more.

It is in our interest to have a stable Middle East. It is sometimes just not in our power to assure this sort of stability.

The mistake most states make is the inability to recognize the above fact.

Harte

If we claim to be "moral," what happened to Somalia, etc.?

I'm not really confused. Probably I just have different values than you do?

Disappointed, might be a good way to describe me, disappointed that my government has become such a global force for evil and destruction. Disappointed that my paltry contribution to the federal treasury is used to fund illegal wars and immoral policy.

I recognize the right and duty of the state to look out for its own, but I do not acknowledge that military aggression and assaults against our own Constitution are legitimate ways to look out for one's own.

[AsteroidX]

This was not an eye opener. Ever since water boarding came to light and the incident at Abu-Grab prison in Iraq everyones known Government sanctioned torture has been the norm.

[Guest]

And yet your beliefs are flawless? ROFL

I am a pragmatist - whatever works. Its not founded on an immoveable ideology.

I even admit that my understanding is partial and evolving. Ravenhawk starts off from the belief that anything which he disagrees with is socialist - including me.

Maybe now you can spot the difference between RavenHawks dogma and the things I say. Probably not.

Br Cornelius

[Harte]

I'm not really confused. Probably I just have different values than you do?

Disappointed, might be a good way to describe me, disappointed that my government has become such a global force for evil and destruction. Disappointed that my paltry contribution to the federal treasury is used to fund illegal wars and immoral policy.

"Has become?"

It's never been any different. No governement has since the dawn of civilization.

I recognize the right and duty of the state to look out for its own, but I do not acknowledge that military aggression and assaults against our own Constitution are legitimate ways to look out for one's own.

Assaults on the constitution? You appear to have the vapors.

Here are some more assaults on the constitution:

Alien and sedition act.

Anti trust acts

Establishment of the Income Tax

Legalized abortion

I'm out of time and leaving work now, or I could give you twenty more.

So far, the constitution has survived.

Harte

Harte

[Harte]

I'm not really confused. Probably I just have different values than you do?

More likely, you're just younger and less cynical.

Note that, if I ran the world, it would be different (I would hope.)

Disappointed, might be a good way to describe me, disappointed that my government has become such a global force for evil and destruction. Disappointed that my paltry contribution to the federal treasury is used to fund illegal wars and immoral policy.

I got over that disappointment long ago.

Harte

[Babe Ruth]

I guess that's another difference between us--I'm still disappointed. I'm too much an idealist, I guess.

You make many good points in your posts above, and I agree with several.

As for "has become", I guess my idealist side clings to the spirit that drove the Nuremberg Trials. And very much to the spirit of Ike's Farewell Address. There was a time when we were the good guys. No, we were never perfect, simply because we are human. But we had principles and those principles fairly well drove government. After Ellsberg, for example, we actually did investigate and prosecute much of the mischief that led us to Vietnam and what we did there. After Manning, rather a divergent path. After ABu Ghraib, nothing but a few lowly enlisted men were punished.

Yes, we could both go on and on.

You're certainly right about the Alien & Sedition Acts.

But recognizing our imperfections is really not the same as criticizing poor governance or blandly accepting poor governance, or worse yet, excusing and defending illegal governance.