Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
Ashotep

Bush knowingly ordered torture

118 posts in this topic

A nonpartisan group led by a former top Bush administration official concluded a two-year review on Tuesday that finds the former president and his top advisers knowingly ordered interrogation techniques that U.S. officials have previously referred to as torture.

Nonpartisan review concludes Bush knowingly ordered torture

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For shame Mr. President. We're supposed to be the good guys.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was even known for war crimes. Yet nothing ever happens to the bad guys at the top

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For shame Mr. President. We're supposed to be the good guys.

Ha, the west ain't been the "good guys" since World War 2.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't there some countries that will arrest him if he goes there for war crimes?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was even known for war crimes. Yet nothing ever happens to the bad guys at the top if they happen to be the American President or British Prime Minister.

Fixed that for you.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha, the west ain't been the "good guys" since World War 2.

As apposed to who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

As apposed to who?

Well, I don't know how many other countries would get away with an illegal invasion, killing more civilians than so called terrorists, the best part of the story being that those innocent people were killed because their puny existence got in the way of oil. It's not quite Hitler level of jackass but give it a couple more invasions (Iran, North Korea) and we're getting there.

As a sidenote: I'd be surprised if anybody was themselves surprised at this Bush revelation. No good scumbag.

Edited by Heaven Is A Halfpipe
9 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I don't know how many other countries would get away with an illegal invasion, killing more civilians than so called terrorists, and actually get away with it - the best part of the story being that those people were killed because their puny existence got in the way of oil. It's not quite Hitler level of jackass but give it a couple more invasions (Iran, North Korea) and we're getting there.

As a sidenote: I'd be surprised if anybody was themselves surprised at this Bush revelation. No good scumbag.

Good point. Its also fair to say that the average citizen in the west is unaware of the west brutal impact to average citizens of affected countries.

Compare these two articles from CNN today. The first about "militant youths" in Pakistan, which dismisses the deaths of woman and children in a single sentance.

Ninety-nine percent of the boys, I am told, have never heard of Osama bin Laden, despite the fact he was killed by U.S. Navy SEALs in the next valley over from here. What has radicalized these boys instead, the school's director says, is what turns teenagers the world over to crime: poverty, poor education, limited prospects and often lack of parental control.

bttn_close.gif

130208133414-pkg-eitm-orig-cnn-explains-drones-00015903-story-body.jpg

It is in this setting that the boys have made ready recruits for Taliban scouts who wean them on tales of the U.S. drone strikes that have killed scores of Pakistani women and children over the past few years.

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/14/world/asia/pakistan-swat-valley-school/

Compared to this;

Monday's terror attack on the Boston Marathon killed an 8-year-old boy watching with his family, a 29-year-old woman loved by her family and friends and a Boston University graduate student near the finish line with two friends. More than 180 others were wounded, many losing limbs as a result of horrific twin blasts near the race's finish line, in the heart of the city

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/16/us/boston-marathon-explosions/index.html

Were the Pakistani woman and children not "loved by her family and friends"? Who is really "weened" on idiological "tales"?

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good point. Its also fair to say that the average citizen in the west is unaware of the west brutal impact to average citizens of affected countries.

Very true, and the media whitewashes everything like in the two articles you posted.

Check out:http://nopewar.wordpress.com/2012/12/01/us-drone-crashes-mount-at-civilian-airports/

According to this article, Bush's drone strikes killed 438 people, and Obama's have killed 2,152 people. This includes women and children. Most killed are civilians... :no:

An October report on the secret U.S. drone war in Pakistan says the attacks have killed far more civilians than acknowledged, traumatized a nation and undermined international law. In “Living Under Drones,” researchers conclude the drone strikes “terrorize men, women, and children, giving rise to anxiety and psychological trauma among civilian communities.”

Also: http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/25/world/asia/pakistan-us-drone-strikes/

U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan have killed far more people than the United States has acknowledged, have traumatized innocent residents and largely been ineffective, according to a new study released Tuesday.

The study by Stanford Law School and New York University's School of Law calls for a re-evaluation of the practice, saying the number of "high-level" targets killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low -- about 2%.

The report accuses Washington of misrepresenting drone strikes as "a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the U.S. safer," saying that in reality, "there is significant evidence that U.S. drone strikes have injured and killed civilians."

It also casts doubts on Washington's claims that drone strikes produce zero to few civilian casualties and alleges that the United States makes "efforts to shield the drone program from democratic accountability."

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't there some countries that will arrest him if he goes there for war crimes?

Yes, I think Switerzerland is one such country. He had to change his travel plans a few summers ago for just that reason.

Further, I think it was Malaysia who tried him and Cheney in absentia for war crimes, and convicted them both.

Bush, Cheney, Yoo, and a host of others were responsible for the crimes of torture and more.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha, the west ain't been the "good guys" since World War 2.

Maybe not necessarily the West but America has been the good guy since at least WWII. I suppose you were one of those that cheered when Margaret Thatcher died? American Hegemony has given the world relative peace in the nuclear age.

Well, I don't know how many other countries would get away with an illegal invasion,

Another misinformed stooge. The Iraq invasion was probably the most legal war in history. Bush did his homework and every “I” was dotted and every “T” crossed. The only thing you can really blame Bush for is that he over hyped the war and Phase IV of OPPlan 1003 was not very well thought out. But there’s an axiom that states that when the shooting starts, you can throw even the best laid plans out the window.

killing more civilians than so called terrorists,

That unfortunately happens in any and all conflicts. Between 80 and 100 thousand Iraqis died and most of them were insurgents or civilians that died from insurgent actions. Despite popular belief, our forces kept collateral damage down to an absolute minimum. From your statements, I can only conclude that all you have access to was the MSM. My brother experienced this stuff first hand. Almost everything he relayed to me was the exact opposite from what the MSM reported. Typical.

the best part of the story being that those innocent people were killed because their puny existence got in the way of oil.

Still quaffing the koolaid. This was not a conquest for oil but oil does play a part. Can you imagine what the price of oil would have been if Saddam stayed in power and was allowed to develop his WMDs even further? Why do you think Chirac pushed France to build up their nuclear plant infrastructure while supporting Saddam?

Of course, Bush had Cheney and Halliburton but think about it. If it wasn’t Halliburton, it would have been somebody else. The more curious thing to look into is the price fixing going on under the current Administration. He has said on several occasions that he wants the price of oil to go up so that we would have to deal with his pet green energy companies. Energy sources are pretty important to the entire world and those in power are going to manipulate it.

It's not quite Hitler level of jackass but give it a couple more invasions (Iran, North Korea) and we're getting there.

WoW! How totally unaware you are. You would compare the possible (if needed) invasion of Iran or NK to Hitler’s conquest of Europe? What is the British educational system teaching? I think you need to change halfpipe to bong.

As a sidenote: I'd be surprised if anybody was themselves surprised at this Bush revelation. No good scumbag.

I never was. But then I support torture. It is an integral part of war. Now to clarify, I support data mining as opposed to what most people are brainwashed to believe that torture only fulfills the sadistic fancy of a few.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a suprise to no one. I bet our curret president does the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Maybe not necessarily the West but America has been the good guy since at least WWII. I suppose you were one of those that cheered when Margaret Thatcher died? American Hegemony has given the world relative peace in the nuclear age.

Another misinformed stooge. The Iraq invasion was probably the most legal war in history. Bush did his homework and every "I" was dotted and every "T" crossed. The only thing you can really blame Bush for is that he over hyped the war and Phase IV of OPPlan 1003 was not very well thought out. But there's an axiom that states that when the shooting starts, you can throw even the best laid plans out the window.

That unfortunately happens in any and all conflicts. Between 80 and 100 thousand Iraqis died and most of them were insurgents or civilians that died from insurgent actions. Despite popular belief, our forces kept collateral damage down to an absolute minimum. From your statements, I can only conclude that all you have access to was the MSM. My brother experienced this stuff first hand. Almost everything he relayed to me was the exact opposite from what the MSM reported. Typical.

Still quaffing the koolaid. This was not a conquest for oil but oil does play a part. Can you imagine what the price of oil would have been if Saddam stayed in power and was allowed to develop his WMDs even further? Why do you think Chirac pushed France to build up their nuclear plant infrastructure while supporting Saddam?

Of course, Bush had Cheney and Halliburton but think about it. If it wasn't Halliburton, it would have been somebody else. The more curious thing to look into is the price fixing going on under the current Administration. He has said on several occasions that he wants the price of oil to go up so that we would have to deal with his pet green energy companies. Energy sources are pretty important to the entire world and those in power are going to manipulate it.

WoW! How totally unaware you are. You would compare the possible (if needed) invasion of Iran or NK to Hitler's conquest of Europe? What is the British educational system teaching? I think you need to change halfpipe to bong.

I never was. But then I support torture. It is an integral part of war. Now to clarify, I support data mining as opposed to what most people are brainwashed to believe that torture only fulfills the sadistic fancy of a few.

Thanks for making the assumption that I would celebrate the death of anybody. This is England, not America, we don't (in masses) celebrate the death of other people. Especially after getting dooped over by our own country that some man in a cave co-ordinated two planes to crash into the World Trade Centers. You really think America is the "good guy" in the world right now? You're off you're freaking rocker.

I'm perfectly informed as to how the Iraq war happened and I think you'll find it was an illegal invasion. We didn't hold a legal inquiry in Britain for nothing my friend. We had an inquiry because the British people are not sheep and know right and wrong when they see it and we demand justice.

I don't even know what the MSM is supposed to stand for so I guess you failed to discredit me there, too. You're not very good at these assumptions are you? I guess your brother is an authority on the entire conflict. He's just another pawn being used for unjustified wars and I pray he doesn't die for his blind loyalty to a terrorist state.

I actually said it wasn't quite Hitler level yet, perhaps your American education isn't all that good, but if you can't see all these invasions of middle eastern nations + potential Iran and NK as exactly what Hitler was doing having parallels, you might as well join the forces yourself and blindly serve your nation. Of course you support torture, it's okay so long as it's America who does it, right? But it's wrong when another nation does it.

You're just another pompous American who is going to one day realise your nation isn't as all powerful and mighty as you're taught it is. I really hope America doesn't come crying to Britain for help (again) with NK and Iran because I'm sick of my nation dragged into these little fights that you can't fight yourself. Your brother might serve but I know people who serve too and they deserve better than to have their lives thrown into jeopardy over the chess game of politics America likes to play with the world.

You got a problem with NK and Iran? Invade them yourself, don't expect others to help you. Though we both know the first place America is going to come begging.

God bless.

Edited by Heaven Is A Halfpipe
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for making the assumption that I would celebrate the death of anybody. This is England, not America, we don't (in masses) celebrate the death of other people. Especially after getting dooped over by our own country that some man in a cave co-ordinated two planes to crash into the World Trade Centers. You really think America is the "good guy" in the world right now? You're off you're freaking rocker.

I'm perfectly informed as to how the Iraq war happened and I think you'll find it was an illegal invasion. We didn't hold a legal inquiry in Britain for nothing my friend. We had an inquiry because the British people are not sheep and know right and wrong when they see it and we demand justice.

I don't even know what the MSM is supposed to stand for so I guess you failed to discredit me there, too. You're not very good at these assumptions are you? I guess your brother is an authority on the entire conflict. He's just another pawn being used for unjustified wars and I pray he doesn't die for his blind loyalty to a terrorist state.

I actually said it wasn't quite Hitler level yet, perhaps your American education isn't all that good, but if you can't see all these invasions of middle eastern nations + potential Iran and NK as exactly what Hitler was doing having parallels, you might as well join the forces yourself and blindly serve your nation. Of course you support torture, it's okay so long as it's America who does it, right? But it's wrong when another nation does it.

You're just another pompous American who is going to one day realise your nation isn't as all powerful and mighty as you're taught it is. I really hope America doesn't come crying to Britain for help (again) with NK and Iran because I'm sick of my nation dragged into these little fights that you can't fight yourself. Your brother might serve but I know people who serve too and they deserve better than to have their lives thrown into jeopardy over the chess game of politics America likes to play with the world.

You got a problem with NK and Iran? Invade them yourself, don't expect others to help you. Though we both know the first place America is going to come begging.

God bless.

Just as your country came begging in WWI and WWII? Like France came begging in Vietnam? Like most of western Europe begged us to keep troops in Europe after WWII ended to help keep the Russians at bay? I see, it is OK for your country to ask us to help them in a war, but not ok for us to ask them to help us in a war.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as your country came begging in WWI and WWII? Like France came begging in Vietnam? Like most of western Europe begged us to keep troops in Europe after WWII ended to help keep the Russians at bay? I see, it is OK for your country to ask us to help them in a war, but not ok for us to ask them to help us in a war.

I think Japan attacking America had just a little something to do with America entering WWII... Quite frankly America was more than happy to see Britain fall to Nazi Germany until it wasn't in their best interests. Britain did pretty damn good defending itself against a power like Nazi Germany, not a single German soldier stepped foot on British soil and that was thanks to the British Army. I won't sit here and discredit America, obviously their part in WWII swung the power of balance but to suggest Britain came "begging" for help is a ludicrous suggestion. Don't act like you did us a favour, America realised Britain falling to Germany wouldn't be good for them.

Now, if I can cast your mind back to Iraq, George Bush's exact words to Britain and other nations was that they were either with him (aka go to war) or against him. It was a desperate plea and I've got no doubts that Obama will make the very same plea when the battle lines are drawn against North Korea and Iran. My point is, the British people are sick of being dragged into wars like that. We have no problem with Iran or North Korea, nor did we with Iraq, in fact there were many riots and protests over declaring war. We also have no problem in standing by America in wars when we believe that there is just cause to send our brothers, sisters, friends, fathers, sons etc into battle. There is no just cause here, not yet, nor do the majority think we have any right to tell another nation what it can and can't do when what we say it can't do, we do ourselves.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason the US wanted its Coalition Of The Willing, or whatever euphemism the politicians created, was for appearances.

They wanted it to APPEAR that everybody agreed that Saddam was a Bad Boy and deserved whatever he got. One man like Dubya might be wrong and illegal, but if Dubya, Tony and the Aussies all do it, well, 3 guys can't be wrong.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha, the west ain't been the "good guys" since World War 2.

Korean War?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good job Mr. President. I fully support your decision.

I'm sorry their actions didn't fit some of your ideals of "the good guys", but their job was to save American lives and they did what they had to do.

I wonder if some of you would be so giddy on your high horses if enhanced interrogation could have stopped the Boston bombing this week?

And what happened to the whole "if it saves just one life" mantra that we've had shoved down our throats since Newtown?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good job Mr. President. I fully support your decision.

I'm sorry their actions didn't fit some of your ideals of "the good guys", but their job was to save American lives and they did what they had to do.

I wonder if some of you would be so giddy on your high horses if enhanced interrogation could have stopped the Boston bombing this week?

And what happened to the whole "if it saves just one life" mantra that we've had shoved down our throats since Newtown?

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.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Good job Mr. President. I fully support your decision.

I'm sorry their actions didn't fit some of your ideals of "the good guys", but their job was to save American lives and they did what they had to do.

I wonder if some of you would be so giddy on your high horses if enhanced interrogation could have stopped the Boston bombing this week?

And what happened to the whole "if it saves just one life" mantra that we've had shoved down our throats since Newtown?

Torture is ineffective at gaining useful information, this is widely understood - even in the CIA. The purpose of torture is to intimidate the civilian population so that they do not offer resistance.

Torture encourages recruitment to terrorist organizations because it justifies the rhetoric of extremists in claiming that they are victims of a criminal oppressor.

Torture is a military tactic - not a intelligence gathering exercise.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good job Mr. President. I fully support your decision.

I'm sorry their actions didn't fit some of your ideals of "the good guys", but their job was to save American lives and they did what they had to do.

I wonder if some of you would be so giddy on your high horses if enhanced interrogation could have stopped the Boston bombing this week?

And what happened to the whole "if it saves just one life" mantra that we've had shoved down our throats since Newtown?

In a most perverse sense, I would like to 'thank you' for demonstrating complete disregard for the US Constitution and the rule of law in general. That your hero is John Yoo et al, Bush & Co, speaks volumes of your humanity.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

What is "the wrong skin color" in the Middle East?

Three people were waterboarded for approximately 45 seconds and thousands of lives were saved, OBL was killed (Obama sure liked shouting that from the rooftops even though it was EI that got the info to find him), and who knows what else was averted.

Again, no problems with that.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Torture is ineffective at gaining useful information, this is widely understood - even in the CIA. The purpose of torture is to intimidate the civilian population so that they do not offer resistance.

Torture encourages recruitment to terrorist organizations because it justifies the rhetoric of extremists in claiming that they are victims of a criminal oppressor.

Torture is a military tactic - not a intelligence gathering exercise.

Br Cornelius

Which is exactly why EI is not torture. Pulling someone's finger nails off is counter productive. Playing mind games and creating discomfort does work. That's why the CIA does it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a most perverse sense, I would like to 'thank you' for demonstrating complete disregard for the US Constitution and the rule of law in general. That your hero is John Yoo et al, Bush & Co, speaks volumes of your humanity.

The US Constitution doesn't apply to enemy combatants, neither does the Geneva Convention.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.