« Turkey, the PKK, Iraq, and President Bush’s War on Terrorism | Main | Abuse of Presidential Power: Will Giuliani top the Bush/Cheney Regime's Power Abuse? »

Comments

TedAdozylyday
DepartureCX

Hi all !
It can be challenging !
GSgyyryr546
[URL=http://news47.xclo.info/]news234[/URL] doc
http://news108.xclo.info news12 doc
Goodbye

Brigitte

As much as I agree that the definition of international treaties against inhuman treatment, torture, etc., come into play here and must be clarified and complied with, we need most of all to insist on upholding the written and unwritten U.S. values that this country has not always adhered to but at least tried before this current regime came to power. If Democrats want us to vote one of their candidates into the White House, they must explicitly swear off torture and other inhumane practices--to begin with.

Tony

The goings-on in our nation's capital are reminiscent of a Kafka novel that the author would have been afraid to release, on the grounds that fiction of this nature would surely have been reviled. Yet here we are, scratching our heads and wondering how much farther credibility can be stretched. My guess is that there is more to come. Guan-o Village is functioning as a laboratory for the perfection of "information gathering" techniques, billions more are scattered about the ME; good and brave fighting men are sorely in need of time with their families; the Fortress of Baghdad (sorry, I meant embassy) is a monument to waste and wishful thinking; and our form of government is not even exportable to a maniacal theocracy without the equivalent of 1000 years of preparatory assaults on the faith, as was experienced in Europe from c 750-1789 CE.
I was treated today to a lecture on why torture is OK under certain (undefined) circumstances, even with the acknowledgement that any information gathered is corrupted by the desire of the torturee to put an end to it. Apparently, I am not alone in my reasoning, because the gov't is busily reconstructing KSM's case, on the issue of whether the events preceding his confessions are admissible in court. The CIA complimented themselves on the effectiveness of their questioning techniques, and simultaneously scoffed at KSM's rapid compliance. The larger question, of course, has to do with how the US redefines treaty language to suit these circumstances, and whether Dems have the fortitude to press Mukasey during the hearings. Eventually, the military interrogators will be back in civil society, where they won't fit in at all. Now, will someone please explain to me what Bremer's CPA Orders # 39 and 81 have to do with anything? Tony thanks you all.

The comments to this entry are closed.