Obama releasing the CIA interogation memos

[Chukpike]

I would think that government officials will now be looking over their shoulders to see who is going to second guess them. Maybe causing the economy to recover, on the volume of lawyers government officials will be hiring to protect their @sses.

Yeah, it might even stop some government agencies from thinking they can get away with committing war crimes. That would be a great pity wouldn't it.

That's why we never bothered to convict any Nazi war criminals, it would have made the Nazi party look bad.

Short memories, eh?

How is releasing the memos going to accomplish your statement; "Yeah, it might even stop some government agencies from thinking they can get away with committing war crimes".

Some human rights groups criticized the decision not to prosecute people for these actions. Amnesty International called it a "get out of jail free card" for people who committed torture. But Obama said in a statement, "Nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past."

Since President Obama, is not going to prosecute, why would governments be worried.

Interesting you should bring up Nazis.
Currently we have a alleged "German WWII prison guard" being deported to stand trial for war crimes.
I don't know if he is guilty or innocent. I do know that he had been deported to Israel and stood trial there. He was acquitted and returned to the US.
He is going to be deported to another country to stand trial for the same charges. Apparently double jeopardy does not apply as it is two different governments.

I don't really care if he did it and is convicted. Just wonder why they are still going after the bottom of the totem pole 65years later. Realistically a defense of "just following orders" should be good enough for someone so far down as a Sargent.

Amnesty International wants people prosecuted. Do you actually think the ones responsible will be prosecuted? (Maybe a sargent or two?)
If so, you are just as gullible as Rob and his Rolling Stone Bush Interview.

I think the techniques the Bush Adminstration used were wrong. I did not agree with going to Iraq. I do think since Congress and then President Bush decided to go there, it should be finished with the best outcome possible.

As this is thread is about releasing CIA memos. I hope releasing them does some good.
Will it keep the US from making this mistake again? We can only hope.

Will it stop any other government from committing them?

I wouuld like to hear your answer.

 

[Rob Henderson]

Yeah, right Rob. It is obvious from your post that you bought the article "hook, line, and sinker.":lol:

Of course it was Chukpike. I believe the President cursed like that because he missed a pitch on Wii MLB. Give me a break. I'm so tired of you taking every chance you think you have to make me look like an idiot. What's REALLY funny is the fact that you completely ignored the point I was trying to make (the MASTER of cutting and pasting to fit his needs) and just took the story. In the very article you mention below, it states that waterboarding "constitutes a threat of imminent death." But that's not torture... Them dying is okay, but if they're in pain, it's torture? Hah! Okay.

Here is a source that is as close as we may ever get to a unbiased review about releasing the memos.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103177115

It also has all 4 memos available if anyone actually wanted to know what was in them.

Here is a short section of the article in the link I supplied, talking about the ramifications of the memos release,

"In the past few weeks, top current and former CIA officials had pushed to keep the memos secret. After the Obama administration declassified the documents Thursday, former CIA Director Michael Hayden told The Associated Press that the United States is less safe now. He said agents will be more timid and foreign allies will be less likely to cooperate with American intelligence officials because "they can't keep anything secret."

Some human rights groups criticized the decision not to prosecute people for these actions. Amnesty International called it a "get out of jail free card" for people who committed torture. But Obama said in a statement, "Nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past."

Again, you are the master of cutting and pasting the things that support your stance.

Please allow me to cut and paste another snippet or two from the same article...

"Fred Hitz, who served as CIA inspector general in the 1990s, read the memos and said, "I just don't see how in the world that kind of advice can be given as a legal opinion as if you were advising on whether a deed of trust was properly executed." He added, "These are human beings we're talking about, and it's not something that the United States — much less the Central Intelligence Agency — should be involved in."

And this:

"One former CIA official speaking on background said that level of detail shows how carefully tailored the program was.

"I agree with that," said former CIA official Hitz, "but so were all of the experiments that were done by the Nazi doctors during the time of the Holocaust. They kept excellent records of the body temperature of the prisoner and all that stuff; it didn't make it any less torture."

How scary is it that we're using procedures similar to Nazi Germany??? And they call Obama the Socialist... *chuckle*

Releasing the memos could very well cause problems for President Obama's administration for years to come. We will probably get to see any bad decisions President Obama makes revealed by the next administration. Great for forums, but not so good for the government to be micromanaged after the fact.

No one should be above questioning. It's a testament to his character that he's willing to subjugate himself to possible inspection that he does this in the first place.

 

[senojekips]

How is releasing the memos going to accomplish your statement; "Yeah, it might even stop some government agencies from thinking they can get away with committing war crimes".

Simple, if you show the world what they have been up to, they may be declared as war criminals and they will have to live with the fact that like Nazi quoted below, they may one day have to answer for their crimes.

Interesting you should bring up Nazis.
Currently we have a alleged "German WWII prison guard" being deported to stand trial for war crimes.
I don't know if he is guilty or innocent. I do know that he had been deported to Israel and stood trial there. He was acquitted and returned to the US.
He is going to be deported to another country to stand trial for the same charges. Apparently double jeopardy does not apply as it is two different governments.

I don't really care if he did it and is convicted. Just wonder why they are still going after the bottom of the totem pole 65years later. Realistically a defense of "just following orders" should be good enough for someone so far down as a Sargent.

So you argue that those below sargeant should be allowed to commit war crimes? That would be wonderful. Adolph Eichman and his mates would have risen no higher than sargeant, other than that it would achieve nothing

Do you actually think the ones responsible will be prosecuted? (Maybe a sargent or two?)
If so, you are just as gullible as Rob and his Rolling Stone Bush Interview.

Well, it would make the sargeants a liot more unwilling to comply with orders that they know to be wrong.

I think the techniques the Bush Adminstration used were wrong. I did not agree with going to Iraq. I do think since Congress and then President Bush decided to go there, it should be finished with the best outcome possible.

Pandora's box has never looked so inviting has it? Just think,... that if a few of the NeoCons thought that one day they will have to answer for all of this, they may have had second thoughts about going along with their dirty little plans. And that is the reason those responsible for these warcrimes must be publicly exposed and punished, to send a clear message to future politicians and those working for them what will happen.

As this is thread is about releasing CIA memos. I hope releasing them does some good.
Will it keep the US from making this mistake again? We can only hope.

Will it stop any other government from committing them?

Only if those found responsible are punished commensurately.

If taken in the same view as the WWII warcrimes trials, there would have to be several death sentences here. Class "A" warcrimes,

Count 1: as "leaders, organizers, instigators, or accomplices in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy .. to wage wars of aggression, and war or wars in violation of international law."
Count 27: waging unprovoked war against another country

I could find a lot more, but they could only be put to death once, so it would be rather pointless.

 

[Chukpike]

Of course it was Chukpike. I believe the President cursed like that because he missed a pitch on Wii MLB. Give me a break. I'm so tired of you taking every chance you think you have to make me look like an idiot. What's REALLY funny is the fact that you completely ignored the point I was trying to make (the MASTER of cutting and pasting to fit his needs) and just took the story. In the very article you mention below, it states that waterboarding "constitutes a threat of imminent death." But that's not torture... Them dying is okay, but if they're in pain, it's torture? Hah! Okay.

Whatever Rob.
I would like to have been there when you went back and read the Title: "Bush Apologizes: The Farewell Interview We Wish He'd Give." As American Express says,"Priceless":lol:

Your constant whining about " (the MASTER of cutting and pasting to fit his needs)" every time you want to deflect away from the issues make me a little tired too. Since in the very next statement, away you go, cutting and pasting.

Again, you are the master of cutting and pasting the things that support your stance.

Please allow me to cut and paste another snippet or two from the same article...

"Fred Hitz, who served as CIA inspector general in the 1990s, read the memos and said, "I just don't see how in the world that kind of advice can be given as a legal opinion as if you were advising on whether a deed of trust was properly executed." He added, "These are human beings we're talking about, and it's not something that the United States — much less the Central Intelligence Agency — should be involved in."

And this:

"One former CIA official speaking on background said that level of detail shows how carefully tailored the program was.

"I agree with that," said former CIA official Hitz, "but so were all of the experiments that were done by the Nazi doctors during the time of the Holocaust. They kept excellent records of the body temperature of the prisoner and all that stuff; it didn't make it any less torture."

How scary is it that we're using procedures similar to Nazi Germany??? And they call Obama the Socialist... *chuckle*

This is another example of you not reading.
I took no stance on water boarding I only addressed the Topic of this thread, "Obama releasing the CIA interrogation memos'. Even though 90% of what has been posted has been off topic I chose to stay with the topic. The topic is not water boarding.

"Please allow me to cut and paste another snippet or two from the same article..."
Not sure I should allow you to cut and paste since it offends you so much.:smile:

But since my source is far and away a better source than Rolling Stone go right a head.

No one should be above questioning. It's a testament to his character that he's willing to subjugate himself to possible inspection that he does this in the first place.

We can only hope.
While I did not vote for him I am willing to wait before making judgements on his Presidency especially since it is just beginning.

My only reservations about releasing the memos is, if he wasn't going to prosecute, what was the point. And Rob I have not seen you post anything about the topic of this thread.

 

[Chukpike]

Simple, if you show the world what they have been up to, they may be declared as war criminals and they will have to live with the fact that like Nazi quoted below, they may one day have to answer for their crimes.

So you argue that those below sargeant should be allowed to commit war crimes? That would be wonderful. Adolph Eichman and his mates would have risen no higher than sargeant, other than that it would achieve nothing

Well, it would make the sargeants a liot more unwilling to comply with orders that they know to be wrong.

Pandora's box has never looked so inviting has it? Just think,... that if a few of the NeoCons thought that one day they will have to answer for all of this, they may have had second thoughts about going along with their dirty little plans. And that is the reason those responsible for these warcrimes must be publicly exposed and punished, to send a clear message to future politicians and those working for them what will happen.

Only if those found responsible are punished commensurately.

If taken in the same view as the WWII warcrimes trials, there would have to be several death sentences here. Class "A" warcrimes,

Count 1: as "leaders, organizers, instigators, or accomplices in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy .. to wage wars of aggression, and war or wars in violation of international law."
Count 27: waging unprovoked war against another country

I could find a lot more, but they could only be put to death once, so it would be rather pointless.

You would have to say alleged Nazi as he hasn't been convicted. I wonder what the chances of a conviction are, since the Israelis weren't able convict him.

Nice speech, but since the administration does not intend to prosecute what is the point?

As far as the war crimes you listed that don't have anything to do with Article 16 of the Geneva Convention the memos address. They don't even enter into the realm of torture for that matter. I guess the Counts you listed would apply to the President and Senators and Congressman that voted to go to Iraq and Afganistan. What are the chances of that happening?

You can go to the link I provided to read the memos. The are pretty long. They don't say, "OK boys makem talk."

It should also be noted that the US Military guidelines for interrogation are different from the CIA. The US Military was not allowed to use these methods. I think you are aware that US military personnel were tried for abuses occurring in Iraq.
Thanks for giving your opinion on the punishment you would like to see.
But it wasn't my question, my question was,
"Will it stop any other government from committing them?"

 

[Rob Henderson]

Whatever Rob.
I would like to have been there when you went back and read the Title: "Bush Apologizes: The Farewell Interview We Wish He'd Give." As American Express says,"Priceless":lol:

I'm sure. :roll: Get over it... The very fact that you bring it up AGAIN betrays your immaturity and inability to stick to the topic (since you so strongly accuse me of straying from it).

Your constant whining about " (the MASTER of cutting and pasting to fit his needs)" every time you want to deflect away from the issues make me a little tired too. Since in the very next statement, away you go, cutting and pasting.

I only mention it because you use the tactic to attempt to prove your own ends as correct, whilst knowing full well that there are other parts of the very same article in some cases that completely dismantle and contradict what you're trying to prove. You so very carefully cut out the part that made it seem like releasing the memos was a bad thing, while leaving out the former inspector general's statements that it was a GOOD thing.

This is another example of you not reading.
I took no stance on water boarding I only addressed the Topic of this thread, "Obama releasing the CIA interrogation memos'. Even though 90% of what has been posted has been off topic I chose to stay with the topic. The topic is not water boarding.

You're correct. It's not, but the article you posted quotes from made about as much mention of waterboarding itself as it did of the memos.

Not sure I should allow you to cut and paste since it offends you so much.:smile:

Only returning the favor!

But since my source is far and away a better source than Rolling Stone go right a head.

Actually, I wouldn't put it past GWB to give an interview like that. If you give him that much credit, that's your business.

We can only hope.
While I did not vote for him I am willing to wait before making judgements on his Presidency especially since it is just beginning.

A noble sentiment, and one that I honestly appreciate. You're a wiser man than some on this forum. (At least in part. )

My only reservations about releasing the memos is, if he wasn't going to prosecute, what was the point. And Rob I have not seen you post anything about the topic of this thread.

The point in Obama's releasing of the memos was to show that America DID in fact use torture techniques on suspected terrorists, and that we were NOT going to try to hide that fact. We are the good guys in this war, and we should be have as such... It's the line you hear in all those Disney movies... "Don't stoop to their level, you'll be just as bad as them" etc... I have posted on the topic, please see post number 32 as I address bropous' comments.

 

[senojekips]

You would have to say alleged Nazi as he hasn't been convicted. I wonder what the chances of a conviction are, since the Israelis weren't able convict him.

Correct,.. alleged perpetrator.

I would say that unless new evidence has come to light, or he is being charged in a different jurisdiction with different laws, that he will probably walk. He maaayyyy, even be innocent, but that will be up to the courts. The pertinent fact in relation to this thread is, that he has been bought before the relevant authorities to answer for his alleged crimes.

Nice speech, but since the administration does not intend to prosecute what is the point?

The point is, that it might well arouse enough world wide indignation, that they will be pressured into prosecuting them, or at least making it less likely to happen again.

As far as the war crimes you listed that don't have anything to do with Article 16 of the Geneva Convention the memos address. They don't even enter into the realm of torture for that matter. I guess the Counts you listed would apply to the President and Senators and Congressman that voted to go to Iraq and Afganistan. What are the chances of that happening?

There are many things other than torture covered by the Geneva protocols. As for the second part of your question, if each time these things happen we are forced to change the rules even by a minuscule amount, eventually it will amount to something that can keep these people in check. Unless of course the American people wish to be ruled by despots who can virtually flout all the rules of a civilised society, remembering that one day they might cause the loss of the citizen's freedom or life for nothing more than personal desires. A bit like the deep southern "Good ole boy" Sheriff who runs the town to suit himself, as seen in countless "B" Grade Hollywood movies.

You can go to the link I provided to read the memos. The are pretty long. They don't say, "OK boys makem talk."

It should also be noted that the US Military guidelines for interrogation are different from the CIA. The US Military was not allowed to use these methods. I think you are aware that US military personnel were tried for abuses occurring in Iraq.
Thanks for giving your opinion on the punishment you would like to see.
But it wasn't my question, my question was,

The punisments I listed, were of course the very top of the heap and would only apply to those guilty of crimes for which they can be handed down.

"Will it stop any other government from committing them?"

Yes, I feel that it will, If future governments are made to realise that they will have to pay for their crimes. At the moment, they are being given carte blanche, which is no less than an invitation to continue pushing the boundaries.

It does not matter which branch of government is involved, Military, CIA or whatever, or what their SOPs happen to be, the government is still responsible for any criminal activity that is permitted.

Somewhat similar to the way that Mr. Yoo is being chased at the moment for allegedly, knowingly giving improper legal advice. I personally feel that he did this thinking that because it was for the government of the most powerful country on earth, he would never be put in a position where he would ever have to answer for it. I would also allege that those asking for this clarification of the law were aware of the facts, but thought they could cover their @rse to some degree by getting a legal eagle to OK it.

It's a viscious circle of abuse of power and position.

 

[A Can of Man]

If we try to stand the moral high ground this is the price we have to pay for not being able to follow through on it.
Be careful of what you say. There will always come a time when your words will be tested.

 

[rattler]

-snip-
Be careful of what you say. There will always come a time when your words will be tested.

Indeed, and that´s the way it should be.

Whether we as persons stand up to it, well: You will find out when it is your turn to face that challenge, and it is the *only* way one can find out for himself...

Rattler