SUPREME COURT JUSTICE WANTED (Only Liberals Need Apply)

Overheal

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Claiming "nonsence" does not serve itself useful for debate. And it was actually a recent statement by justice lawyers (I believe) that I read. I have already taken part in the discussion of enhanced interrogation measures, so don’t assume. As I have stated, the discussion on what constitutes torture has already been done here, and I find no reason to go through it again in other threads (it pretty much just becomes a pissing match). Nobody’s opinion changed from the debate that took place (including mine). Look back through this section and you will find the thread. You are welcome to dig up that old thread, read mine and other's comments, and add to it if you so wish.

Yeah, we went through the debate, and I had thought we all had come under the conclusion it was illegal, until you dragged it out from an unholy grave again.

I've used the Truman angle myself only insofar to say that these people will never get prosecuted. Fine. Alberto Gonzalez can live on a thousand acre ranch in montana for all I care. But you're going after the situation still saying we shouldnt reverse those judgement calls now, to close gitmo.

I'm not about the witch hunt; the policy change would be fine for me.

I believe Rush Limbaugh is interviewing Andrew McCarthy today about waterboarding and other methods. I don't get to listen to him, but hopefully there will be a transcript of the exchange tomorrow. You may also want to give it a read.

I turned him off this morning as soon as he got into yet another spiel about how the White House is picking on him because he is god's gift to - well I don't know to what, because I turned it off.

"They are attacking me (you can hear the rage-filled tears in his eyes) Because I am THE ONLY ONE THAT RABLABUSHUBURU <insert Huttian dialect here>"

LostinKildare

Okay, I read through that old thread. Of course there is nothing there that speaks to your claim

LostinKildare wrote: »

(1) that the advice was "based upon the best legal reasoning"

and how could there be, since the thread predates the release of the memos that lay bare that legal reasoning?

Many legal critics have charged that the legal analysis in the memos is grossly self-serving and simply reaches the conclusion that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld wanted reached. Certainly, it's obvious even to a layperson that they ignored legal precedent -- both domestic and international -- and included no discussion of international law that binds the U.S. So again, why do the memos contain "the best legal reasoning"?

As for the other point I've challenged you on,

(2) that the acts weren't torture "when that advice was given"

as far as I can see you don't make any argument at all that waterboarding and the other acts weren't torture in 2002. If you have made a defense of this statement, I don't think it was in that thread. So please just face the argument now, or don't. But don't send me on another fruitless search in an old thread.

Perhaps the most educative post in that thread was number 70, by Ludo in response to one of yours:

In other words, you made it up! No point in discussing things rationally with you really. This is the second time in this thread alone you have done this. . . . This ends my input in this thread as there is no point in continuing beating my head against an ever moving wall.

Overheal

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Claiming "nonsence" does not serve itself useful for debate. And it was actually a recent statement by justice lawyers (I believe) that I read. I have already taken part in the discussion of enhanced interrogation measures, so don’t assume. As I have stated, the discussion on what constitutes torture has already been done here, and I find no reason to go through it again in other threads (it pretty much just becomes a pissing match). Nobody’s opinion changed from the debate that took place (including mine). Look back through this section and you will find the thread. You are welcome to dig up that old thread, read mine and other's comments, and add to it if you so wish.

I believe Rush Limbaugh is interviewing Andrew McCarthy today about waterboarding and other methods. I don't get to listen to him, but hopefully there will be a transcript of the exchange tomorrow. You may also want to give it a read.

As I recall in the end you were just offering up your interpretations. But this is Politics not Poetry as one poster put it. Read over the old gitmo thread all you like. The only thing I see in there is everything that backs up the claim that what has been going on at Guantanamo was illegal under many, many Historical cases and modern day law - inclusive of the US Bill of Rights and The Geneva Convention. Bearing in mind some of the cases you bring up (like Vietnam) were not only illegal, but unsanctioned.

You can't offer up anything to claim it is legal, so I welcome you to try. But if you haven't managed to do that then I will consider the matter rested on the conclusion that the activity at Gitmo was illegal in every sense, and I hope that we will need to have no further discussion of it.

Gitmo will be closed, Torture is illegal, and these suspected Terrorists are being transferred and/or released.

I have no idea why your understanding of the situation has not changed. But the reason nobody else's "opinion" changed in that thread, PJ, is because they were Facts, proofed and verified, not your feelings hunches and rose-tinted interpretations.

Though I did notice one thing - there's probably not one place in that thread where you engage any of my counterpoints. I found this a bit interesting - have you no way of engaging or disputing any of my claims or arguments? Or are you really resigned to the idea that what happened at Gitmo was illegal, and you're still just trying to carry on in Denial? Its a river in Egypt I hear.

LostinKildare wrote: »

Ah, so you will not defend it. I don't recall that you did in Torture Memos either. That's grand, I won't expect real debate then.

I think that sums it up.

I'm done wasting my serious on the matter when it ends up going nowhere: back to sattire and good times.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY64meMb7-s