Unbelievable...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...c=news letter

Triple sheesh,
R

that's an under statement......



On Apr 22, 8:28*am, wrote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...09/04/21/AR200...

Triple sheesh,
R

wrote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...c=news letter

Triple sheesh,

Two deancounter posts in one day ? LOL !! Poor thing, your
anti-Obama kookiness is moving from pathetic to pathological.

Why shouldn't lawyers who write opinions justifying future
acts of illegal torture as acceptable government policy be
subjected to prosecution ? And don't even try to argue that
waterboarding isn't illegal torture.

The law is quite clear in the Geneva Conventions and other
international treaties to which the US is a signatory.
Torture is illegal.

At the very least the Bushies responsible should be disbarred
and the one on the federal bench should be impeached. I
doubt any of them will ever see the inside of an American
jail but it'd tickle me to see them be very afraid to venture
outside the US.

--
Ken Fortenberry

--
Ken Fortenberry



why do you hate your country?

On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:46:10 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...c=news letter

Triple sheesh,

Two deancounter posts in one day ? LOL !! Poor thing, your
anti-Obama kookiness is moving from pathetic to pathological.

Why shouldn't lawyers who write opinions justifying future
acts of illegal torture as acceptable government policy be
subjected to prosecution ? And don't even try to argue that
waterboarding isn't illegal torture.

Here's the thing - it is not _clearly_ "torture" under the legal definition, and
if it isn't, then it is legal. Forget personal opinions for a moment - it isn't
what you, I, or Obama think is "torture" and/or illegal, it is what is clear in
the law. And clear in the law means inarguable, that reasonable minds cannot
differ, there are no reasonable arguments to be made. That is not the case
here. If it were, all reasonable people and legal experts (and I mean other
than those involved) would agree that this was "torture" and it was illegal
under a particular law/statute. They do not so agree. The relevant US law
requires specific _intent_ to cause, at a minimum, extreme physical pain,
long-lasting mental damage, etc.

The law is quite clear in the Geneva Conventions and other
international treaties to which the US is a signatory.
Torture is illegal.

First, the GC is not applicable, but yes, "torture" is illegal _as it is
defined_ by the relevant statutes (which are somewhat similar to the GC). It is
not clear that waterboarding, in and of itself and in all cases, is "torture."

At the very least the Bushies responsible should be disbarred
and the one on the federal bench should be impeached.

Er, no, and I don't think you really want that as it exposes both Obama and
Holden to impeachment and prosecution. Here's why, generally: It will require
the same legal analysis made by Bybee, Yoo, etc. to determine whether
prosecution is proper. If those doing the analysis find it not to be
prosecutable conduct, then they themselves, in offering that opinion, have done
exactly what Bybee and Yoo did - their opinion would be that Bybee's, Yoo's,
etc. opinion(s) were "legal," "legally-defensible," or IAC, not prosecutable,
and as such, the attorney(s) offering that opinion must, for consistancy's sake,
then be "investigated." It must continue until someone decides that all of the
past opinions were prosecutable conduct. Whenever it happens, the defense must
do an analysis of the law with the aim of defending those clients, and in doing
so, have just possibly committed the same prosecutable offense as their clients.
If they reach the conclusion and then argue that their clients' position is
legally-defendable, they have then committed the same offense as those clients.
And if they defend their clients on that belief, then they have presented prima
facie evidence of having committed that offense.

I don't know whether you've thought this out or not, but "investigating"
attorneys for offering legal opinions and analysis is incredibly dangerous to
the system of law, so much so as to be potentially a mortal blow - this is bad,
bad, BAD practice. And here's yet another really bad thing - if they are
prosecuted by this administration, and a later administration were to be advised
that those prosecutions were improper, they would be duty-bound (and now there
would be precedent) to prosecute those involved in these prosecutions, should
they take place. And, for example, if the Supreme Court were to rule that the
prosecutions were improper, or God forbid, be forced to utter the phrase that
they were "un-constitutional," those involved would need to be investigated and
possibly prosecuted, their having formed and acted upon "improper" opinions.

Sounds like a bunch of legal mumbo-jumbo? Well, maybe, but this is exactly and
precisely why there should not even be the slightest hint of a threat of lawyers
being prosecuted for offering arguable opinions or analysis, however much some
may disagree with them, or Federal judges being impeached for having offered
those opinions.

I
doubt any of them will ever see the inside of an American
jail but it'd tickle me to see them be very afraid to venture
outside the US.

Be very careful of what you wish for on that basis - you're liable to get what
you think you want only to find it abhorrent in the extreme when it arrives...


Politics, political theater, and political shtick aside, this is really, really
bad news,
R

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Torture is illegal.

At the very least the Bushies responsible should be disbarred
and the one on the federal bench should be impeached.

Er, no, and I don't think you really want that as it exposes both Obama and
Holden to impeachment and prosecution. ...
nonsense snipped
Sounds like a bunch of legal mumbo-jumbo? ...

Oh yeah, that and your usual ridiculous and rabid anti-Obama rant.

If a lawyer gives someone the green light to go out and do something
illegal and they subsequently go out and actually do something illegal
then the lawyer should be held responsible. All this silly crap about
Obama and Holder committing a prosecutable offense by naming a special
investigator or investigators is just a figment of your warped and
partisan imagination. Neither the President or the Attorney General
can be prosecuted for naming a special investigator. Trust me on this.

Politics, political theater, and political shtick aside, this is really, really
bad news,

Oh for sure, this is by far the biggest blunder and most serious
attack on our American way of life by the incompetent and not ready
for prime time, amateurish Obama administration since, well ...
yesterday. LOL !!

Can't wait to read the deancounter chronicles tomorrow. ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Apr 22, 7:45*am, "~^ beancounter ~^" wrote:
that's an under statement......

On Apr 22, 8:28*am, wrote:



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...09/04/21/AR200...

Triple sheesh,
R- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Listen to Beanman, he seemed to be bashful about sharing his "real
world" military experience with torturing prisoners yesterday but
maybe today he will come forth because as he says, "War is a bitch."

Dave
Rightwing Ideology as a "get out of jail" card? Ain't going to work
this time.

On Apr 22, 9:19*am, wrote:

For more than 50 years the Rightwing whackjobs have depended on the
sense of national embarrassment to hide the saddo-masochistic and
lawless character of their ideology. Forbearance has not slowed the
evil. It is time the torturers and murderers in our midst be brought
to justice before their psychoses becomes our norm. Soldiers do what
they are asked. But the sick *******s who give the illegal orders need
to be prosecuted. And the freelance killers cannot be allowed to claim
the rights and understanding earned by our uniformed service men.

We need to reopen some cold cases. For example . . .

1. It is particularly important to look resolve the EXECUTION OF
AMERICAN CITIZENS by rightwing death squads with the reported presence
of renegade CIA and irregular American DOD paid contract killers in
Chile, Honduras, El Salvador, Panama, Guatemala, Argentina, and
Nicaragua. It is unclear whether these *******s also were operating in
Peru and Columbia. American families deserve to at least know if
renegade Whackjob Americans participated in the execution of their
loved ones. Repatriation of bodies is also an issue.

2. The Raygun era torture base operated by the US under the direction
of Mr. Negraponte, at an airbase in Honduras. When production was not
going fast enough, Raygun approved and Negraponte brought in a
specialized Argentine Army torture unit, fresh from murdering several
thousand Argentine couples and giving their children to deserving
rightwing military and political couples. Several Americans were
identified as entering Negraponte's torture base and disappearing.
This cluster**** needs to be dealt with.

3. We need to investigate American corporate funded death squads
reported to have been operating in the Eastern oil region of Equador,
and having a connection to companies for which Dick Cheney and Bush #1
were officers or principals. This issue is separate and apart from un-
prosecuted dealings both had with Libya, in violation of US law.

4. There's more but I am still eating breakfast.

The dead and desaparecidos call out to the living for JUSTICE.

Dave

On Apr 22, 8:08*am, "~^ beancounter ~^" wrote:
--
Ken Fortenberry

why do you hate your country?

Uneducated boobs like you threaten this country and its defense.

You must not agree with George Washington who by general order to the
Revolutionary Army, forbade torture, killing, and abuse of British and
Hessian POWs even though "No Quarter" was the SOP for both the Brits
and the Hessian's.

Someone should explain to Beanbrain how British and Hessian troops
began deserting to the Revolutionary Army after Washington's order, in
large numbers and were often moved unguarded, to the frontier as
settlers . The British kept sending soldiers, and they kept deserting
to become Americans. In that way, and thru combat, we destroyed the
largest English army ever deployed overseas, commanded by their best
Generals.

And this is but one reason why the professional American officer corps
is deeply schooled in the humane treatment of POWs, and taught to keep
abuses to a minimum in the horror of combat, formally illegal and
punishable, according to circumstance.

Dave
They study history at West Point and Carlyle, not Wingnut jive.

On Apr 22, 11:21*am, DaveS wrote:

Dave
They study history at West Point and Carlyle, not Wingnut jive.

Correction: Washington's Revolutionary Army destroyed the largest
English Army ever deployed overseas TO THAT DATE.