WHO WOULD JESUS TORTURE?
There is nothing new about the idea of using torture to get vital information to the survival of a nation-state. Lately, some legal intellectuals (strangely, mostly lefties) have been floating the idea of judicially supervised torture. The government would have to apply for Torture Warrant (Like a Search Warrant or an Eavesdropping Order) and state its grounds and, I suppose the extent of discomfort it would inflict on the subject.
How does this hit you? If you were King/Queen of the world, how would you handle it?
posted by UMRBlog @ 12:50
13 comments
13 Comments:
Hi there.. was just killig some time with the next blog button and saw yours. You are up with an intersting point, I actually have some experiense with it and I can say from one ocation I witnessed - it works!.. of course there must be rules for this so that only in life saving situations these technicue be used and no permanent damage for the interrogatee will be done.
I'm for doing whatever it takes to get the info needed to ensure safety for US citizens and to prosecute the war on terror. Just that simple. Seems like everyone forgot 9-11.
Okay, Foox is talking about a previous marriage, Lootie's gone plumb biblical, fade to humorous, but anon 1647 doesn't want to bother with the details. I guess he/she just wants to leave the decision to the executive branch. Gonzo and Rummy, guardians of Human Rights. What a concept!
Have a nice weekend.
HOw do you know Jesus didn't torture? Maybe L.A./New York Times could look into it! Anyways my answer is No as far as getting warrants to use torture to get info. I am not surprised that the people, legal intellectuals as you called them, are lefties who else would try to fight a war on terror with our legal (notice I didn't say justice system - we have a legal system not justice system)system. I beleive that was tried during the 90's with no success.
What does 9/11 have to do with anything? I'm tired of all that bull! The United States is not the only nation that was attacked from the outside, so quit all the whining.
5:43
Tone, we elected him didn't we, he said he was going to spend his mandate! For better or worse. LOL
PS Don't blame me, I voted for Kerry (but regret it now).
Signed,
He
I thought you want to hear an opinion, to shape your's, not that you already decided and want to make laught about what others think.
have a nice weekend
Foox,
That was light humor to provoke some additional participation. Sorry to give offense. You are welcome here and I do appreciate your coming by.
Seriously, do come by again and I'll behave better (at least for a while.)
2007,
Does that mean you want it to be a completely executive decision?
Thanks for coming by.
2206
Does that mean you're anti-torture or was that just a noise pollution argument?
Thinker-to-Evers-to-Chance,
I don't which one was for you, either because you've never been in here before as "Thinker".
I get it that you don't like our legal system. Let's explore that. Is there one operated on this planet by human beings that you think is adequate? If so, which one?
You seem to have a good grasp of the Skilling situation. What was he charged with and what was his defense?
Is there some other reason you don't like our legal system in addition to what you think will happen in the Skilling case? If Skilling's conviction holds up, what's your specific objection then?
Thank you for coming by.
I have far more fear in executive power than our legal system. Lesser of two evils situation though.
Legal system moves slow for a reason on situations such as these. Some things just need to proceed slowly with caution. This is one of those situations.
If something is urgent our executive has the power to immediately address it for 90 days prior to review.
Might not work the way you would personally want it to, but I can think of no better system another country has in place.
I have far more fear in executive power than our legal system. Lesser of two evils situation though.
Legal system moves slow for a reason on situations such as these. Some things just need to proceed slowly with caution. This is one of those situations.
If something is urgent our executive has the power to immediately address it for 90 days prior to review.
Might not work the way you would personally want it to, but I can think of no better system another country has in place.
Post a Comment
<< Home