The fact is, the door is open whether he likes it or not. The WH has little or no say in matters like this beyond expressing a POV. My concerns are that I'd prefer Obama would express more adherence to the law and fewer lofty thoughts in this case; and that his POV may exert too much gravitation pull on Holder and Justice after all.
Obama has said he doesn't support charging CIA agents and interrogators who took part in waterboarding and other harsh interrogation tactics...
I can't accept that the orders of superiors are a reason for non prosecution. If one is ordered to perform an act as blatantly illegal as torture the correct response is to refuse the order and report the matter to the police. Okay, shoot, what have we got... those giving the orders should be prosecuted and so should those carrying them out.
You forget that Cheney gained approval so what you think is illegal was not to them , in a sense it was legal and they were carrying out a lawful order
However Cheney seemed to forget that it is still illegal internationally - that dumb arse
Loc: Alexandria, VA
in a sense it was legal and they were carrying out a lawful order
The Nuremberg trials made the "just following orders" defense invalid -- it was determined that no order to the contrary could justify the commission of a war crime ...
And since the Executive cannot autonomously change the laws of the land, an order to commit an illegal act is still illegal regardless from where the order originates ...
So, yes Cheney authorized the torture, but no, that does not automagically make it legal in any way, nor does that absolve those who actually committed the torture from prosecution or conviction. Key is right in that the proper course of action when presented with an illegal order is to refuse to obey it and report that order to the proper authorities.
Key is right in that the proper course of action when presented with an illegal order is to refuse to obey it and report that order to the proper authorities.
Yes and No
For all they knew was the DOJ , CIA and DOD told them it was legal via Cheney approvals . Thats it end of story
However Gitmo is not on US soil but rather leased land from Cuba and the detainees are international - So with that someone should have popped the question , okay Cheney got it legal in the US but what about it internationally ? ? Duh . Maybe someone did ask and they were lied too ? who knows
Carp, it was not legal in the U.S. Not ever. Just because Cheney "decided" is was does not rewrite U.S. or international law. Doesn't matter if the torture was rendered in Gitmo, in Belfast, or in Buffalo, NY. It was, is, and always will be ILLEGAL. <---Get it now (as you love to ask)?
Carp, it was not legal in the U.S. Not ever. Just because Cheney "decided" is was does not rewrite U.S. or international law. Doesn't matter if the torture was rendered in Gitmo, in Belfast, or in Buffalo, NY. It was, is, and always will be ILLEGAL.<---Get it now (as you love to ask)?
GOOGLE'S OUR FRIEND. Results 1 - 10 of about 2,030,000 for Israeli torture techniques
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.