TV Schedule

Gitmo war crimes trial: judge bars all evidence obtained by torture

  2. Octoguy
  3. related topics
Now there’s a shocker, no? This is just one of many reasons why we shouldn’t torture. As more details about the Bush administration’s torture program come to light (see Jane Mayer’s The Dark Side), we find that torture brings about more bogus intelligence and coerced confessions have led our intelligence agencies on a host of wild goose chases and wasted valuable time and US tax dollars.
Octoguy

20 responses // Gitmo war crimes trial: judge bars all evidence obtained by torture

  • As long as the fifth amendment stands this judge is taking the correct position.
    seeker561
  • As someone recently said, there isn't a court in the land that would admit "evidence" obtained by torture.
    Mark701
  • This is why we have judicial oversight.

    When congress and the executive goes rogue, there is always a last defense for the constitution.

    Any good judge would have thrown that bullshit out, thank God for their good judgment.
    Saladin
  • Was that a real article, can anyone give me another source. The read on brought me to yahoo.

    Saladin im not trying to be a hateful warmonger right now, i just want another source.
    clayjj05
    1 response to this
  • Right, I understand that. Crooks and liars doesn't sound like a very good source to me either.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ha...

    There's the story from the LA Times.
    Saladin
  • I hope some judge from US does'nt let them pigs go.
    Sometimes Americans are so stupid.Did we have any rights when those scum sucking dirt bag flew the planes into the wtc.Let them ALL rot in little hell (Cuba)
    regularrf
    7 responses to this
  • kudos to the judge, this is great news. I hope they understand they cant just torture all these people and then take that information into a courtroom. Especially if they try and reclassify things like waterboarding as not being torture.
    Bahlkris
  • I dont think it will matter in the end. Considering the jury is going to be people from the military.
    clayjj05
  • I'm pretty sure it's a tribunal clay, I don't think there's going to be a jury.

    In any case, thank God for this. America is dead when torture and coerced testimony are considered legal standards.

    Those are just basic fucking legal precedents. Which is what makes this whole thing so disgusting.

    If there's so much evidence on the assholes, then why not try and convict them here in the U.S.A.? That's how it's always been done.
    Saladin
  • http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hlkUMaokG6I7flYKGhlB...
    Here's the AP link:
    mattbrawn
  • Not a shocker at all
    CTZNWES
  • Isn't this just word games?

    Because if there actually was information obtained by "torture" than, obviously, the American government engaged in torture of POW's and is guilty of a war crime. But Bush and Bush only controls the very definition of torture, doesn't he?

    So doesn't this still fall back to Bush's ultimate defense that NONE of the "aggressive interrogation techniques" he's used are (by his definition alone) torture?

    It seems like an endless and pointless round of bullshit because so long as Bush alone can personally define what torture is -- than this is all a waste of time.

    Bush has decided to "re-define" waterboarding as merely a "aggressive interrogation technique" and therefore "not torture."

    The courts have ruled that no evidence will be allowable if it's obtained by using torture.

    Bush high-five's Cheney and says, "No problem! Because we only waterboarded and ass-raped them and I've just signed a document declaring that such techniques do not fit the definition of torture as we define it. So, yeah, the 'confessions' that 15 year old gave in which he admitted to being a super-terrorist in charge of 10,000 terror cells hidden here in America after being ass-raped, er, I mean 'interrogated' for 6 years is perfectly admissable."

    So, sadly, I think the court is just wasting it's time because Bush (and Bush alone it seems) has the power to control the definition of "torture" and he has shrewdly defined it to mean only that which causes major organ failure or death.

    And even THEN it would be damn near impossible to prove anyone that's died in GitMo after being "interrogated" had died because of being waterboarded because (again!) Bush and Bush alone can unilaterally classify ANYTHING he desires as either executive priviledge or a national security secret.

    We are never, ever gonna get this guy.
    crob80227

Add your response

Login/Registration is required to add a response.