InfoGeek InfoGeek

Who's "WE", Pres. Bush

▼

Who's "WE", Pres. Bush

from JoeUser Forums
There is a current proposal by the Senate to ban torture. Most people agree that torturing someone is a bad thing. Now, we are not talking about the police interrogation techniques that have passed legal muster, what I am talking about its torture.

Let’s say. For example, taking a hammer and whacking the boys a few times.

In general most people don’t like torture, so the Republican controlled Senate says, “OK, we’ll pass a law. No torture.”

And Bush just said recently that “We do not torture!” So this should be an easy pass. We don’t like torture, Bush says we don’t torture. Slam Dunk. Right?

No. The shot is rejected by Richard “hidden location” Cheney who wants an exemption for the CIA from the new law.

My question is, “If the president is saying we don’t torture, and Cheney wants an exemption, who is this “WE” the President is talking about?

IG
8,887 views 30 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
Wrong again. It is constrained by the preamble. As in who is defined


citizen is defined. where in the preamble is the government given free rein to do whatever the hell it wants to non-citizens?

the constitution does not exist to limit rights...except in neo-con wet dreams.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
Wrong again. It is constrained by the preamble. As in who is defined


citizen is defined. where in the preamble is the government given free rein to do whatever the hell it wants to non-citizens?

the constitution does not exist to limit rights...except in neo-con wet dreams.


Try again!


PREAMBLE

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


Please show me where in this that says constitutional protection is given to non-citizens? You should go read some law books kb. Non-citizens are NOT covered by the constitution.
ObjectDock - Access shortcuts and frequently used applications from an animated dock.
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
Much as I hate to, Doc, I have to differ with you. We supposedly hold these truths to be self-evident. We consider these rights "inalienable". To say that they are only "self-evident" for US citizens is silly.

That said, I don't give a rats ass. I feel confident enough in myself that I can say I am capable of doing something wrong when I feel that it serves my safety and well-being. I think it is hypocritical to make something that is wrong into something right by twisting words and their definitions.

I don't think torture does anyone any good, frankly. I doubt we get any intelligence of use from it very often, and killing these Gitmo stooges would be far more effective than making them eternal "dissidents" like friggin Russian novelists.

So, in short, people who think torture is necessary should do what they are given the power to do, and stop trying to pretend they are morally right, when in reality they are doing a nasty thing they feel is necessary regardless of right or wrong. I have a problem with people making bad into good, a lot more than I have people doing bad things.
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
Much as I hate to, Doc, I have to differ with you. We supposedly hold these truths to be self-evident. We consider these rights "inalienable". To say that they are only "self-evident" for US citizens is silly.


Why should they be afforded the protection of "our" constitution? Have they fought or died to uphold it? Nope. Do they support it in "any" fashion? Nope. That document was made to protect "Americans" in my opinion. All that being said...I don't hold with "torture" either. The prohibition of it should be a "human right" not just a constitutional one.
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
So, in short, people who think torture is necessary should do what they are given the power to do, and stop trying to pretend they are morally right, when in reality they are doing a nasty thing they feel is necessary regardless of right or wrong.


Whoooo! Go Machiavelli!

No seriously, I am not being sarcastic. I have thought this way ever since I read "The Prince"

But on that note...torture is bad...M'kay?