Part of the ongoing attempt to criminalize and stigmatize any resistance to the jihad, even one as partial and wrongheaded as Rumsfeld's was. "US judge won't toss torture suit naming Rumsfeld," by Mike Robinson for The Associated Press, March 5 (thanks to herr Oyal):
(AP) -- CHICAGO - A federal judge refused Friday to dismiss a civil lawsuit accusing former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of responsibility for the alleged torture by U.S. forces of two Americans who worked for an Iraqi contracting firm.U.S. District Judge Wayne R. Andersen's ruling did not say the two contractors had proven their claims, including that they were tortured after reporting alleged illegal activities by their company. But it did say they had alleged enough specific mistreatment to warrant hearing evidence of exactly what happened.
Andersen said his decision "represents a recognition that federal officials may not strip citizens of well settled constitutional protections against mistreatment simply because they are located in a tumultuous foreign setting."...
But this kind of court action, if it proceeds, will lead to deleterious consequences for American democracy in the future. Picture America as a banana republic in which every new President jails his opposition. It isn't all that far off from this.
I suspect that it is a slippery slope argument.
It is unlikely that Rumsfeld would have been called by the US soldiers to ask permission first if they could rough up two captives. To then hold him accountable for a likely breach of protocol is absurd.
I could understand if it was against the Federal Government as a whole, but this is an indiviual. Why? The Governemnt should be responsible for the conduct of the military not indivuals.
"Torture, according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, is:
...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions.
—UN Convention Against Torture"
If Bill Clinton could parse the word "is" by saying, It depends what the definition of the word is is.
Then
Rumsfeld should be able to parse the worse "severe" by saying, It depends what the definition of the word severe is.
Rumsfeld response: "Your honor, it wasn't and isn't torture, although it might have been torturous, in the same way our US soldiers are forced to undergo torturous and rigorous basic tr aining, including pain, sleep deprivation, hunger, thirst, and yes, even waterboarding, etc.
/Being forced to eat a delicious BLT might be considered torture by Muslims.
Jew Lover
And that's how it's done in Banana Republics.
Get yer predecessor if at all possible to weaken the opposition, thus improving your chances of retaining power. Can't get him? Get whomever you can.
islam is a lie and
Truth is killing it.
"Get yer predecessor if at all possible to weaken the opposition, thus improving your chances of retaining power. Can't get him? Get whomever you can."
Exactly. As in Orwell's dystopic novel "1984."
The object of the "Two-Minute Hate" is one Emmanuel Goldstein. This is a deliberate deflection away from Big Brother, sort of like what Hussein does with W.
The scapegoat on which all is blamed in Oceania is obviously Jewish. Orwell's purposeful use of a Jew as scapegoat parallels the Nazis blaming Germany's problems on the Jews.
The same way Hussein always makes a point to blame the "previous administration" for America's problems today. Hussein is Orwellian as all-get-out, and he doesn't even know it.