Obama and rendition.

Scott Dolan · February-3rd-2009, 02:01 AM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-continue.html

Change...

Brian Olewnick · February-3rd-2009, 10:41 AM

What are the reasons offered to justify rendition aside from the host country's (presumed) greater willingness to employ torture? They must have cobbled together a few, even if they're flimsy.

rollhead · February-3rd-2009, 10:54 AM

I get it. We will stop torturing, but let other countries do it for us.

me wag · February-3rd-2009, 11:01 AM

It's outsourcing, fellas.

Scott Dolan · February-3rd-2009, 11:34 AM

Well, at least we'll be saving money.

Scott Dolan · February-3rd-2009, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Olewnick

What are the reasons offered to justify rendition aside from the host country's (presumed) greater willingness to employ torture? They must have cobbled together a few, even if they're flimsy.

As far as I can tell, that's pretty much it.

Hell, we can't be seen as torturers, can we? That would be just ghastly!

patricia · February-3rd-2009, 11:44 AM

Rendition, or outsourcing torture is no different that hiring a hitman.
Technically, YOU are not torturing. But, torturing is being done at your behest.

Standing in front of your countrymen with your bare face hanging out, as the Bush Administration has done, and saying "WE don't torture" is as big a lie as the reason given for launching the attack on Iraq being WMDs.

People who were transported to other countries to be tortured were tortured because they were sent by the U.S. government to countries who were known as torturing countries.

The Bush Administration was hiring hitmen and knew it, but did it deliberately.

Tom Storer · February-3rd-2009, 11:51 AM

Seriously disappointing. I'm hoping there will at least be transparency on:

a) where rendition will occur (not just countries but precise locations)
b) exactly what constitutes "a short-term, transitory basis"
c) exactly who is "rendered" and when their rendition begins and ends
d) what the legal status is of people detained for rendition
e) exactly what occurs during rendition and who is accountable for it

But I'm not holding my breath.

I'm waiting for Monte to weigh in to either laugh snarkily at how Obama pulled the wool over our eyes or praise him for his tough attitude towards the Enemy. Or both!

Scott Dolan · February-3rd-2009, 11:52 AM

Hahahahahaha.................

Let's not hold Obama's feet to the fire particia. And you truly fucking have no idea why I call you that?!

You are as lost in wonderland as Goody.

Reread the article I posted. THIS SHIT IS BEING APPROVED BY YOUR LORD AND SAVIOUR!!!

But, hey, who cares? We can just blame it on the Bush administration.

Monte Smith · February-3rd-2009, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Storer

I'm waiting for Monte to weigh in to either laugh snarkily at how Obama pulled the wool over our eyes or praise him for his tough attitude towards the Enemy. Or both!

Yuk yuk yuk, Gobama! Gobama! Gobama! Yuk yuk yuk.

Tom Storer · February-3rd-2009, 12:20 PM

Reading the executive order more closely, I see that the definition of "detention facility" has no bearing on the matter.

The Telegraph article linked to from Scott's initial post says:

Quote:

Section 2 (g) of the order, appears to allow the US authorities to continue detaining and interrogating terror suspects as long as it does not hold them for long periods. It reads: "The terms "detention facilities" and "detention facility" in section 4(a) of this order do not refer to facilities used only to hold people on a short-term, transitory basis."

But the order also specifies, in section 3, that the Geneva Convention must apply for anyone "in the custody or under the effective control of an officer, employee, or other agent of the United States Government or detained within a facility owned, operated, or controlled by a department or agency of the United States." Since the order concerns only actions by the US government, that would apply even if longterm detention facilities were not closed, and will apply in any "short-term, transitory" facilities that remain.

The order does not address sending people to other countries for interrogation by foreign governments, outside US control. Not at all. Nothing in the order allows it, nothing forbids it. The order itself does explicitly give Geneva Convention protection to all terror suspects who "are in the custody or under the effective control of an officer, employee, or other agent of the United States Government or detained within a facility owned, operated, or controlled by a department or agency of the United States."

We can't be certain that the US, under Obama, will not continue to ship people off to the care of torturers in other countries (just as we can't be certain that the US will not break its own laws and ignore its own stated policy). Personally, I'm assuming his opposition to torture is real and that he will not condone it. Even if his opposition is purely political, I think he is still not likely to condone it, since it is sure to be discovered if it continues as a matter of policy.

Scott Dolan · February-3rd-2009, 12:32 PM

Well, you either agree that none of this should be left in an ambiguous state, or you don't.

I think it speaks volumes that he did not explicitly rule out rendition to foreign countries. And that's the meat and taters of this.

Brian Olewnick · February-3rd-2009, 12:58 PM

Could one rationale be that they (we) are able to keep people in custody without due process for a longer period than would be possible in the US? Still creepy, but a level or two below torture.

Scott Dolan · February-3rd-2009, 01:03 PM

I don't know that anyone is arguing that rendition is torture.

One could easily come to the conclusion that one follows the other, though.

rollhead · February-3rd-2009, 04:20 PM

Actually, why not do something that Monte suggested? Put a transistor in their flipper and let them go? If they pop up again in Tora Bora or in the Tribal Areas, we have a better way to deliver "surgical strikes" with cruise missiles.

Or would this kind of "anti-terrorist vaccination" be considered a human rights violation as well?

rollhead · February-3rd-2009, 04:56 PM

Well, Scott Horton says that I am wrong to be concerned about this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#28985838

Monte Smith · February-3rd-2009, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rollhead

Actually, why not do something that Monte suggested? Put a transistor in their flipper and let them go? If they pop up again in Tora Bora or in the Tribal Areas, we have a better way to deliver "surgical strikes" with cruise missiles.

Or would this kind of "anti-terrorist vaccination" be considered a human rights violation as well?

If they are not doing that already, we have the dumbest or most ethical government in human history.

GoodSpeak · February-3rd-2009, 08:29 PM

Got any legit sources to corroborate the website's story, Scott?

Rendition does not equal torture and I scarcely know where to begin dismantling such a ludicrous interpretation of the facts. But let us begin with a definition of terms, shall we?

Rendition n. The act of rendering; especially, the act of surrender, as of fugitives from justice, at the claim of a foreign government; also, surrender in war.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=rendition

Fact #1: The Executive Order states there will be no more torture.

Fact #2: The Executive Order states there will be interrogations done only under the strictest rules of conduct outlined in the military guidebook regarding such practices. In other words, NO TORTURE.

Basically, you're full of shit once again. What a shock.

Wow.

GoodSpeak · February-3rd-2009, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Storer

Seriously disappointing. I'm hoping there will at least be transparency on:

a) where rendition will occur (not just countries but precise locations)
b) exactly what constitutes "a short-term, transitory basis"
c) exactly who is "rendered" and when their rendition begins and ends
d) what the legal status is of people detained for rendition
e) exactly what occurs during rendition and who is accountable for it

But I'm not holding my breath.

I'm waiting for Monte to weigh in to either laugh snarkily at how Obama pulled the wool over our eyes or praise him for his tough attitude towards the Enemy. Or both!

I'm still waiting to see an argument "easily" connecting rendition to torture.

Scott?

Yer on.

GoodSpeak · February-3rd-2009, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

Well, you either agree that none of this should be left in an ambiguous state, or you don't.

I think it speaks volumes that he did not explicitly rule out rendition to foreign countries. And that's the meat and taters of this.

Um.

That's where the terrorists live, Scott.

[duh]

So!

You going to wait until they migrate to America then arrest them?

GoodSpeak · February-3rd-2009, 09:15 PM

OK.

You know what?

This thread is so fucking stOOpid it is about to make my head explode.

Scott Dolan · February-3rd-2009, 09:16 PM

Ah, so you're adopting the kill them over there so they don't follow us home, eh?

Very interesting.

Scott Dolan · February-3rd-2009, 09:20 PM

Is the L.A. Times legitimate in your fantasy world?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,4661244.story

Scott Dolan · February-3rd-2009, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoodSpeak

I'm still waiting to see an argument "easily" connecting rendition to torture.

Scott?

Yer on.

I'm sure the CIA is kidnapping folks and sending them to foreign countries so they can compete in handball tournaments.

GoodSpeak · February-3rd-2009, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

I'm sure the CIA is kidnapping folks and sending them to foreign countries so they can compete in handball tournaments.

Oh you are so full of shit...it is to staggar the imagination.

The CIA under Bush the 2nd promoted torture. OK? You know, maybe you need to buy a calendar and check the dates, Scott.

Obama has been the president for less than three weeks. It just might take, oh, a few more minutes to change all that, eh? Ya think?

Understand now?

GEEZ. You are just too dumb for words.

GoodSpeak · February-3rd-2009, 10:19 PM

Again I ask: You going to wait until the terrorists migrate to America before you arrest them?

Amazing stupidity.

GoodSpeak · February-3rd-2009, 10:24 PM

GoodSpeak · February-3rd-2009, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

Is the L.A. Times legitimate in your fantasy world?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,4661244.story

And the "easy" torture link would be, uh...where again?

GAAAA!

jesus marion joseph · February-4th-2009, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoodSpeak

You going to wait until they migrate to America then arrest them?

Outside of a treaty, I don't see how we can *legally* arrest anyone outside of the jurisdiction of the US.

Brian Olewnick · February-4th-2009, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jesus marion joseph

Outside of a treaty, I don't see how we can *legally* arrest anyone outside of the jurisdiction of the US.

Please stop confusing Goodz with facts. Thank you.