Going to Far!!!!!

It does not overly surprise me, but it really sickens me.
IN the US there is federal law about allowing testimony from undo duress. Torturing would clearly fall under those lines, however a Federal judge is allowing it.
It seems the man-A US citizen, was tortured till he confessed to attempting to kill the president, just to stop the torture.

Here is the link-read for yourselves:

news.bbc.co.uk...

Sadly, this seems to be how things are done in the USA these days. If you can't find the real criminal, decide on who you would like it to be and go after them. As long as you find SOMEONE to blame for your problems, then you don't have to be responsible.

Ultimate case in point: Too incompetent to find the 9/11 mastermind? Well, convince the people that a stupid little man running a country you'd like to invade had something to do with the crime (and some vague future threat) and get them to back an invasion. Saddam is a very bad man!

Unfortunately, the people follow the leader in cases like this. Our morals and values are being demonstrated by one who is morally bankrupt and a criminal at that!

Yes there are domestic laws to prevent torture, ah but that's why the CIA is using your tax money and Cutom Built Planes given to them by the airline companies to take the prisoners to other countries to torture them. The American Inquistion is afoot, and if Bush has his way, it will be above and beyond reprieve.

I missed this when I first made my post-straight fraom atssn.

www.atsnn.com...

Basicly it is an attempt to get the anti-torture laws excluded for the CIA.

Sadly, I see my beloved America turning into the Nazi Germany and it makes me sick.

umm, the judge didn't permit a confession via torture. The judge could not find any evidence of torture.

The judge reviewed photographs of Mr Ali's back, which showed thin, linear marks or scars that the defendant said was proof of the flogging he received.
Prosecutors argued that the faint markings could have been caused by anything and that Mr Ali's confession was voluntary.
But his lawyers said that he gave a false confession to stop the torture.

I read this already, first up, the article already assuming that man was tortured. Your whole "sickens me" opinion also assumes this man was really tortured. That has yet to be proven.

Al Qaeda rule: Claim torture if captured.

The manual can be found here:
www.usdoj.gov...

Please see my post to this subject here:

www.abovetopsecret.com... d0

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Sadly, this seems to be how things are done in the USA these days.

Excuse me?? This wasn't done in the U.S.! Reread the story! This guy was arrested in Saudi Arabia, where he attended college.

If you can't find the real criminal, decide on who you would like it to be and go after them. As long as you find SOMEONE to blame for your problems, then you don't have to be responsible.

The first and foremost candidates for terrorism training continue to be those who reside in the United States (and may or may not have citizenship) who "go back to their home countries for a religious education." I couldn't help but notice the story does not mention what his "major" was.

Ultimate case in point: Too incompetent to find the 9/11 mastermind? Well, convince the people that a stupid little man running a country you'd like to invade had something to do with the crime (and some vague future threat) and get them to back an invasion. Saddam is a very bad man!

Perhaps you don't realize that Saddam is the FIRST Head Of State outsed by a foreign power AND CAPTURED to stand trial for crimes commited against his own people. Maybe that's wasn't the original intention, but it sure worked out that way...and yes...the Iraqis ARE grateful.

Unfortunately, the people follow the leader in cases like this. Our morals and values are being demonstrated by one who is morally bankrupt and a criminal at that!

In the future, when comparing Buch to Satan and Hitler, can you pleae provide PROOF that he's quilty of a crime??




[

[edit on 25-10-2005 by Toelint]

Originally posted by Toelint
Excuse me?? This wasn't done in the U.S.! Reread the story! This guy was arrested in Saudi Arabia, where he attended college.

From the article (which I did read), "A federal judge in the United States has ruled ..."

The first and foremost candidates for terrorism training continue to be those who reside in the United States (and may or may not have citizenship) who "go back to their home countries for a religious education."

Where does this information come from? Besides, Ali was born in Houston.

Maybe that's wasn't the original intention, but it sure worked out that way

So, to you, the end (which we haven't reached) will justify the means. To me, it will not. We went to war to protect ourselves (supposedly). To change the reason for being there is simply unacceptable (again, to me).

...and yes...the Iraqis ARE grateful.

I think that depends on which Iraqis you speak to... How many times did you have to tell yourself that before you actually believed it?

In the future, when comparing Buch to Satan and Hitler, can you pleae provide PROOF that he's quilty of a crime??

I didn't compare Bush to anyone. And regardless of what I provide, there's little indication that you would believe it. And regardless of whether or not anyone provides proof to your satisfaction, I will always have and voice my opinions about the man and his administration.

There is all kinds of questionable behavior on the part of this administration, but some people refuse to believe it. Yet, this one story about this one man being arrested and charged is enough for you to play judge, jury and executioner based on obviously not knowing much at all about the case.

The Appalling Case of Ahmed Omar Abu

The case is far from as open-and-shut as the FBI might suggest. Indeed, a number of aspects of the prosecution are deeply troubling.
...
Before U.S. District Judge John Bates, the government took the position that Abu Ali was far too dangerous to ever be returned to the United States, and that the reason was so serious that it could not be disclosed even to the family's attorneys. In other words, the government sought to proceed on secret evidence.
...
Then, the government reversed itself dramatically....
...
Apparently, however, the U.S. had taken advantage of this U.S. citizen's choice to attend school abroad, to make sure he was held in prison there--where torture would be permitted, and counsel would not be provided. Indeed, unidentified sources have been quoted in the Washington Post and New York Times as saying that the government certainly would have preferred to have left Abu Ali in Saudi Arabia.

I won't quote any more. If anyone wishes to know more, you can visit the link. Or you can go on looking at the pretty colors and bright lights.

Yes, a US Federal Judge said it......But, according to the article, there was NO trial in America. This occured in SAUDI ARABIA...where a US decision means nothing. Saudi law allows physical enticement of prisoners, so no "crime" was commited by authorities.


All the Iraqis I have spoken too, which sometimes numbered 1500 a day, are indeed grateful for US intervention. How many have you spoken to----in Iraq, like I did?


MrMonsoon related the US government to the Nazi's, and also mentioned the CIA, whom had nothing to do with this thread. You did call Bush a criminal though, for which we would like proof from a non-biased source........we'll wait.