Reply With Quote
what exactly is 'enhanced interrogation'?
For all who support 'enhanced interrogation'...
Given a theoretical US citizen that was attempting a terrorist attack, should the CIA be allowed to 'interrogate' him to find out information?
Or should we not do such since he's a US citizen, even if the CIA believed he possessed information about a ticking time bomb?
what exactly is 'enhanced interrogation'?
enhanced interrogation is a euphemism for torture.
no, but.....
if they did it illegally and it worked I wouldn't care that much.
I don't know if the CIA has jurisdiction within US boundries but I have no problems with the FBI interrogating possible terrorists(or the CIA if it is within their jurisdiction).
I'm sure all of our local police departments have to get tough with criminals.
I don't know if you've ever been outside but it's a dog eat dog world out there and some people just need some slapping around.
Torture, for those who don't support enhanced interrogation
Let's just say waterboarding, sensory deprivation/overload, sleep deprivation, and drastic temperatures.
hand jobs work better
sincerely,
libs
you don't say....
what kind of 'torture' are we talking about?
'cut the pickle, tickle tickle'? waterboarding? forcing them to whiz on an electric fence?
Academic, since outsourcing remains legal and the precedents for indefinite detention still stand, as do an array of *investigational tools* not called *waterboarding*.
They would interrogate them bleep out of them under standing law IMO.
I don't know about waterboarding....Torture, for those who don't support enhanced interrogation
Let's just say waterboarding, sensory deprivation/overload, sleep deprivation, and drastic temperatures.
it's so easy a miamiheat can do it.
At least the board repubs are logically consistent!
Next question!
Would those who support enhanced interrogation of US citizens also support revocation of habeas corpus rights? Or would the right to habeas corpus enshrined in the Cons ution have precedence?
If you believe that the right to habeas corpus would hold precedence, how long do you think it would be acceptable for the FBI/CIA to hold a prisoner in custody?
Yes, but I was wondering what the board Republicans would say, just to make it clear. Not asking so much about the optics/realpolitiks of today's situation.
First of all, I don't approve of the EITs. No effing way.At least the board repubs are logically consistent!
Next question!
Would those who support enhanced interrogation of US citizens also support revocation of habeas corpus rights?
Secondly, no and NO. Habeas is the only check against arbitrary detention. If we ever have to suspend it again, maybe the president will be courteous enough to ask Congress to endorse the suspension, like Lincoln did.
I'm sure the police never use any enhanced interrogation techniques.
I'd only support it if Jack Bauer was giving the interrogations.
if anyone, citizen or not, wants to bring terrorism here to the mainland then i feel they lose all rights whatsoever. rights that we as americans have and supposedly live by, but there has to be a substantial amount of evidence against them. i'm just waiting for the gotcha momentAt least the board repubs are logically consistent!
Next question!
Would those who support enhanced interrogation of US citizens also support revocation of habeas corpus rights? Or would the right to habeas corpus enshrined in the Cons ution have precedence?
If you believe that the right to habeas corpus would hold precedence, how long do you think it would be acceptable for the FBI/CIA to hold a prisoner in custody?
Judges and Juries give them la ude to use *necessary force*. What's your point?
The paucity of prosecutions (20 or so) among the 200 or so remaining at Gitmo does not inspire confidence that this is the case.there has to be a substantial amount of evidence against them. i'm just waiting for the gotcha moment
Do you feel the use of terrorism automatically renders a citizen's rights null and void?if anyone, citizen or not, wants to bring terrorism here to the mainland then i feel they lose all rights whatsoever. rights that we as americans have and supposedly live by, but there has to be a substantial amount of evidence against them. i'm just waiting for the gotcha moment
If so, do you feel that should only apply to terrorism?
(Regarding evidence, who's going to check on it besides the FBI/CIA? Congress? The judiciary?)
possibly, but i think you can't be too safe in this situation especially the way things are now. war is .
If that individual were high up in an organization that had just murdered 3500 americans and the government did not have a handle on that organizations plans/capabilities then yes interrogate the er. Otherwise no.
Do you think that enhanced interrogation should be used in any possible ticking time bomb situation, no matter the time/place/person? Or are you saying you're ok with it because we're at war, and if we were at peace, we could afford the luxury of a trial?
The idea that Gitmo capital cases could plead guilty without any trial has been floated.
Then we could execute a few of em.
How would you feel about that, VLE?
without a doubt. citizen here or anywhere. there should be no tolerance for that.
if you're intent is meeting allah, or whatever you're fighting for, and you want to take other people with you, then yes.
i'm sure there's highly classified covert ops checking this out. at least i hope there is, but to be honest i don't have an answer to that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
