News-Record.com

Thanks for the nod. What has happened to us?

To us? Nothing. "What has happened to our government?" is, I believe, the more relevant question.

The government vigorously investigated and prosecuted Passaro to hold him responsible for his illegal personal acts. His actions were in direct violation of his contract, CIA standing orders, our government's policies, and the law. He was found guilty and I believe he deserved it.
Passaro was the problem, not the government. I doubt seriously that he was a perfectly normal person before going to work under contract to the government and then miraculously changed overnight because of his work for the government. If a city worker commits a crime while on duty we don't lynch the mayor. If we did, we'd have a new one every day!
Liberals have a nasty habit of holding no one personally responsible for their actions, instead blaming it all on "the government." I don't think the facts revealed in court during this case support that position here. Passaro was a bad apple, and our government firmly hauled him in to account for his crimes.

The government vigorously investigated and prosecuted Passaro to hold him responsible for his illegal personal acts.

Riggsveda's point was that the prosecution actually wasn't all that vigorous.

Passaro was the problem, not the government.

Given the government's unseemly eagerness to torture, that statement is simply laughable.

Liberals have a nasty habit of holding no one personally responsible for their actions, instead blaming it all on "the government."

Talk about your non sequitur. Riggsveda was saying that the government AND Passaro should be held accountable, not that the government should be held accountable INSTEAD of Passaro. She also was saying that Passaro got off light.

And given your protestations in light of the fact that two federal courts have now pretty much accused the president directly of breaking U.S. (NSA case) and international (Hamdan case) law, your implication that only conservatives value "personal responsibility" is, to be polite, amusing.

Lex, to date NO CASE has been made that the US government ordered, condoned, or sanctioned any torture of any kind as defined by legal authority. NONE.
Each and every case has been proven to be an illegal act committed by an individual in disobeyance of his/her orders, policies, guidelines, and the law.
Again, if a sanitation worker commits a crime while at work, does that mean the city government is guilty of the crime or ordered the employee to commit it?
I'm sorry you hate our government, but don't blame it for the individual criminal acts of it's employees.

Once again, jaycee, you are objectively wrong on the facts, as Riggsveda documents here.

For my own part, I'll just add a little Math 101:

Wanting the government to obey the law != hating our government.

Riggsveda quotes OPINIONS, not facts.
One man's interrogation technique is another man's torture.
I'll repeat my FACTUAL assertion: Lex, to date NO CASE has been made that the US government ordered, condoned, or sanctioned any torture of any kind as defined by legal authority.

You keep living in denial, jaycee. The responsible citizens of this great country will pick up your slack.

Please back up your claim. Show your readers where the GOVERNMENT has been adjudicated liable or found guilty of torture as defined by any legal body.
You continue to confuse opinion with fact, a rather startling characteristic for someone on whom the N&R depends on to report facts.
So you found someone who agrees with you and views interrogation techniques as "torture." The only thing that article does is lay out OPINIONS that some interrogation techniques are considered torture by the authors. If I wrote a blog article that said Lex Alexander was a woman, that wouldn't make it true, now would it?
Like Jim Wilson, I'm pretty appalled that the N&R lets you sit at their desk and draw a paycheck while you spew out misinformation and deliberately false and misleading information.

Well, you're entitled to your opinions, jaycee. But the in the real world, the paper trail pretty well spells it all out. Will all this get in front of a judge? I'm skeptical. But then, O.J. is walking around free, so maybe you and he can track down the real killer.

Please show me a "paper trail" that includes a conviction in a court of law or finding of liability that the government practices "torture" as defined by any legal authority.
Not YOUR opinion that some interrogation technique is "torturous" or someone else's opinion that because one employee did something it makes the entire US government guilty. You know that's mere speculation and conjecture on your part.
The US government does not practice, order, or sanction torture as defined by any legal authority, no matter how much you disagree with the tactics used against murdering terrorists.
Your hatred for the Bush administration and your anger at losing power because you're in the political minority in our country is clouding your judgment and senses, Lex.

As you know, no senior government individual has been brought before a court yet. But I'm sure that you, as do I, believe that all people are equal before the law and that government officials must be held just as accountable for their actions as anyone else, and so you look forward, as do I, to some court action on these issues.

The US government does not practice, order, or sanction torture as defined by any legal authority,

It has in fact sanctioned treatment banned by law and ratified treaties. And if you don't think some of it constitutes "torture," let's see you spend months at a time chained to the floor in "stress positions," doused with cold water in a chilled room, while having been charged with no crime, and then see how you feel.

no matter how much you disagree with the tactics used against murdering terrorists.

Of which we have how many, again, in custody? As opposed to people we SAY are terrorists but who have been charged with no crime and against whom we have no evidence?

No, really: How many KNOWN murdering terrorists do we have in custody?

There you go again. Your *opinion* that a tactic is "torture" does not meet the legal definition. Just because you disagree with some tactics does not make you the legal authority to whom license is given to determine what is and isn't legal.
Every person who is part of a conspiracy is responsible for all acts of that conspiracy. Every terrorist picked up on the field of combat and every one that acts in furtherance of that conspiract/terrorist act is a terrorist. You really need to get a solid legal grounding before you continue discussions like this. You're out of your league.

There you go again. Your *opinion* that a tactic is "torture" does not meet the legal definition.

Even if that were true and relevant, the fact remains that the U.S. government has violated the Geneva Conventions in multiple respects w/r/t its treatment of detainees, and it has done so knowingly, willingly and against the advice of many of its own attorneys.

Every person who is part of a conspiracy is responsible for all acts of that conspiracy.

True. And this relates to detainees who haven't been charged, and against whom no evidence exists, HOW, exactly?

Every terrorist picked up on the field of combat and every one that acts in furtherance of that conspiract/terrorist act is a terrorist.

True, but see above. This is the third time I've asked this question, or a variant of it, of you today and you have yet to answer. I'm beginning to wonder whether maybe you don't intend to.

You really need to get a solid legal grounding before you continue discussions like this. You're out of your league.

Yeah, but I'm mopping the floor with you, and that's all that counts.

You state "the U.S. government has violated the Geneva Conventions in multiple respects w/r/t its treatment of detainees, and it has done so knowingly, willingly and against the advice of many of its own attorneys." and you're welcome to this OPINION, but you have yet to back up your false claim with evidence of a court decision affirming your belief. It doesn't exist.

"And this relates to detainees who haven't been charged, and against whom no evidence exists..."
So you've been to Guatanamo and seen each and every case file on each and every detainee and KNOW of your own personal knowledge that "no evidence exist?" I rather doubt that, but you have a right to this "opinion" about what exists and what doesn't.

I wouldn't term your continued false and misleading statements to constitute "wiping the floor" with anyone with whom you've debated this issue. Far from it, you repeat the same "my opinions should be believed as fact" line to most every statement that contradicts your OPINION.

jaycee, as I've said before, if you've seen the evidence, you don't need a court to render a verdict.

In the specific case to which I linked, the government admits it has no evidence. What, you think they're lying about that?

So tell me how you "saw" the evidence kept at Guantanamo? Did Louis Farrakhan take you up on his "mother ship" and fly you there?
You haven't seen anything, Lex. You've read other peoples OPINIONS of what the evidence is and made up your mind. However, that's not a FACT, it's your OPINION. You are not a judge and jury, you don't have the lagal authority to determine guilt or innocence except in your own mind.

jaycee, relativism is the last refuge of an argumentational loser. And I'm not going to spend the time to explain to you the same things I've explained dozens of times before.

Shorter Lex=I can't defend my position.

whatever, jaycee. whatever.