Skip to main content

View Diary: Updated with Corrections Re: 9th Circuit legalizes torture (266 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  But how else do we, or anyone, hold torturers (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheMomCat, LaFajita, Lady Libertine

    accountable (whether the torturer himself or the legal authors) without the right to sue, especially when no one in the Gov seems to want to do anything about it?

    Does that not create a legal dead zone where torture isn't legal or illegal, and if so, what is to stop someone/agency from doing it.

    My issue is that the SCOTUS has allowed this to stand, and thus I place the onus on them, as well as the Obama DoJ for pushing for it. The How is not as important as the Why in my book, but I thank you for the corrections

    If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- for ever.' ~ George Orwell, 1984

    by MinistryOfTruth on Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 11:23:50 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  So, what you seem to be saying here is that (6+ / 0-)

      there is no justification possible, by any standard, for the 9th circuit court to dismiss the suit.  Because we want to see a court decision against torture so badly, we are going to view any and all legal obstacles as attempts to legalize torture - is that it?  You can't conceive of the possibility that there was a legitimate procedural or legal flaw in the suit that necessitated its dismissal?

      Deoliver47 was right and deserves some apologies.

      by LeanneB on Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 11:29:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Here's the problem (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Elise, dan c, marabout40, LeanneB, soothsayer99

      DOJ should be run by people who do their own investigations, which supposedly they are working on.  The "people" should not be involved one way or another.  Torture should not be politicized one way or the other.  If there is a crime, then the DOJ should be able to find a way to file charges. The political process needs to stay away no matter what DOJ decides.

    •  Did the ruling prohibit suing (6+ / 0-)

      government officials without exception?  If not, then there is still a legal remedy and the whole premise of your diary is completely false.

      You know, really.  You should use your head before your knee.

      Oba-MA bumaye! Oba-MA bumaye!

      by fou on Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 11:32:42 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Nope. (6+ / 0-)

        The ruling said 4 British guys held in Guantanamo couldn't sue the Donald Rumsfeld for violating their religious beliefs under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (passed by congress primarily to ensure Native Americans could use Peyote) because they weren't the 'persons' the law referred to.  

        It's not a case about torture.  And it didn't strip them of their 'personhood' or make them slaves as of the insane shit linked by the diarist claimed.  Rather, it simply held that these guys weren't the people referred to in the law, ie. they weren't American citizens.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site