We can check-mate McCain in the next 5 days. Here's how...

[DeadElephant_ORG]

Last week, the Administration was finally cornered by their torture videos - forced to admit to waterboarding prisoners. Now, their only way out of criminal charges is to try to make torture NOT ILLEGAL. That's why last Thursday (Feb 7th) Cheney publicly admitted to, and defended, torture. He stood in front of an Ultra-Right audience (CPAC) and, in-effect, dared the country to arrest him: "Would I do it again? You're damned right I would."

This places McCain in the ultimate no-win political bind. Torture is John McCain's signature issue. The best-known fact about McCain is that he was tortured. He lead the fight in the Senate to ban torture - and won the issue, over stiff White House resistance, 90 to 9! Right now he's in a fight with the Ultra-Right for his political life. Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, et. al., are attacking him relentlessly and refusing to support the Republican ticket. He went before that same CPAC audience, just before Cheney, to beg for conservative support. He can't win the general election without it. So he can't cross the Ultra Right right now. But Cheney is defiant about breaking McCain's torture ban. And what has McCain done about that? NOTHING.

If McCain is going to give us "straight talk", he'll have to accuse the President and Vice President of war crimes. That would finish his campaign. If he fails to stand up for his principals and call them to account, he will brand himself as history's preeminent flip-flopping, pandering, wimp. It would destroy the McCain brand. If we demand that he answer the question, any answer he gives is his doom.

So our task is simple: for the next 5 days we hold John McCain's feet to the fire over torture. Our demand for his answer should be lead by both of our Democratic candidates.

And the price of failing to do so? To wake up tomorrow in an America in which torture is forever legal.

If this makes sense - kick it!

Jeff Goldsmith
www.DeadElephant.ORG

------------------------------------------------------

More detailed information and links:

• This week, the White House admitted to waterboarding (controlled drowning) of terrorist suspects. It’s an ancient and barbaric technique, long understood - without any question - to be torture.

• Cheney gave a speech in which he acknowledged and defended the use of this known torture.

• A White House spokesman reserved the right to do it again! But he refused to answer whether it would be torture if Al Qaeda waterboarded US soldiers.

• While questioning our new Attorney General today, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) claimed that “99% of Americans would support” waterboarding. He emphasized that the Bush administration should “not be defensive about using” the technique.

• Ann Coulter this week comfortably acknowledged on national television that she supports torturing our prisoners. She felt no need to mince words about "waterboarding".

video of Cheney, and White House spokesman
transcript of Rep Lemar Smith
Anne Coulter: "I should feel concerned about putting a little water up a terrorists nose!?"


This is a balls-to-the-wall play to make the war crimes which they have now admitted to somehow, suddenly NOT BE CRIMES. It out-Cheneys Cheney for sheer aggressive, criminal hubris.
They are moving right now to make TORTURE NORMAL. So NOW is when we MUST OPPOSE THEM.

The Clinton and Obama campaigns must pull together on this and raise HELL right now! Besides the immorality of it, the normalization of torture is a wedge issue pointed right at the heart of John McCain.

A poll three months ago asked Americans whether they think waterboarding is a form of torture. More than two-thirds of respondents, 69 percent, said “yes”. So not only are we are in the right, we are in the MAJORITY. And because most moderate Republicans and Independents are morally opposed to torture – including most Christian evangelicals (after all, who would Jesus torture?) - torture is the ideal issue by which to wedge McCain and moderate Republicans away from the fanatical Right. Away from pure evil.

Torture has no part in the America that you and I love. It is the scariest possible step towards a police state. We must hold John McCain’s feat to that fire NOW. (pun intended)


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blecht]

2. The zombie strawman

Can somebody please bury this idiotic "but he knows where the nuke is!" argument forever? It keeps coming back from the dead after being shot down by critical thinking.

Torture should never be an option. It does not produce anything other than what the victim thinks the torturers want to hear.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blecht]

4. I'm not gonna feed this troll any more -- nt

[regnaD kciN]

5. Thanks for playing...

..."The World Is A Giant Episode Of 24."

:eyes:

[tkmorris]

11. The answer is no

No, torture is NOT acceptable, in any situation, period.

There are certain moral principles which to me are not subject to circumstances. They are universal. Torture is one.

If you want some ammo in your attempt to make my position seem ridiculous, I'll make it easy for you. I also am opposed to the death penalty, in ALL cases. If you can't make hay out of that.........

[Usrename]

12. The 9/11 Commission Report used evidence obtained by waterboarding.

We are waterboarding people to obtain evidence in official proceedings. It has nothing to do with gathering intelligence.

Just drop that whole argument, and drop it right now. It isn't fucking true. It isn't even close to being fucking true.

The 9/11 Commission report contains a text box that speaks to the issue. The disclaimer (page 146), entitled “Detainee Interrogation Reports,” reads:

“Chapters 5 and 7 rely heavily on information obtained from captured al-Qaeda members. A number of these ‘detainees’ have firsthand knowledge of the 9/11 plot. Assessing the truth of statements by these witnesses—sworn enemies of the United States—is challenging. Our access to them has been limited to the review of intelligence reports based on communications received from the locations where the actual interrogations take place. We submitted questions for use in the interrogations, but had no control over whether, when, or how questions of particular interest would be asked. Nor were we allowed to talk to the interrogators so that we could better judge the credibility of the detainees and clarify ambiguities in the reporting. We were told that our requests might disrupt the sensitive interrogation process. We have nonetheless decided to include information from captured 9/11 conspirators and al-Qaeda members in our report. We have evaluated their statements carefully and have attempted to corroborate them with documents and statements of others. In this report, we indicate where such statements provide the foundation for our narrative. We have been authorized to identify by name only ten detainees whose custody has been confirmed officially by the US government.”

They admit in their own document that they submitted the questions to the waterboarders, with the intent of using this information as evidence in their official report. Under the Nuremberg principles, any claims that those Commissioners make now, that they didn’t know about how the info was obtained, is completely irrelevant. This act of including information obtained by torture in an official proceeding is strictly verboten by all modern jurisprudence.

It stinks to high heaven, and you only have to be fair-minded to see that it all stinks. It’s just plain wrong!

The interrogation of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (KSM) is mentioned as a source 211 times... He was repeatedly waterboarded and tortured ... and it will later be reported that up to 90 percent of the information obtained from his interrogations may be unreliable ... Interestingly, the 9/11 Commission sometimes seems to prefer KSM’s testimony over other sources. For instance, in 2003 the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry reported that the CIA learned in 1996 that KSM and bin Laden traveled together to a foreign country in 1995, suggesting close ties between them ... But the 9/11 Commission will ignore this and instead claim, based on KSM’s interrogation, that KSM and bin Laden had no contact between 1989 and late 1996.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&investigations:_a_detailed_look=911Commission

KSM underwent at least two sessions and other extreme measures before talking. "KSM required, shall we say, re-dipping," said another former senior intelligence official.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20752717/page/2/

Stop trying to justify what these monsters have been doing! Just stop! Now that you have been informed, consider this:

Are you going to continue being a willing tool of the people that are behind this whole agenda? Or will you help try to stop them?

[Usrename]

10. Sure, it's simple enough. Answer the question with a question.

If a house was burning with a baby trapped inside would you break in, or let the baby burn?

(All those babies will burn up if we don't legalize breaking into other people's houses!)

[Angela Shelley]

14. More power to you, Blecht! Torture should never be an option.

[DeadElephant_ORG]

25. forgive me, but I find defenders of torture to be revolting.

I'm an American.

[dysfunctional press]

6. who would jesus torture?

that's your answer.

[Dark]

8. The problem with your argument is this: You never know what they know.

We don't have telepaths, so it is impossible know before an interrogation if someone has knowledge of a terrorist attack.

What we can be sure of is that we have interrogated innocent people.

So the real question isn't "What if they know where the nuke is?" It's "Are you okay with America torturing innocent people?"

[MiniMe]

13. A tortured person will say whatever they think you want to hear to make it stop

The information is notoriously unreliable. If a man in custody knows where a nuke bomb is planted and when it is going to go off, you won't know he told you a lie until it goes off. So why do something so morally repugnant in the first place? You will get just as much if not more bad information than if you used conventional interrogation techniques.

[malaise]

20. Torture is a crime

Get over it.

[Mister Ed]

7. K&R. This OP outlines a sound strategy. n/t

[ConsAreLiars]

9. Yes. And point out the cowardly nature of the Iraq fear mongering.

And expose the kind of core cowardice that is revealed by those who actually believed that Iraq posed some threat that was so terrifying that they would murder and torture a million innocents through sheer desperation.

[TexasObserver]

15. I think you have made an excellent suggestion.

You're right. If we can make torture an issue now, bring it into focus, McCain will have to take his usual position, or get off the straight talk express. That will put him cross wise with the Puke party wonks who are trying re-make him into Cheney Junior. The far right will go apeshit, the Huckster will win races, Romney will kick his own ass watching Huckster make a move, and the Pukes meltdown just as the party overlords thought they had their frontrunner secured.

Little John could end up blowing his stack and going Zell on someone in front of cameras.

[radfringe]

16. he has come out against torture in the past

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/16/us/politics/16mccain.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
After a public forum at a restaurant in Allison, Iowa, where he once again took on his Republican opponents by name, Mr. McCain told reporters that, because of his efforts in the Senate, he was confident that the United States was no longer engaging in cruel and inhumane treatment.

“After we passed the Detainee Treatment Act, the Military Commissions Act, then obviously anybody who violated any law of the United States would have to be held responsible,” he said.

A few days later, in New Hampshire, Mr. McCain was asked about reports that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, was made to give up vital information only after being waterboarded.


http://www.democracynow.org/2007/11/29/romney_mccain_spar_on_waterboarding_and
Romney, McCain Spar on Waterboarding and Torture at GOP Debate
At the Republican debate hosted by CNN and YouTube Wednesday night, Gov. Mitt Romney and Sen. John McCain were asked about waterboarding and torture. Romney refused to say whether the interrogation technique was torture and continued, “I want to make sure that what happened to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed happens to other people who are terrorists.” McCain responded, “I am astonished that…anyone could believe that is not torture. It’s in violation of the Geneva Conventions.” We play an excerpt of the debate.


perhaps a better way to frame the issue is to ask him these questions:

"If you are elected as President of the United States, are there are any circumstances or events where torture is appropriate?"

and

"How do you define torture?"

[DeadElephant_ORG]

17. You can Digg this here:

You can Digg this here:
http://digg.com/politics/NOW_or_never_on_TORTURE_Put_a_wedge_into_McCain_s_heart

And promote it on C2NN here:
http://www.care2.com/news/member/404810293/631990

[KharmaTrain]

18. Oh...To Force Some Embarassing Votes...

It'd be fun to see Harry Reid have some fun this year...similar to how the GOOP used to run things. He should bring up a vote on torture, another on immigration, another on stem cell research...put McCain in the middle and watch him spin.

[Thothmes]

19. Question for McCain

IMO, that if in an open public forum, a person asked Senator Clinton and Obama the same question, they would (a) refuse to answer the question, (b) soft shoe around an answer. If they answered that Yes, the President, Vice President and the Secretary of Defense are guilty of war crimes, should be impeached and tried as war criminals at the Hague, theire political careers would probably end that day. Why don't we ask all three candidates the same question and see what shakes out. It is a valid question to all of them. Again just my opinion.

[Oilwellian]

21. McCain was asked about it recently in a GOP debate

He spoke very strongly against it. Half of the audience hissed and booed him for his opposition but he stood his ground. I don't think torture is something we can checkmate him on...he feels the same way about it as we do.

[DeadElephant_ORG]

22. If he calls the Vice President a criminal it will be political suicide

What's changed since that debate is that Cheney admitted to waterboarding. I agree with you that McCain is strong on this issue - stronger, frankly, than either of our own candidates. But McCain has a unique problem in that he cannot offend the far Right. Hillary and Obama have always been offensive to that crowd.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

23. WARNING VERY GRAPHIC! let them defend these pictures:

[DeadElephant_ORG]

24. THAT, absolutely, is what's at stake.