Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Guantamamo Bay Torture, Mitt Romney

Guantanamo Bay Torture

I find torture of any human totally unacceptable. I believe acts of torture of detainees at Guantanamo Bay undermines our cause as Americans in the Middle East, which will only creates MORE anger and hatred against us. I totally agree with Michael Posner of Human Rights First when he said, “This is not about being for or against the war it is about doing it right. If we are going to transform the Middle East, we have to be law-abiding and uphold the values we want them to embrace - otherwise it is not going to work."

I watched the GOP debate last night, and Mitt Romney said he would "Double Guantanamo". They say he's a steel, tough minded and seasoned executive whose use to running things his way. I don't want our next president who’s USED to running things HIS WAY! I want a president who LISTENS to the people and runs things the way the majority of Americans want things run! I do not like this man, and it frightens me beyond belief to think he could someday be the President of the United States!

Thoughts please.


Join The NRA

"The Right Of The People To Keep and
Bear Arms, Shall Not Be infringed."


( 36 comments — Leave a comment )
May. 16th, 2007 08:14 pm (UTC)
May. 17th, 2007 12:53 pm (UTC)
Nods back. :o)
May. 16th, 2007 08:22 pm (UTC)
Which by the logic of your last post means you have to LIKE Al Sharpton again because Al Sharpton made negative remarks about him and Mormonisn.

I'm still waiting for that reply :)
May. 17th, 2007 07:29 pm (UTC)
Hold your horses! I THINKING, I even went to bed THINKING!! :o)

As for Al Sharpton, I had no idea he had made negative remarks about Mormons. I just don't like Sharpton anymore, since he spoke so nicely about Falwell, and for being responsible for having Imus fired.
(no subject) - donchep - May. 17th, 2007 09:23 pm (UTC) - Expand
May. 16th, 2007 09:00 pm (UTC)
You're absolutely right.

These republican candidates are working hard to agressively court the far-right base, and it's pretty sickening to watch. On the plus side, the majority of Americans are not so blind to the realities as this particular group, so the further the candidates move to the right, the less likely their chance to take executive power in '08.
May. 16th, 2007 09:05 pm (UTC)
Mitt Romney is a mormon. Those people don't even think non-whites are even real humans. Yeah they changed their Bible, right before sending a lot of missionaries out to Africa and other places where a lot of non-whites live and objected to that quaint little belief. So it doesn't surprise me that he thinks it's ok to torture brown skinned sub-humans.
May. 16th, 2007 10:00 pm (UTC)
Oh man, it's gonna fly now.
(no subject) - playgirl - May. 17th, 2007 01:56 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - nishar - May. 18th, 2007 10:25 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - daddy - May. 18th, 2007 09:22 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - nishar - May. 18th, 2007 10:22 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - daddy - May. 19th, 2007 01:28 am (UTC) - Expand
May. 16th, 2007 10:17 pm (UTC)
I am a pacifist...

I would hate having to cause pain to someone to find out information...

But (And there's always one of those)

In the scenario they're talking about, I'm afraid the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few... I would rather torture ten men and save hundreds of men, women, and children, than pussyfoot around people who are intent on murder.

At the end of the day, when you're dealing with people willing to die for their cause, the only real threat is either hurting the ones they love, or prolonged pain...

Although, this "Double Guantanamo" talk makes me angry...

See, the first guy there had it right... The key is certainty that the people subjected to enhanced interrogation are the right people. Evidence is required beyond someone fitting a certain profile, or being in the wrong place at the wrong time...

It's a very complex issue, and a very hard one to separate into black and white...
May. 16th, 2007 10:38 pm (UTC)
Actually I live in MA. As a minority REpublican in the state I thought Mitt did a pretty good job of running things here and a good job of listening to the people. What Mitt may have been talking about is not letting the House and Senate try to bully him into doing things their way. As to torture; hmmmmm I don't think torture actually works to get the information, least not the brutality kind. Me, I'd be more for mentally torturing which I think works.
(no subject) - playgirl - May. 17th, 2007 01:31 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - playgirl - May. 17th, 2007 08:16 pm (UTC) - Expand
May. 16th, 2007 10:47 pm (UTC)
"I don't want our next president who’s USED to running things HIS WAY!"

I was persuaded by Edmund Burke’s argument on the responsibility of a representative and his obligation to follow his own virtues while in office. I can’t find a summary of his argument right now, sorry.
May. 17th, 2007 08:01 pm (UTC)
If you find it, please let me know.
May. 16th, 2007 11:03 pm (UTC)
We need to define TORTURE.
Cutting off fingers and such= torture

water boarding and not permanently harming someone= NOT torture

I'm in favor of being tough on our enemies....but not in permantently disfiguring or damaging them.
You can hurt a person so badly they will tell you ANYTHING. That intel is virtually useless.
May. 17th, 2007 07:35 pm (UTC)
I'm also in favor of being tough with our enemies, but where do we cross the line when it becomes torture? I have put myself in that situation mentally, and have come to the conclusion that if I were to be tortured for information, I'd just come up with some cock and bull story, just to stop the torture!

Defining the word TORTURE, is exactly the problem when it comes to Guantanamo Bay. What ever happened to the Geneva Conventions anyway?
May. 17th, 2007 12:50 am (UTC)
I am for Hillary Clinton!!!! :)
And as for Mitt Romney he is just your typical GOP kind of guy a Bigot in a suit.
Now I wonder what comments I will get!!! Heheheee...=o) lol

Hugs Savanah!! ;o)
May. 17th, 2007 01:33 pm (UTC)
I just not sure about Hillary Clinton, Sweety Pie. Too many people do not like her, and I must find out why.
I was just curious :o) - moon_shine - May. 17th, 2007 03:58 pm (UTC) - Expand
May. 17th, 2007 01:56 am (UTC)
All I have to say is to judge Romney on his views, his consistency or lack thereof, etc. But once we speculate on his religion we descend that slippery slope.

Remember they did it to another Massachusetts politician over 40 years ago and it was as unfair then as it is now.

If he uses his religious views to project a view you disagree with that's fair game.

I like to think of jerry falwell, I am tolerant of his religious views and wouldn't judge him on whatever faction or sect he is part of, but when he uses it to spread and endorse intolerance then it's really about how the individual uses that religion and it's fair to use that as a benchmark to determine how you feel about him politically.

Now if I can only learn to be more tolerant of those scientology whack jobs :)
May. 17th, 2007 08:21 pm (UTC)
Who was that Massachusetts politician, and what did they do to him?

You mean its okay for a president to use his religious views to run the country? Perhaps I misunderstood.
(no subject) - donchep - May. 17th, 2007 09:17 pm (UTC) - Expand
May. 17th, 2007 04:11 am (UTC)
the way I see it, if the "ticking time bomb" scenario came up a stressed soldier/cop will go ahead and torture whoever to find out whatever and dam the consequences...if torture is legitamized it won't be too long before your local cop is beating a confession out of everyone, whether they've committed the crime or not.

the problem with torture is that it's too effective. Sheee-it, with some power tools I can get anyone to confess to assasinating archduke ferdinand.


May. 17th, 2007 07:59 pm (UTC)
That's what frightens me more than anything else; the day when policemen can torture us and get away with it!
(no subject) - ninjaguydan - May. 17th, 2007 08:05 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - playgirl - May. 17th, 2007 08:06 pm (UTC) - Expand
May. 17th, 2007 11:57 am (UTC)
From the beginning in 2001 I have believed that the only true way to succeed in bringing down the forces of terrorism is to undermine its power base, its source of converts. I have never believed that going to war would achieve this. If you want to seek justice you have to do it from a higher moral ground with the higher ideals of the good of humanity in mind. Otherwise all you have is a desire for revenge. The same goes for Democracy. If you are hoping to lift a people's hope in life to want Democracy, then you have to show them that Democracy is something that is worth having.

How can you do that when interrogation of suspects in Guantanamo Bay is no better than any treatment handed out to prisoners under the old regime? How can America, or Australia my home country, expect to make an impact in Iraq if the people of Iraq think that they will get treatment just as barbaric as before the invasion should they be taken into custody?

If you think that I have missed the point, consider this. If you don't use aggressive interrogation techniques or torture to question US citizens in police custody, a consequence of democratic procedure, then failure to extend that courtesy to political detainees in Guantanamo Bay or other facilities can only be counterproductive in the spread of Democracy.

Believe me, one day the use of torture and inhumane tactics will come back to haunt us. In this we have lost the moral higher ground.
May. 17th, 2007 08:05 pm (UTC)
You have expressed all the exact sentiments I have felt all along about torture, but couldn’t put down into words.

To feel we have the right too willingly inflict torture of mind or body to others, in order to extract information, then we are no better than beasts.
May. 18th, 2007 09:41 pm (UTC)
1. Define totrture,
2. Just what do you feel is happening is Gitmo?
3. If your Grandfather was held by the ragheads, and there was a possibility that he might be beheaded, and you had someone who knew where he was, what would you do to get that Information?
4. What would you have done to someone who had information that could have prevented the entire 9-11 operation?

Mitt is a good man, and was an excellent Govonor. but it is way too early to believe he or anyone is gonna get the nomination. Fred Thompson and others may decide to run.

In the meantime think about the Democrats who are also running and the "Torture" they are for. Partial Birth Abortion. Both Hillary and Obamma have said they support this MURDER. The child is delivered breech, but before the head is delivered, while it is still in the birth canal, a pair of forcepts or scissors is shoved into the back of the skull, and a tube is inserted and the brain is sucked out where the skull can collapse. The Child is now dead, and is pulled from its Mother.

THAT my friends is real torture. Im sorry nothing in Gitmo comes anywhere close to this.
May. 20th, 2007 03:03 am (UTC)
I've had enough of the close to 8 years of a man use to running things his way, and Mitt seems to have the same attitude.

I want a President who will run things as the majority of the people want him to run things.

I have no idea in what way the detainees are being tortured. Remember how it surfaced, along with pictures, how perverted acts were performed on them. The pictures where they are on top of one anohter and that bitch is pointing her fingers at them and touching them? God only knows what form of torture some sickos are doing to them, that none of us knows.

What makes it all the tragic is that it's very possible that some detainees are innocent, but thanks to the Geneva Conventions obliteration, they'll never be able to prove they're innocent.
(no subject) - daddy - May. 20th, 2007 04:00 am (UTC) - Expand
( 36 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

May 2015


Powered by LiveJournal.com