"who only last week backed off her previous suggestions that some torture could be legal"

[redqueen]

This is talking about our front-runner.

Seriously?

Somebody tell me this is a gross mischaracterization, please.

[wtmusic]

1. Seriously.

Read and weep. Flip, and flop.


http://www.alarmingnews.com/archives/005264.html

[knight_of_the_star]

2. Another reason she won't ever get my vote

Someone who is willing to nuance on an issue enshrined in our Constitution and our foreign policy efforts up until now does not deserve to lead this country.

[redqueen]

3. HELLO?!

:wtf:

[redqueen]

4. It kills me that this is just ignored...

eh, so she danced around about torture... no big deal, right?

[redqueen]

5. I'm going to keep kicking this until someone

who supports Hillary stops by to say something about Hill's vacillation on torture.

:evilgrin:

[ncabot22]

10. Good luck with that

I'd be surprised if you hear from any of her supporters. You may get "well, she's against it now" but that doesn't make it any better, does it?

[redqueen]

12. Yeah...

I just don't get how something like this is so easily ignored.

[jenmito]

15. kick

:kick:

[jenmito]

19. kick again

:kick: :D

[alteredstate]

41. kick

[mmonk]

6. Well she finally produced this for the American Freedom Campaign.

http://www.americanfreedomcampaign.org/storage/afagenda/documents/Clinton%20response.pdf


If she wins, we just have to make sure we hold her to it.

[redqueen]

8. Yeah... but the 'dancing around' part of her stance on torture

makes me just a *little* nervous. (Actually, a lot.)

[mmonk]

9. Yep.

The proper response should be automatic, not a calculation.

[redqueen]

13. Exactly.

It's frickin torture!

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

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

[rucky]

11. If it were a mischaracterization...

you would've been accused by now of spreading GOP talking points.

[redqueen]

14. Good point.

I just don't understand how it's easy to ignore this.

*sigh*

[hedgehog]

16. There is no nuance to torture.

To me, the comments made by both Clintons suggest that they don't have the imagination or empathy required to understand torture, nor do they understand our history. My mother was very upset and shocked over Abu Garaib. I was neither shocked nor suprised. I've been reading for years about the torture techniques used in Central and South America by people we trained. I know the enemies of this contry use torture. America is supposed to be different.

[redqueen]

17. I think they understand *perfectly*. They are very intelligent. n/t

[hedgehog]

18. There is understanding and there is understanding.

Clinton is famous for feeling people's pain, but he has a couple glaring blind spots.

[PurityOfEssence]

34. Ah, not to a true afficionado...

To an epicure of abuse, there are many shadings, and mental torture is truly the best. Of this delicious subset of cruelty, one of the most exquisite is the Clintonian version, especially if one has a taste for truth.

[Forkboy]

20. Kick

:kick:

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[redqueen]

23. What?

What's enough? Do you care to comment on Hillary's waffling around about fucking TORTURE?

Oh, and by the way... welcome to DU, and enjoy your stay.

[incapsulated]

22. The "ticking time bomb" scenario

That is where she said there may be a reason for "severity", ie, you've got the terrorist and a bomb is about to blow a building to pieces but you don't know which building. Should you be able to smack this fucker around, put a gun to his head, whatever?

I mean, c'mon, that is such a unlikely hypothetical, and so extreme even those who are firmly against any kind of torture have to think twice.

[redqueen]

24. It's a huge steaming pile of bullshit is what that 'scenario' is.

Can't believe people still trot that out as if it's fucking meaningful.

But that's what this country's come to, I guess.

[hedgehog]

30. Actually , I realized today that this scenario happens every day

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1983048&mesg_id=1983048

[Solon]

25. That scenario is a pseudo-intellectual excercise that makes immoral people think they are...

justified in their positions. There are so many assumptions put forward in such a scenario that not only is it "unlikely" its fucking impossible to happen in real life.

[jenmito]

26. If torture isn't allowed because it's cruel and doesn't work...

why would it work in ANY scenario? That's just flawed logic.

[incapsulated]

27. Just to be clear, she was *asked* this question

And that was her response. That in such an unlikely scenario, severity, with presidential authority, may be justified.

So, I really think it is stretching it to say based on being asked this stupid question, Hillary had been "pro-torture".

[jenmito]

28. So? If she's asked a question, her answer shouldn't matter?

Allowing for torture in a certain, unlikely scenario only means she thinks torture WORKS, which it doesn't according to those who've been tortured.

[incapsulated]

29. Because it's a bullshit question along the lines of...

"Oh, yeah, well what if it was your WIFE that was raped??"

"What if it was your kids this guy was about to blow up??"

Frankly, I would be totally dumbstruck if this scenario ever happened and "severity" was not used, no matter who was in office. And anyone who says, in that specific unlikely event, they wouldn't touch the guy if they were in office, is lying. And rather stupid, politically, because most people expect their government to bend the rules in "melodramatic movie versions of reality" to protect thousands of innocent American lives, yadda yadda.

[jenmito]

35. It's an often asked question and she's given different answers at different times.

BILL Clinton kept mentioning a fictional character on a fictional show to justify his stance on the issue. If Hillary really believes torture doesn't work and is immoral and cruel, it should've been a consistent answer of "No. I wouldn't use torture in ANY case because if it doesn't work it doesn't work." Simple.

[incapsulated]

36. Saying torture is immoral and cruel and should not be supported

Is one thing. Saying it never, ever works is not true, even if you are talking 10% of the time. Just because something might work doesn't make it morally correct or the right thing to do. Saying that it could never work or would never in any circumstance be used is just being disingenuous. The Pakistanis were telling the CIA that terrorists were planning to fly planes into buildings before 9/11. They didn't get that information over tea or from top notch intelligence. It doesn't justify torture but I think that in a extreme situation with lives on the line, any elected president is going to turn a blind eye and tell them to get information by any means necessary. Maybe it won't work but they will take that chance. And frankly, people want to hear that they will.

[jenmito]

37. I disagree...

I think the Pakistanis knew about the plans of 9/11 because they had people working on the inside of terror cells. Where do you get that this info. was gotten from torture? It probably WAS over tea that an undercover "terrorist" got the info. and reported it to us. If torture works, then say you're for torture because it works. Don't lie about your position.

[incapsulated]

38. The Pakistanis use torture, that is why

That is no secret.

My position is that torture is wrong and should not be tolerated.

Give me an extreme, straight out of the movies scenario and I may change my tune, like MOST PEOPLE.

[jenmito]

40. It doesn't work...

I don't think most people WOULD change their minds. At least not Dems. Torture makes people say whatever they think the torturer wants to hear so they'll stop torturing them.

Robert Baer just said he's been ALL OVER the Middle East working for the CIA for 21 years and the intel. gathered from torture is DRIVEL. It's USELESS

[mmonk]

42. They could probably make you confess to being a 9/11

conspirator. Torture doesn't work because the person will confess to anything or give you the answer they think you want. Therefore, you don't even know if the person is guilty of anything and second, whether there is even a bomb.

[jenmito]

45. Exactly. They tortured KSM and he "confessed" everything from planning 9/11

to personally decapitating Daniel Pearle, which we know is false. As I said in my above post, Robert Baer just said he's been ALL OVER the Middle East working for the CIA for 21 years and the intel. gathered from torture is DRIVEL. It's USELESS.

[PurityOfEssence]

31. Well she sure as hell tortures US. Drip drip "fer it" drip drip "agin it" drip drip "really fer it"

drip drip "sorta agin it"

It's like that scene in "Chinatown": "My sister. My daughter. My sister..."

Aaaaaaaaah! Won't it ever STOP?!

This two-bit, three-faced, four-flushing fifth-wayer is gonna drive us batty six ways from Sunday.

[slipslidingaway]

32. Kick n/t

[paulk]

33. hate to interupt your little anti - Hillary circle jerk

but this is a gross mischaractorization.

But you knew that, didn't you?

[hedgehog]

43. No, we don't know that this is a gross mis-characterization.

I really do worry that Hillary Clinton will go along with some renditions (as long as no one mentions them directly) and some torture ( as long as no one asks pewrmission first). She'll do it to prove that she can be as tough minded as the boys. Saying that it won't happen as often as it did under Bush is not acceptable.

[illinoisprogressive]

39. and this is why she is afraid to take the pledge.

[alteredstate]

44. kick! eom