Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rep. Aaron Schock (R-IL): Yes, we tortured detainees and we should do so in future.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 10:33 AM
Original message
Rep. Aaron Schock (R-IL): Yes, we tortured detainees and we should do so in future.
Appearing on Hardball just now, Rep. Aaron Schock (R-IL) defended the use of waterboarding -- and unlike other GOPers, he openly used the word "torture."

"I would not limit our intelligence agencies' ability to get information from people," said Schock. "If they have a ticking time-bomb or some critical piece of information that can save American lives, I don't believe that we should limit waterboarding or quite frankly any other alternative torture technique, if it means saving Americans' lives."

Most Republicans, such as Dick and Liz Cheney, adamantly deny that waterboarding constitutes torture or that the United States ever authorized torture, and they also charge President Obama and other Democrats with slandering American troops by using the word "torture." So it's interesting to see at least one Republican who is not afraid to use the word "torture," and who describes it as a positive thing that should be utilized.

Go to the 2:25 mark in the video:

more:
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/gop-rep-schock-waterboarding-or-alternative-torture-technique-shouldnt-be-ruled-out.php?ref=fpblg
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
1. Yes
And since congress is the greatest threat to the American public, they should be waterboarded starting with this asshole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sui generis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 10:36 AM
Response to Original message
2. props to him for being honest
Don't agree with him in the tiniest bit, but it is definitely more honest. I'd rather know who the monsters are because they volunteer than be a victim of some coward's semantics.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. We have built an America in which Shock feels free to say this.
Right-wingers carefully shied away from using the t-word for years, but now they realize they will get away with it. This won't even make national news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ensho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
3. may nasty Aaron fall down and never get


a man that is pro torture should never hold power
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
4. Apparently a new video of a captured American soldier is about to be released
That soldier's family should know that if he's been tortured, Rep. Schock fully supports and endorses whatever was done to him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 11:16 AM
Response to Original message
5. Pathetic
but obviously a lot of people think that way...

You can't allow war criminals to walk around freely and not send the message that it's OK if America does it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
6. someone draft that little turd
put his priveldged ass on the front lines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
8. Home of the new Guantanamo, how convenient.
The Obama administration announced today that it will create a new "supermax" facility in Thomson, Illinois, and will transfer to it many of the detainees currently held at Guantanamo. Critically, none of those moved to Thomson will receive a trial in a real American court, and some will not be charged with any crime at all. The detainees who will be given trials won't go to Thomson; they'll be moved directly to the jurisdiction where they'll be tried. The ones moved to Thomson will either (a) be put before a military commission or (b) held indefinitely without charges of any kind. In other words, they'll have exactly the same rights -- or lack thereof -- as they have now at Guantanamo.

...ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero had this to say today:

The creation of a "Gitmo North" in Illinois is hardly a meaningful step forward. Shutting down Guantánamo will be nothing more than a symbolic gesture if we continue its lawless policies onshore.

Alarmingly, all indications are that the administration plans to continue its predecessor's policy of indefinite detention without charge or trial for some detainees, with only a change of location. Such a policy is completely at odds with our democratic commitment to due process and human rights whether it’s occurring in Cuba or in Illinois. In fact, while the Obama administration inherited the Guantanamo debacle, this current move is its own affirmative adoption of those policies.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gidney N Cloyd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
9. Schock is one of these freaky nutbags the pubs have been planting in local school boards.
They cultivated him and made a slick politician out of him that they could move up the ladder. Get ready for a lot more to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-16-09 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
10. There's at least two Democrats running against him in 2010
Edited on Wed Dec-16-09 12:17 PM by derby378
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC