Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Where is Hillary on Torture? msnbc [View all]
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/where-hillary-clinton-tortureWhere is Hillary on Torture?
In an editorial board meeting, she added that there are very rare circumstances when an exception to the no torturing rule would be needed, and if they occur, there has to be some lawful authority for pursuing it.
Obama attacked her on the issue in a late January 2008 speech in Denver, suggesting her position on torture even put her to the right of the then-presumed GOP nominee John McCain, who opposed the harsh tactics after being tortured in Vietnam.
But by then, Clinton had changed her position. When asked about a ticking time bomb scenario during a debate in September 2007, she categorically ruled out the use of torture. It cannot be American policy, period, she said.
That held as her policy, despite the fact that it initially put her in disagreement with her husband, who often cited the TV show 24 as an example of why torture is sometimes necessary.
In an editorial board meeting, she added that there are very rare circumstances when an exception to the no torturing rule would be needed, and if they occur, there has to be some lawful authority for pursuing it.
Obama attacked her on the issue in a late January 2008 speech in Denver, suggesting her position on torture even put her to the right of the then-presumed GOP nominee John McCain, who opposed the harsh tactics after being tortured in Vietnam.
But by then, Clinton had changed her position. When asked about a ticking time bomb scenario during a debate in September 2007, she categorically ruled out the use of torture. It cannot be American policy, period, she said.
That held as her policy, despite the fact that it initially put her in disagreement with her husband, who often cited the TV show 24 as an example of why torture is sometimes necessary.
Fact Sheet: Extraordinary Rendition
https://www.aclu.org/national-security/fact-sheet-extraordinary-rendition
December 6, 2005
Beginning in the early 1990s and continuing to this day, the Central Intelligence Agency, together with other U.S. government agencies, has utilized an intelligence-gathering program involving the transfer of foreign nationals suspected of involvement in terrorism to detention and interrogation in countries where -- in the CIA's view -- federal and international legal safeguards do not apply. Suspects are detained and interrogated either by U.S. personnel at U.S.-run detention facilities outside U.S. sovereign territory or, alternatively, are handed over to the custody of foreign agents for interrogation. In both instances, interrogation methods are employed that do not comport with federal and internationally recognized standards. This program is commonly known as "extraordinary rendition."
The current policy traces its roots to the administration of former President Bill Clinton. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, however, what had been a limited program expanded dramatically, with some experts estimating that 150 foreign nationals have been victims of rendition in the last few years alone. Foreign nationals suspected of terrorism have been transported to detention and interrogation facilities in Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, Diego Garcia, Afghanistan, Guantánamo, and elsewhere. In the words of former CIA agent Robert Baer: "If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear -- never to see them again -- you send them to Egypt."
https://www.aclu.org/national-security/fact-sheet-extraordinary-rendition
December 6, 2005
Beginning in the early 1990s and continuing to this day, the Central Intelligence Agency, together with other U.S. government agencies, has utilized an intelligence-gathering program involving the transfer of foreign nationals suspected of involvement in terrorism to detention and interrogation in countries where -- in the CIA's view -- federal and international legal safeguards do not apply. Suspects are detained and interrogated either by U.S. personnel at U.S.-run detention facilities outside U.S. sovereign territory or, alternatively, are handed over to the custody of foreign agents for interrogation. In both instances, interrogation methods are employed that do not comport with federal and internationally recognized standards. This program is commonly known as "extraordinary rendition."
The current policy traces its roots to the administration of former President Bill Clinton. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, however, what had been a limited program expanded dramatically, with some experts estimating that 150 foreign nationals have been victims of rendition in the last few years alone. Foreign nationals suspected of terrorism have been transported to detention and interrogation facilities in Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, Diego Garcia, Afghanistan, Guantánamo, and elsewhere. In the words of former CIA agent Robert Baer: "If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear -- never to see them again -- you send them to Egypt."
37 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Looks like you have your answer. It cannot be American policy, period, she said.
Thinkingabout
Dec 2014
#1
'who often cited the TV show 24 as an example of why torture is sometimes necessary.'
PoliticAverse
Dec 2014
#2
Sometimes the stretch of the truth still does not change the facts, cognitive dissonance
Thinkingabout
Dec 2014
#9
Hillary is a great Democrat and I will be proud to vote for her in the primary and general.
hrmjustin
Dec 2014
#11
Hillary did not live most of her life as a Republican, voting for Reagan who thought
Thinkingabout
Dec 2014
#20
Hillary must be too busy counting Goldman Sachs money to bother with a tweet.
LawDeeDah
Dec 2014
#33