A coalition of civil rights groups launched a campaign on Tuesday urging presidential candidates to sign an “American Freedom Pledge” rejecting torture, detention without trial and warrantless wire-tapping.
The online pledge reads:
“We are Americans, and in our America we do not torture, we do not imprison people without charge or legal remedy, we do not tap people’s phones and e-mails without a court order, and above all we do not give any president unchecked power.”
“I pledge to fight to protect and defend the Constitution from assault by any president.”
I’m looking forward to the rationales from candidates who refuse to sign on. There were a few folks named Franklin and Jefferson and Hancock who I’m confident would sign.
They need to figure out what works. I have read that pain torture really does not work but some stress and fear does. The real pledge to sign is to make sure that information extraction is done right. We are Americans and eventually we can come up with a way to get it done right and effective and timely. It seems like a Darpa thing to me there has to be some hypnotic drug that can be used to make people think they need to answer questions. I think it is a practical rather than some political deal. I mean we blow up people on accident every day and they spend huge amounts on fixing that. The real issue is how to best protect our nation and military the moral issues follow that.
Yeah – forget that Constitution and Bill of Rights and Habeus Corpus stuff. That’s just for knitpickers.
Put it in your knickers, kreep!
The problem with this petition is in who they are asking to sign it. Professional politicians. Does their signature on this petition really mean anything? No matter which party they are from….their word still means crap.
I guessing the tricky bit will be the Dems whose chickenshit advisors tell them not to sign. And once one of them presents the rationale “for safety and security” – of their campaign, anyway – most of the rest will have to cop out, too.
Maybe I’m too cynical. Certainly, none of the Regrublikans will sign – excepting maybe Ron Paul.
Like, why even have a Bill of Rights, anymore? Or Habeus Corpus? Political hacks will always come up with a “good” reason to set it all aside. And cowards will always agree.
BTW – I just went over and signed-on. It’s for citizens, too.
Heck yeah, any politician would sign it. BUT, when the time came to a choice of using torture as a means of saving millions of people’s lives or not, they’d call it “Persuasive Information Extraction,” otherwise known as PIE.
“How’d you get those terrorist to give up where they had that suitcase nuke planted?”
“Oh, it was as easy as “PIE.”
Liberty is more important than safety.
P.S. I bet Ron Paul signs it.
I’m just guessing none of the candidates of either party will have the strength of conviction to actually sign such a pledge. I’ll be impressed if any do.
Thats funny, I thought they already pledge to protect and defend the constitution of the United States.
How does a pledge to a “coalition of civil rights groups” carry more weight?
It’s a nice sentiment. Would they also make very clear that citizens have more rights than non-citizens?
it depends on what the meaning of the word torture is. We don’t torture now remember. It’s called Intense interrogation. These are all lawyers, they will sign this and keep torturing with a clear conscience .
#8, tcc3
Very good point. I was thinking the same thing.
Would one of you please point out where in the US Constitution it extends any protections to those who are not US citizens and not in the US?
#12 “Would one of you please point out where in the US Constitution it extends any protections to those who are not US citizens and not in the US?”
Would you please point out how exactly the United States has jurisdiction over anyone who isn’t either a US Citizen or in the US? Prisoner of War, perhaps, but that would require a declaration of war.
#12 Three questions sir:
Would you please explain to me how it is morally acceptable to torture another human being for any reason whatsoever?
What other horrors are you willing to visit on someone who’s quite possibly innocent of any terrorist activity?
Are you so convinced that the same national security apparatus that missed the clues in the lead-up to 9/11 was wrong about WMDs in iraq, and still haven’t found OBL is 100% correct in whom the incarcerate, torture, etc? no mistakes at all, ever?
What would you say to person who was wrongly accused that was then tortured and incarcerated for years by your government? I’d love to hear it.
#12 — sorry forgot to answer your question
non-u.s. citizens are in not protected by our courts in any way
and yet, torture is still immoral
All of this rhetoric is silly, but I have a thought experiment I’d like to try out — please indulge me.
Suppose a businessman who is not a US citizen — but is completely innocent — were to have a chance encounter, a bit of small talk, with a stranger while waiting on a train platform while on business in say, Greece. Further suppose that stranger turned out to be a known member of Al Queda.
Now then, let’s suppose a CIA operative saw them together, picked up the businessman and took him away for questioning.
After months of torture, the businessman starts to say whatever he hopes his interrogator wants to hear just to make it stop.
In your mind, do you harbor suspicion against the businessman, even though as part of the experiment you know he’s innocent and never met the man on the platform?
#12, Gig,
Because American Law extends to all land and territories under American jurisdiction. Thus, while foreigner visitors must obey American laws, so must law enforcement in their treatment of them. The basis for this is held in Common Law as well as the Ninth Amendment.
Amendment IX: Existence of other rights for the people.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
I hope that answers your question.
#17. Sorry, Mr. Fusion, to the Bushies, foreigners are obviously not “people.”
and for the record, nowhere in the Bill of Rights or any other provisions of the US Constitution that protect these sorts individual liberties does it limit them to “citizens.” In particular the 5th Amendment – banning compulsory self-incrimination, and the 8th Amendment – banning cruel and unusual punishments – do not limit their protection to citizens.
as for me, I just want Mitt Romney to sign a pledge guaranteeing the rights of snowmen.
I’m looking foreward more and more to the next election. And I’m hoping one of the favorites of those who regularly comment here wins(Democrat)……then I look foreward to all of you acting as though everything you said in here about Bush and the Republicans was also meant for the Democrat who wins and continues the same policies as Bush……
And I know that all of you activists will be out there giving time, effort and money to elect ….uh…elect…..ummmm…elect….well damn….I can’t think of who you might elect that will be all that so many of you seem to expect the next President to be. Maybe someone can enlighten me and tell me which candidate of either party that has said he/she will stop these spying programs, and rendition programs and survallience programs, and erosion of our Constitutional rights……not counting the 2 most likely to NOT have a chance in hell of winning 1% of the vote.