Republican's use of Torture
Definition of torture from Dictionary.com
/ˈtɔrtʃər/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [tawr-cher] Show IPA noun, verb, -tured, -tur⋅ing.
1. the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty.
2. a method of inflicting such pain.
3. Often, tortures. the pain or suffering caused or undergone.
4. extreme anguish of body or mind; agony.
5. a cause of severe pain or anguish.
–verb (used with object)
6. to subject to torture.
7. to afflict with severe pain of body or mind: My back is torturing me.
8. to force or extort by torture: We'll torture the truth from his lips!
9. to twist, force, or bring into some unnatural position or form: trees tortured by storms.
10. to distort or pervert (language, meaning, etc.).
It looks like the republicans (as always) do to want to accept responsibility for their actions. It really makes me sick how they do this constantly and think they can get away with it time and again. They should be held accountable for their war crimes! As an American I did not vote for the Bush administration but many did. those same ones are just as responsible for allowing this crime to happen as Bush himself. Now the economy has crashed and we all must suffer for their deeds and greed. I, for one, am tired of it!
Here is an article on the Yahoo news regarding the torture:
Here is a part that really irks me: Some former Bush officials argue that they were not properly warned by CIA officials about the potential perils of the severe methods, while others insist there were explicit cautions. Ok, so which part of torture did they think was good?
Or how about this one: The former official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the issue's continuing sensitivity, said Tenet and other CIA officials did not mention the techniques' potential legal and physical dangers. since I wonder if they serious think that actions have no consequences and if so, they do not belong in Public Service.
Or this one: Rice told the Senate Armed Services Committee last fall that she and other senior Bush officials were told that the harsh interrogation methods would not cause significant psychological or physical harm. so they agreed that calling it torture would be bad so decided to call it "harsh" instead and hoped we would believe them that they did not realize they were torturing people?
If they seriously want us to believe that they honestly believed that it would not cause significant psychological or physical harm as they try to say then let the same procedures be used on them. Or will it be considered inhumane when it comes to themselves but ok for everyone else?
Please continue to speak up and against this and do not let up until they are held accountable for their actions.