wait, so Fox admits torturing people involved with this case is "egregious" but still holds torturing, in general, is not? what is the line at which torture becomes egregious...the religious views of the tortured individual?  View

Public release is one thing. I would suspect the Justice Department is already looking at the emails. Anybody who thinks the loss of these emails was an accident underestimates the GOP. The GOP been involved in creepy stuff like this for a long time. Watergate comes to mind as does the secret bugging of the Internet under the Patriot Act. Don't forget the torture of Islamic detainees, a cross border operation into Syria during the Iraq War, secret CIA prisons, or the illegal rendition of terrorist suspects off of the streets of Europe. There will be some major embarrassments for the Bush administration that will be revealed. Executive privilege does not provide immunity for criminal acts.  View

An Outline Whereby ICTY Judges Should Judge Radovan Karadzic By Jill Starr At the end of the day, some three years from now in the final judgment of Radovan Karadzic%u2019s case being tried at the ICTY, and, in morally judging his guilt or innocence insofar as whether he is directly responsible for war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity and isolated incidents of rape and summary executions during Srebrenica, first and foremost, the ICTY judges have a duty, a %u201DNoblesse oblige%u201D if you will (used to imply that with wealth, power and prestige come responsibilities of morality-even in judging Radovan Karadzic and the other Bosnian Serbs awaiting trials/appeals at the Hague%u2019s highest court), The ICTY judges have an international duty to compare, contrast and analyze the annals of human history of war, torture and war crimes before rendering their judgement in the case. Why? When analyzing rapes, executions, pilgrimages and torture of former wars,even dating back as far as Medieval Times, cases in point: American soldiers in Vietnam, the Roman Catholic Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition in which women were sexually tortured and burnt alive at the stake, as well as the Abu Ghraib torture scandal recently in Iraq, we discover that the soldiers guilty of these monstrous acts, are themselves guilty and should be tried and sentenced, HOWEVER, one can not rationally say that for instance President Bush was directly responsible for the Abu Ghraib torture scandal in Iraq merely owing to the matter of fact he was the United States President at that time. By the same token we can not reasonably conclude Radovan Karadzic is directly responsible and guilty for the crimes against humanity lower level Serb soldiers committed against Muslims in Srebrenica. For the American and international news media to at this premature point in time to try swaying everyone watching it daily insofar as the Karadzic case, and for this media to daily pronounce Karadzic%u2019s so-called %u201Dguilt%u201D saying %u201Dhe is responsible for the crimes that in actuality, may or may have not occurred at Srebrenica,%u201D even before the evidence and trial has even taken place and been presented; is morally wrong and illegal in and of itself. This entire judgement remains murky and leaves a tremendous %u201Dreasonable doubt%u201D hanging over whether Radovan Karadzic is directly responsible for ordering executions in Srebrenica.  View

I don't think it's just about throwing the Bush admin under the bus. I suspect that this has more to do with information about U.S. treatment of terror suspects slowly beginning to go public. This info could have damaging diplomatic repercussions--as would any attempt to hide, or ignore it. He has to say something about torture, imprisonment, rendition, not just because staying silent hurts him politically, but also because if the allegations are true it would be wrong to stay silent.  View

Are there any anchors out there worried about the legality or ethics of the alleged torture, or are they just concerned with the politics?  View

What about the torture inflicted on the most defenseless of citizens, I ask?  View

What a stupid media stunt!! He was "waterboarded" for 5 seconds, what a fraud. What is that supposed to show me? I could do at least 30 seconds, maybe a full minute. The prisoners have to endure hours of that, thats when its torture. What those guys did is nothing close to torture, just one short stunt.  View

Maybe that IS the point! If people who are able to get out of it by simply sitting up do so after just 5 seconds, imagine the prisoners who aren't able to stop the procedure. Sure, it may seem like a stunt but it's really a powerful statement about the power of this torture technique.  View

I think it's powerful that even after a 30 second stunt these media guys are claiming it felt like torture. I think it definitely proves that prolonged exposure to waterboarding is not something to dismiss.  View

Did anyone else see Bill O'Rielly agree to be waterboarded on national television and then just pretend like it never happened? I'd like to see how long he could go. It is torture no doubt about it, that shouldn't be the debate. The debate should be whether we should have done it or not.  View