Mark of the beast: Fascist Trump wants to reinstate torture – will the rest of the candidates fall in line? Looks like it!

http://www.sott.net/article/312508-Mark-of-the-beast-Fascist-Trump-wants-to-reinstate-torture-will-the-rest-of-the-candidates-fall-in-line-Looks-like-it

Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump wrote an Op-Ed in support of waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques. It’s not the first time he’s spoken in favor of torture. While some fellow candidates agree with him, others do not.

Waterboarding was an “enhanced interrogation technique” employed in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. But the practice was eventually banned by the George W. Bush administration ‒ after it simulated drowning for its prisoners for years ‒ because waterboarding was deemed to be torture.

Most Republican candidates believe in some version of enhanced interrogation technique, while both Democratic candidates disagree.

On Monday, USA Today published an Op-Ed written by Trump about the use of enhanced interrogation techniques, which include practices such as electric shocks, dogs, nudity, hypothermia, mock executions and more. All of those techniques are specifically banned by the US Army Field Manual.

“Though the effectiveness of many of these methods may be in dispute, nothing should be taken off the table when American lives are at stake,” Trump wrote. “The enemy is cutting off the heads of Christians and drowning them in cages, and yet we are too politically correct to respond in kind.”

SOTT Comment: So their effectiveness is in dispute, but everything should be ‘on the table’. We wonder what Trump has in mind… The Iron Maiden? The Rack? The Judas cradle?

Trump said that the Op-Ed was designed so that his position on torture was clear to American voters, but it is just one in a line of such declarations, including his comment on doing “a hell of a lot worse” than waterboarding during a February 6 debate.

“I would absolutely authorize something beyond waterboarding,” Trump told George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s ‘This Week’ the next day. “And believe me, it will be effective. If we need information, George, you have our enemy cutting heads off of Christians and plenty of others, by the hundreds, by the thousands.”

Despite his adamant stance against torture, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas not only called for the re-institution of waterboarding during the February 6 presidential debate, but actually justified the practice by saying it didn’t meet the definition of torture.

“Well, under the definition of torture, no, it’s not,” he said. “Under the law, torture is excruciating pain that is equivalent to losing organs and systems, so under the definition of torture, it is not. It is enhanced interrogation, it is vigorous interrogation, but it does not meet the generally recognized definition of torture.”

SOTT Comment: Cruz should subject himself to a little “vigorous interrogation” and see what he thinks then.

He did promise, however, that he would “not bring it back in any sort of widespread use.”

Under Cruz’s definition, the Intercept’s Alex Emmons noted, the treatment his father endured in a Cuban prison would not qualify as torture. The elder Cruz was imprisoned before the Cuban Revolution, where he was beaten, kicked and had his teeth bashed in, among other horrors, the Texas senator said in his 2015 book.

Former neurosurgeon Ben Carson believes that steps to ban torture amount to caving to the pressure of political correctness, and is a dangerous precedent when dealing with an enemy that doesn’t follow the Geneva Convention.

Sott Comment: Are we seriously living in an age where morons like Carson can get away with stuff like this? The idea that torture is wrong is only ‘political correctness’?? No, one’s position on torture is an indication of whether they’re human or not. And you ain’t, Carson. How’s that for PC?

“I’m not one who is real big on telling the enemy what we’re going to do and what we’re not going to do,” Carson said on ‘This Week’ in November. “I don’t see where that accomplishes anything for us.”

Florida Senator Marco Rubio believes that terrorism cases do not require the same legal standards of traditional law enforcement.

“Well, when people talk about interrogating terrorists, they’re acting like this is some sort of law enforcement function,” he said during the New Hampshire debate. “Law enforcement is about gathering evidence to take someone to trial, and convict them. Anti-terrorism is about finding out information to prevent a future attack so the same tactics do not apply.”

Sott Comment: What people need to understand about Rubio’s above statement is how easily the state will be able to label anyone terrorists – protesters, activists, whistleblowers, etc. Anyone can fit the label if the government puts its considerable powers to use. It’s not something that will just be used “out there”, but it will no doubt eventually become common practice at home against all kinds of people and eventually you.

He also believes that the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center should not only remain open indefinitely, but should receive new prisoners.

“If we capture terrorists, they’re going to Guantanamo, and we will find out everything they know,” Rubio said in a January GOP presidential debate.

Ohio Governor John Kasich was pressed about his position on torture by a New Hampshire resident after the February debate in that state. He spoke of the TV show ’24’, noting that “there could be a Jack Bauer moment[where] I gotta find out what the heck is going on.”

Sott Comment: Annnnddd, TV propaganda proves its usefulness. Really, Kasich? Using a cheesy terror propaganda TV show to make your point? Don’t have anything better?

Yet Kasich also said that, since his 18-year stint on the House Armed Services Committee, he has been advised that torture often doesn’t work.

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush has long sought to distance himself from many of his older brother’s presidential policies. When it comes to enhanced interrogation techniques, however, he has never quite been able to separate himself.

“I don’t want to make a definitive, blanket kind of statement,” Bush said in August 2015, when asked about repealing an executive order banning torture.

Sott Comment: Will Bush also refuse to make a definitive, blanket kind of statement regarding rape and military targeting of civilians?

Yet in the February 6 debate, Bush was the only Republican candidate to speak out against the practice.

Sott Comment: That really says something, doesn’t it?

Days later, on February 9, Senator John McCain (R-Arizona), who ran against now-President Barack Obama in 2008, condemned the torture rhetoric of the current crop of GOP hopefuls. The 79-year-old former Navy pilot was captured and tortured by the Viet Cong during the Vietnam War.

“These statements must not go unanswered because they mislead the American people about the realities of interrogation, how to gather intelligence, what it takes to defend our security and at the most fundamental level, what we are fighting for as a nation and what kind of nation we are,” McCain said on the Senate floor.

The topic of torture has not been a factor in the Democratic race, in part because the two candidates stand firmly against the practice, and those stances have solidified over time.

When the Senate Intelligence Committee released its investigation on the CIA’s use of enhanced interrogation in December 2014, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) spoke out strongly against the practice.

“A great nation must be prepared to acknowledge its errors. This report details an ugly chapter in American history during which our leaders and the intelligence community dishonored our nation’s proud traditions,” he said in astatement. “Of course we must aggressively pursue international terrorists who would do us harm, but we must do so in a way that is consistent with the basic respect for human rights which makes us proud to be Americans.”

The self-described democratic socialist followed up that statement in June, when he voted in favor of a Senate amendment that sought to “reaffirm the prohibition on torture.”

In December 2014, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke out against waterboarding during a speech accepting an award from the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights.

“America is at our best when our actions match our values,” she said, adding that she was “proud” to be a part of the Obama administration when the current president banned such tactics in a 2009 executive order.

Terrorist attacks “not only break hearts but should steel our resolve and underscore that our values are what set us apart from our adversaries,” Clinton said.

Sott Comment: Oh, this is rich. This is the same Clinton who ‘values’ lynching foreign leaders, working with Islamic extremists to topple secular regimes, taking money from children, and generally being an odious witch.
Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Mark of the beast: Fascist Trump wants to reinstate torture – will the rest of the candidates fall in line? Looks like it!

  1. Translimits says:

    I looked up who “SOTT.NET” is as the source of this article, since it sounds pretty biased, and maybe from an alien life form perspective we humans are quite awful, BUT Cassiopians** are not getting their heads cut off! …

    “SOTT Stands for “Signs of the Times”…associated with Quantum Future Group, a new religious movement created by Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk. It’s not necessarily a scam, but it’s a highly unreliable source run by people who believe they talk to aliens**.” (**Cassiopian cult–another entry read.)

    Really?—Really? Really?

    • Jean says:

      Translimits, what you say may be true, but please check out the articles on this site. I think you will find they offer valid news. We are in a time when lots of things are gray – and it’s up to us to discern. Hugs, ~Jean

  2. lecox says:

    The above treats Laura the way most seem to like to treat Hubbard. Laura’s group is not a “new religious movement” as far as I know, and I have studied Laura’s website considerably. The fact is that “translimits” runs an activity very similar to Laura’s. Trying to black-PR your competition?
    The information Laura is getting from her “Cassiopaean” friends has influenced her opinions on some matters, but she is also a totally voracious reader of non-fiction (research) and draws from a lot of data when she has something to say. She is also a big believer in the importance of the psychopath as a hidden influence in society. In this view she has a kinship with Hubbard.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Signs of the Times

Creating Unity from our human diversity.

2012: What's the 'real' truth?

To find out, I hold a finger in the breeze.

RT - Daily news

Creating Unity from our human diversity.

%d bloggers like this: