Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Rendition Begun In 1995 By Pres. Clinton -- CNN  
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1704 times:

I'm currently watching "Your World Today" from CNN International, live, on cable television. Right now, "Your World" is running a fairly sympathetic story on Maher Arar. However, in the moments prior, it was noted that the rendition program, by which terror suspects are sent to third countries for interrogation, was begun by President Bill Clinton in 1995.

Perhaps Democratic critics of the President should understand this fundamental fact before accusing the Administration of violating international standards of conduct.

[Edited 2006-10-06 18:37:04]

46 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1689 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Wait a minute. First you deny it's happening, now it's all Clinton's fault? banghead  rotfl 


Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1686 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 1):
Wait a minute. First you deny it's happening, now it's all Clinton's fault?

I certainly did not deny that it occurred. In fact, in another thread, I said that third countries had promised not to use methods of torture, therefore necessarily implying that rendition did occur.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21461 posts, RR: 53
Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1682 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
Perhaps Democratic critics of the President should understand this fundamental fact before accusing the Administration of violating international standards of conduct.

Currently ongoing violations are a bit more pressing than past ones, don't you think?

Past violations still need to be investigated, but present ones are obviously more urgent.

Your hope of deflecting scrutiny and accountability from the Bush administration is futile - only an extension of the investigations could possibly be a result.


User currently offlineConfuscius From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 3863 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1681 times:

"...that third countries had promised not to use methods of torture"

Then what's the purpose of rendition? Big grin



Ain't I a stinker?
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21461 posts, RR: 53
Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1675 times:

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 4):
Then what's the purpose of rendition?

"No, no...!!! Not the soft cushion!!!"  scared   hypnotized   faint 


User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1661 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 3):
Currently ongoing violations are a bit more pressing than past ones, don't you think?

But by your definition, past ones would also include those committed under GWBs administration.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 3):
Your hope of deflecting scrutiny and accountability from the Bush administration is futile

If both administrations committed these violations, should not both instances be investigated and both administrations be criticized?


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1661 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 1):
Wait a minute. First you deny it's happening, now it's all Clinton's fault?

They only occurred under Clinton.  rotfl 

But only GWB chased after OBL.

You see, up is down, east is west, and black is white. And Foley (R) is actually Foley (D).

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
In fact, in another thread, I said that third countries had promised not to use methods of torture,

Yes, we don't trust Syria when it says the "sand is sandy," but when they say "the regime of Bashir Al Assad promises not to use torture," we do.

LOL LOL LOL LOL.


User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1656 times:

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 7):
Yes, we don't trust Syria when it says the "sand is sandy," but when they say "the regime of Bashir Al Assad promises not to use torture," we do

Did not some Democrats say that we should negotiate with Syria? Or North Korea? Should we trust them in these negotiations?


User currently offlineA332 From Canada, joined Feb 2005, 1644 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1647 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 8):
Did not some Democrats say that we should negotiate with Syria? Or North Korea? Should we trust them in these negotiations?

Might be in idea considering Afghanistan & Iraq are both clear examples of why shooting first and asking questions later isn't always the best choice.



Bad spellers of the world... UNTIE!
User currently offlineSearpqx From Netherlands, joined Jun 2000, 4344 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1644 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 6):
If both administrations committed these violations, should not both instances be investigated and both administrations be criticized?

Simple answer, yes.



"The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity"
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21461 posts, RR: 53
Reply 11, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1642 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 6):
If both administrations committed these violations, should not both instances be investigated and both administrations be criticized?

Exactly my point.

Just that investigation of the Bush administration's ongoing violations can probably prevent future ones.


User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1629 times:

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 7):
They only occurred under Clinton.   

No, nor did I say that.

The principle of precedent is critical in any investigation. That is, critics of the President must ask themselves: "Did this President exercise the prerogatives of his office in such a way that violated the past and accepted practices of previous Administrations?"

If the answer is in the negative, then it is in that direction that lies the end of the inquiry.

Sometimes I marvel at the ability of leftists to promote the idea that history and precedent began on January 20, 2001. But it didn't. It's quite a bit longer than that.

[Edited 2006-10-06 21:57:08]

User currently offlineSearpqx From Netherlands, joined Jun 2000, 4344 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1618 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 12):
If the answer is in the negative, then it is in that direction that lies the end of the inquiry.

Ah, so as long as someone else did it first, its ok? I'm pretty sure that had this come out to any significant degree during the Clinton admin, there would have been just as much of an uproar - and likely from the right.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 12):
Sometimes I marvel at the ability of leftists to promote the idea that history and precedent began on January 20, 2001. But it didn't. It's quite a bit longer than that.

And I marvel at the ability of Bush apologists to find no other answer to his actions than, "Well, x Did it Too!"



"The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity"
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1618 times:

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 13):
Ah, so as long as someone else did it first, its ok? I'm pretty sure that had this come out to any significant degree during the Clinton admin, there would have been just as much of an uproar - and likely from the right.

Actually, when WJC bombed Yugoslavia, there were indeed murmurings of "wag the dog". But not from me.

I'm from the old school. I believe that politics stops at the water's edge. United we stand, and divided we fall.

Or, as Franklin said: "We must hang together, or we shall most assuredly all hang separately."

[Edited 2006-10-06 22:09:36]

User currently offlineSearpqx From Netherlands, joined Jun 2000, 4344 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1592 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 14):
I'm from the old school. I believe that politics stops at the water's edge. United we stand, and divided we fall.

Yes, but you've made it clear that the only correct unity is that of the right. Those of us who disagree with this President and his administration, even though we're now in the majority, are 'misguided, wrongheaded, and essentially in some respects playing into the hands of the enemy'. But hey, despite all my failings, I'm still patriotic!  sarcastic 



"The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity"
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1571 times:

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 15):
Yes, but you've made it clear that the only correct unity is that of the right.

The unity we have should support our national interests. It is not in our national interests to give inspiration to our enemies by showing our political will to be divided against itself. In fact, inspiring our enemies gives them strength with which to fight against our own soldiers. Does this result count for nothing?


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1564 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 3):
Currently ongoing violations are a bit more pressing than past ones, don't you think?

Crime is crime, whenever it occurs - unless the statute of limitations has run. And even if you consider (understandably) the current renditions to be more important, we are talking about criticism of the use of renditions in the political context.

For the democrats to complain about Bush using rendition is the worst sort of hypocrisy. I didn't hear any democrats complaining about them when Clinton ordered them.


User currently offlineDrDeke From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 830 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1564 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 16):

The unity we have should support our national interests. It is not in our national interests to give inspiration to our enemies by showing our political will to be divided against itself.

Some of us don't think it's in our national interest to start wars based on a pack of total and utter lies.

Some of us don't think it's in our national interest to start wars with no plan to win.

Some of us don't think it's in our national interest to torture people.

Some of us don't think it's in our national interest to tear up the Constitution of the United States.

Some of us don't think it's in our national interest to use rhetoric about "unity" to attempt to squash dissenting viewpoints.

-DrDeke



If you don't want it known, don't say it on a phone.
User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1564 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 16):
It is not in our national interests to give inspiration to our enemies by showing our political will to be divided against itself.

It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish. I dont think there is much disagreement in the removal of the threat that Islamic fundamentalism can present to the Western world. A good discussion and criticism of this would concern the methods of achieving this aim. This to me is valid, patriotic, and required in any democracy.

What I find repugnant is unqualified criticism over what we are doing, w/o mentioning in passing that the end is agreed by both sides, if not the means. So when the enemy is using the same lines and criticism as the left side here, I dont like it.


User currently offlineConnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 20, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1563 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 8):
Quoting Jaysit (Reply 7):
Yes, we don't trust Syria when it says the "sand is sandy," but when they say "the regime of Bashir Al Assad promises not to use torture," we do

Did not some Democrats say that we should negotiate with Syria? Or North Korea? Should we trust them in these negotiations?

The US (with Reps & Dems in their turn) negotiated with both the USSR & China for decades. And practiced "containment". Any you know what? There was no WW III, no bright flash downtown. We all lived.

And now there is an administration that won't talk to people it doesn't like. How childish. "I'll hold my breath until I turn blue if you don't go away."

Isreal, for God's sake, Israel sat down with the PLO. Sworn enemies negotiated an agreement. Because they talked. That it has gone to hell in a hand-basket is for many reasons, and there is blame enough on both sides.

Talking is good.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1555 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 19):
What I find repugnant is unqualified criticism over what we are doing, w/o mentioning in passing that the end is agreed by both sides, if not the means. So when the enemy is using the same lines and criticism as the left side here, I dont like it.

Agreed, AndesSMF. Agreed.

Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 20):
The US (with Reps & Dems in their turn) negotiated with both the USSR & China for decades. And practiced "containment". Any you know what? There was no WW III, no bright flash downtown. We all lived.

But both Russia and China were rational state actors. You're assuming that Iran is a rational state actor. Many people doubt that.

It is also questionable whether North Korea is rational, either.

[Edited 2006-10-07 01:30:50]

User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1549 times:

Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 20):
Isreal, for God's sake, Israel sat down with the PLO. Sworn enemies negotiated an agreement. Because they talked. That it has gone to hell in a hand-basket is for many reasons, and there is blame enough on both sides.

But in the end result talking here has not reached a result.

Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 20):
Talking is good.

Talking is always good, but talking to an irrational person will only frustrate you.


User currently offlineConnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 23, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1538 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 22):
But in the end result talking here has not reached a result.

Due more to internal bickering, on both sides, rather than any innate desire on the part of Israeli or Palestinian citizens to simply fight each other ad nauseum. There are several principals whose names we all know, some living, some dead, who can share the blame. Putting personal privilege and power ahead of the nations interest is always a shabby way to go.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 24, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 1494 times:

If Clinton's use is of it is a justification of rendition, do we expect the carpet in the Oval office to get an extra work out?

It matters not what Clinton did or did not do, sending prisoners to be tortured is not smart policy either in terms of immediate outcomes or longer term outcomes if any US personnel are ever held taken prisoner. The "intelligence" gained from torture is likely to be even more unreliable than that which it seems was common fare prior to the Iraq invasion. Maybe some of that lousy intell did come from torture, but we do know this Admin is never going to tell us if it did.


25 AerospaceFan : Of course it matters -- if nothing else, than for political reasons. The people who are criticizing the Administration now for maintaining rendition
26 Baroque : I will try again. I was suggesting that it is the policy, not the administration that should be criticised. I must be forgetting some major trend of
27 Post contains images Halls120 : It DOES matter in the context of the domestic political attacks against Bush for the use of rendition. Clinton did it, and I don't recall leading dem
28 Post contains links Baroque : I think your nostrils are flared too far to one side to get a proper scent of hypocrisy. I am condemning both if they followed a policy of rendition;
29 Halls120 : I'm not criticizing either Clinton or Bush for the policy. It is a necessary process which countries have engaged in for decades. I don't object to r
30 JGPH1A : Countries ? Or just the U.S. ? I wasn't aware of any other countries that undertook extraordinary rendition - do you have a list ?
31 Post contains links AerospaceFan : And the policy is one that is necessary because the terrorist suspects are often located other than on U.S. soil. Then we shouldn't have liberated Af
32 Halls120 : Rendition - not extraordinary - has been part of maritime law enforcement for decades. We board a ship flying the flag of state X, and find illegal a
33 Baroque : You may need to check what is happening there. Changed the administration, possibly. Liberated, not yet. Ah, now I understand, you are Country X, the
34 AerospaceFan : The point is that military force was needed. Also, you didn't address my points about Eichmann, et al. Further, as I said, the U.S. does not send sus
35 Seb146 : I am getting sick and tired of the right saying "Well, Clinton did ______." I don't know if anyone on the right has noticed but: CLINTON IS NOT PRESID
36 Halls120 : All correct. But democrats are criticizing Bush for using renditions, when in fact they were also used by Clinton when he was President. Why were the
37 Baroque : Well no, because they are totally irrelevant to the current discussion. Eichmann was kidnapped, forcibly by Israeli agents and taken to Israel basica
38 AerospaceFan : You asked me what other countries have practiced rendition, and I gave you several examples. Now you make the distinction that in the Eichmann and Ta
39 Baroque : No, the reason they are/were not rendition is that they were "exported" to the country that was keen to detain them. They were not exported to a thir
40 Seb146 : Nobody ever said it was okay for Clinton to render and torture people. It seems more pressing now only because some of these people are released and
41 Halls120 : You are missing the point. I'm NOT suggesting that rendition for torture is a good idea. Rendition alone IS appropriate in certain circumstances. I D
42 AerospaceFan : You may have a point, there. I'll have to think about it. Excellently put.
43 Seb146 : This is interesting: Dems have been the minority party for how many years? If they would have said something while Clinton was president, they would h
44 RichPhitzwell : I'm going to place this with voting irregularities.... I dont give a rats arse what party did/does this, its un-American. On the D vs. R routine, lets
45 Baroque : Very well put Seb, to which you could add the effect it has had on the external view of American justice. I suppose as soon as Bush started to thump
46 Halls120 : Whether they were majority or minority is irrelevant. If they opposed what Clinton was doing, they should have spoken up. After all, in our system of
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
For Whom Will You Vote In Next Us Pres. Election? posted Fri Apr 7 2006 03:19:22 by DL021
Fmr. Pres. Clinton Goes After Bush posted Mon Sep 19 2005 01:12:20 by Jalto27R
Churchs Attacked In Iraq By Terrorists posted Sun Aug 1 2004 21:23:02 by Go Canada!
Allied Troops Will Be In Baghdad By Tuesday posted Sun Mar 23 2003 19:48:16 by STT757
Public Opinion In The US - State By State (Ohio) posted Sat Nov 11 2006 03:44:52 by SKYSERVICE_330
CNN’s Kyra Phillips Caught In Bathroom With Mic On posted Wed Aug 30 2006 05:36:58 by RJpieces
CNN: U.S. Embassy In New Delhi Warns U.S. Citizens posted Fri Aug 11 2006 08:14:37 by AerospaceFan
In The Mail: New Rules To Live By posted Wed Jul 12 2006 17:00:08 by Mrmeangenes
Pres. Bush In Germany Again. Some Friendly Advice. posted Mon Jul 10 2006 22:05:21 by NoUFO
Clinton, Monica, And Soda Machines In Schools posted Thu May 4 2006 20:54:27 by Tom in NO