On AAR -- Thom Hartmann (?) -- This Bill Legalizes RAPE!

[Leopolds Ghost]

Nonconsensual sex now an allowable torture technique.

Talking to CNS News Reporter who says "I don't condone rape but we're in WWIII!"

[AX10]

1. WTF

:wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf::wtf:

[Leopolds Ghost]

2. CNS News guy sez "I'm not worried about my rights because I'm a good white

conservative Canadian who's done nothing wrong."

Said that on Thom Hartmann just now.

[Leopolds Ghost]

5. Did you guys hear the CNS news guy say this? "I'm a good white Canadian"

"so I'm not worried about my rights"

Actual Thom Hartmann interview.

[Bluerthanblue]

3. male rape was reported to have taken place

in some (now RELEASED) detainee's reports of what happened in detention- Men, who were given back their freedom because they were found to be INNOCENT-

Who is going to care, who is going to know,:sarcasm: hell," ya gotta remember these are people who don't value human life":sarcasm: *quote-

You know what this would mean to me if I had ANY inclination to harm america? It would mean the very BEST way to do so, would be to be a kamakazi attacker- a 'suicide' attacker. The bull shit spouted about the death penalty discouraging violent crimes, when in reality it removes the 'restraint' that might otherwise be there in people- Kill me now, or torture me till you kill me later??? doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.

I'm so troubled by this world, i can't begin to make any sense-
my apologies if this sounds like gibberish......

blu

[Solly Mack]

4. Yep link/article below

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/23/opinion/23sat1.html
Turning Back the Clock on Rape

[Eric J in MN]

8. That NY Times editorial rightly says that the definition of rape...

..in the bill is too narrow, but it doesn't say that the bill makes rape legal.

[Solly Mack]

9. by narrowing the definition - other forms of sexual assault

and rape is sexual assault - that are not included in the "compromise" defintion are removed...Forced oral sex is rape...but that isn't the same as forced penetration is it?...yet it is still rape

so if an interrogator forces oral sex on a person, it's not rape by the definition in the "compromise"

if it's not considered rape then it's not considered illegal in the "compromise"

it's not what it says in words...it's the implications of what was left out

the bill doesn't say "America tortures" either....but guess what? America tortures and this bill gives legal protection in our courts for torturing...even as it's dressed up in pretty language that proclaims the tactics used are legal.

[Eric J in MN]

10. There is another section against forced sexual contact.

If an interrogator forces a prisoner to have anal, vaginal, or oral sex, all that is illegal under the bill.

There are two problems:

1) What is "forced"? It would be better to ban all sexual contact instead of requiring a scared prisoner to say "No."

2) Forced nudity to take embarrassing photographs isn't specifically prohibited. Senator Kennedy tried to address this issue with his amendment, but Republicans voted down his amendment.

[Solly Mack]

12. Forced is any unwanted sexual act, touching...

that one is fairly simple...

and you're right...all contact that can be construed by a reasonable person as being sexual in nature, whether or not by intent, should be banned

and this part



"Rhonda Copelon, a professor of law at the City University of New York who was an author of the international law on rape as a war crime, says the bill also could make it impossible to prosecute rape or sexual assault as torture, because the definition of torture in the legislation requires proof of specific intent to commit the crime. Motive is very hard to prove in cases of rape or sexual assault."

Any, and I mean any, rule, law, regulation (or social norm) intentionally designed to make prosecution of rape impossible is a law, rule, regulation (or social norm) that intentionally makes rape legal.

If you can't prosecute, it amounts to the same.

Rape is torture

[Eric J in MN]

13. I'm not a lawyer, but...

...if an interrogator is charged with rape, and the woman said "No," and both sides agree on the basic facts...

...and the interrogator claims he should be found not guilty because he didn't have a "specific intent" to commit rape...

I don't think that argument will succeed.

[Solly Mack]

14. In Bush's America? In a country that would even consider

making torture legal?

In an America that still blames the victim for rape?

In an America that still blames rape on how a woman is dressed?

In an America where rape victims often get the "she deserved it" attitude?

In that America?

[Eric J in MN]

6. The bill doesn't say that.

It says that forced vaginal and anal penetration is illegal.

Ideally, the bill would consider sex between prisoners and interrogators illegal without having to prove that it was forced. But the bill doesn't say rape is legal.

[KingFlorez]

7. How in the hell does that have anything to do with us being at war?

Madness

[sandnsea]

11. When detainees can't go to court

They can't accuse anybody of torture, so in practice, everything is legal. That is the major problem with this bill, that and the extraordinary power it gives to the Presidency.