For the first time in American history, a federal judge last week authorized the goverlovebylifent to recognize the defendant’s allegations of torture in the courtroom as evidence in a criminal case.
The fruits of torture, which are any cruel or discriminatory or intentionally painful or directed acts that come to the captive to ensure compliance or satisfy the torturer, shall not be permitted in any court of the United States. and inciting them is a crime. .
Here is the date.
Abd-Rahim al-Nashiri, a former low-ranking member of the Taliban, is accused, among others, of plotting a suicide attack on a USS Cole plane that killed 17 American sailors in October 2000. He has been in U.S. custody since 2002 and at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, since 2004. When he was first arrested, he was handed over to the CIA for questioning, not to the Attorney General’s Office.
JUDJ ANDRUV P. NAPOLITANO: KOVID’S LAST LESSON – NEVER GIVE UP
When the federal goverlovebylifent arrested a man he believed would receive information about national security abroad immediately after 9/11, there was a practice of handing a man over to the CIA for torture – the federations called it an “extended interrogation”. – called – in a “dark place” in a foreign country without an extradition treaty with the United States.
The reason for the torture scene was the misconception of DOJ and CIA officials that torture committed or committed by U.S. personnel would not be prosecuted if he was outside the United States.
This has never been the law in the United States, but it has become a practice for the DOJ and the CIA to protect the privacy of their employees while they are being tortured abroad.
However, because the torturer or the person involved in what the torturer identified was to be tried in a federal court and no federal court could accept the evidence obtained under torture against the defendant, the federations developed a scheme in this regard.
Under this scheme, the Federal Bureau of Investigation “clean teams” were required to interrogate the tortured person using the usual and legal interrogation methods after the torture was over. These methods have often been more successful than torture by the CIA. Because these techniques were legal, the person being questioned was advised of his or her rights, and because the FBI was humane, the information obtained from him could be used in federal court.
During the trial, the defendant is not always tortured to gain the sympathy of the jury, but to allow his lawyers to argue with the judges that they do not consider any evidence, such as unconstitutional, immoral, illegal, and non-American torture. may indicate that
Al-Nashiri’s lawyers told the court and prosecutors at Guantanamo Bay that they wanted to argue in court that the goverlovebylifent had the wrong person and that the real conspirators had already been killed by U.S. forces. The federal federations said they had statements made in court during al-Nashiri’s torture to counter the controversy, which could be used to question his defense in the dispute.
OUR MILITARY PRESIDENT ABOUT OUR BALL IS READY TO MAKE AFGHAN TRANSLATORS “MODERN” IF ORDERED
If a judge at Guantanamo Bay has complied with the laws – the Constitution, the charter, and the rules of procedure – all of this would be a profound rejection of the fruits of brutal and extraordinary punishment and shocking behavior, as well as American history. when he put a broom in the rectum of the torturers, he would have excluded from the trial what al-Nashiri said.
If a judge had adhered to our laws and values, he would have dismissed the case against al-Nashiri because his actions have shaken the conscience of the goverlovebylifent. If the judge had obeyed the law, he would have taken the torturers into the courtroom and arrested them there.
But the judge in the case did not follow American law and rejected American values and human morality because he gave the goverlovebylifent the right to provide a partial transcript of al-Nashiri’s statements that he was allegedly tortured. It also broke a 230-year precedent. He also strengthened the court’s belief in the barbarism and nihilism of the goverlovebylifent, that these individuals are subject to the state and that their rights and their rights exist with the consent of the state because they come from the state.
Click here to receive feedback
The goverlovebylifent lies, deceives, steals, and kills; and has written laws that allow it, and makes it almost impossible to sue.
But nothing he does is more damn than torture.
Torture is the ultimate victory of the state over man and the ultimate decline of the individual. This is a complete rejection of the values of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. And it doesn’t work.
The history of torture is a history of victims who have been separated from reality by extreme fear and unbearable suffering, and who are willing to say what torturers demand in exchange for stopping the pain. In other words, the fruits of torture are truly separated. Torture as a mechanism that creates truth fails.
There are many appeals to al-Nashiri until the trial of the judges arrives; and torture – with all the suffering of the victim and the perpetrators – is part of the history of his case. I believe that the wise judges in the appeal process will win and that this precedent-breaking and horrific decision will soon be overturned. But his loss is over.
Click here to download the LOVEBYLIFE NEWS program
The United States goverlovebylifent continues to engage in torture and will continue to do so until those tortured are punished. And prosecutors working for torturers will one day try again to legitimize the effects of their brutal behavior in the American courtroom.
When will the goverlovebylifent stop using torture? Who will suffer next? Why swear to protect the Constitution and then throw it in the trash?
JUDGE ANDREW P. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM NAPOLITANO