Flynn lied to the FBI. A mistake or deliberate.. don't know. This would be a process crime not a Russian collision link.

Still this is a side story of little direct impact to POTUS.

Yet Brian Ross suspended 4 weeks for lying on air and misleading false hoods about this.





Still the witch hunt will continue ..
Keep spewing your Trolling POV -- No one believes this story and all know it is BS.

I believe if I recall correctly you implied an IQ of mid / high 130s.
I also believe you indicated that you are in one of the lower tax brackets.

Why would a poor man with such an IQ be here? Righting justice where ever wrong doing exist? Or are you 1 of those Russian trolls?????????????

Brian Ross is a top notch investigative reporter, IMHO.

Brian Ross has been busting his ass at ABC - he and Stephanopolous are probably the only worthwhile people in ABC's news departments.

As for the scandal, I hope this brings down every single Republican who knew about it. Morals and family values, my ass.

rickegee:

It's not an extreme hypothetical that only happens on 24 or other Hollywood productions. A live case in point is Khaled Sheikh Mohammed. He was, according to ABC's Brian Ross, waterboarded. He yielded and gave up realtime information that was used in stopping several concrete attacks inside the US. Hundreds of lives were saved. I don't see how refraining from strong interrogation, and even torture, would have been the moral choice in this case, and many others. If a captured terrorist has operational details of attacks, it seems to me that using whatever means necessary to extract the information and save lives is the clear moral imperative.

Arar was not innocent of being in the country illegally, hence he was deported according to civil procedures. I'm not sure what makes his stories about being tortured credible. Seems to me like he's just got an axe to grind and is enjoying his 15 minutes.

You didn't really address the question on why the GC should be immutable, or I didn't understand you to answer it. My basic premise is this: Between two countries that are fighting according to these laws of war, by all means the laws of war should be followed. But when fighting against a country that doesn't observe the same laws or against terrorists that don't clearly represent any country whatsoever, how is it that the GC applies in the first place?

In days of yesteryear, people had duels according to certain rules. For example, the duelers would pick from identical weapons, stand back-to-back, walk 20 paces, turn and fire. If one dueler attempts to observe the rules while the other clearly does not (tries to turn to fire at 2 paces, for instance), what value are the rules? If the one insists on dueling according to these rules while the other refuses the rules, the "honorable" one in this case is just being stupid.

Of course torture should be considered aberrant and disgusting in society. But we're not talking about "in society," we're talking about outside of society. Indeed, we are talking about what actions are moral in combating those who wish to destroy society altogether.