| Welcome to Fire Emblem Fusion. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Extraordinary Rendition | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Mar 31 2008, 11:32 PM (382 Views) | |
| K' | Mar 31 2008, 11:32 PM Post #1 |
PR
|
Whee debate transfer~ Extraordinary rendition. In effect since the Clinton Era, it is the government consented right for the CIA to legally detain and transport anyone whom they suspect of being a terrorist to secret United States prisons outside of the U.S., in far off places such as Morocco and Egypt. Once there, the prisoners are subject to mental trauma, such as the removal of clothes and the placement of the prisoner in a small cell with little to no light filtered in. This cell is often referred to as the “hole,” an apt name for it. Other physical traumas include the absence of water, the absence of food, and even inhumane forms of physical torture. Nobody is safe from extraordinary rendition; anybody from an illegal immigrant to a full-born U.S. citizen can be victimized by this process. Though this method does in fact capture potential terrorists at some times, it seems that human error comes into mind here, as there have been several horror stories of the CIA making a blunder resulting in a forever traumatized human being. The phrase, “I know that by sacrificing one I saved many” can be applicable in the case of extraordinary rendition, however, what happens when the one that you sacrifice is in fact innocent? It seems that once the CIA detains a prospective terrorist in extraordinary rendition, they remain forever convinced of their wrongdoings, continuing the physical and mental torture until the detainee either dies or cracks. Now, I would like to hear the honest opinions of the members about this topic. I must admit, it is a very touchy one. Rendition is not only in effect in the United States but in most parts of Europe as well. Why is it a touchy subject? Well, there are just so many sides to this argument. Is it okay if they have no family? What if it’s a mother? What if it’s a father who is the sole provider of income? What I’d mainly like to hear is if you are pro-rendition or against it. Please, attempt to leave things like, “Well of course it’s not okay if my mom gets taken and things like that. That’s just a stupid ignorant answer which is a statement of basic human emotion. Don’t bog up this debate with things like that. I honestly have started wanting to hear people’s views on the more controversial things that our government does and approves, and extraordinary rendition just happened to be the first thing that came to mind. So yeah, that’s pretty much the explanation of it. If you want to hear more in depth, here’s the Wiki link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition The floor is now open. |
| |
 |
 
|
| Soja | Apr 1 2008, 04:33 AM Post #2 |
Gentle Water, Crashing Waves
|
Yeah, there was a movie about this (albeit a crappy one laden with liberal innuendo), but I believe there is legitimate concern for a policy such as this. It basically circumvents the system of responsibility and accountability on a technicality (that violations of basic rights occur in foreign soil, thus are not privy to U.S. law). I am not familiar with all the legalese and details of rendition, but I only have to hear the basic idea to find myself personally biased against it. If there is sufficient evidence of one's involvement in terrorist activities, is such an extreme measure as extraordinary rendition really necessary? I see it as a policy rife with loopholes, open to heinous abuses of all sorts. In short, the lack of accountability and control of this method puts me firmly in the "against" party. If you don't see me for a few weeks, you'll know why. 
|
Fusion Universe - FEF Fanfic Slayers Forth - Slayers Fanfic Smartest Member '06 & '07 & '08 & 'o9, Favored Debater '07 & '08 & '09, Most Popular '08, Manliest '08 & '09, Author of Nightmares, Scourge of the Luxon, Rules Lawyer, Nick's Former Hero, Crysta's Lover | |
|
|
|
| cool story bro | Apr 1 2008, 11:53 AM Post #3 |
|
It perplexes me why anybody would want Extraordinary Rendition to stay legal. It is, in my opinion, the absolute worst thing about the American government, and is a slap in the face to "land of the free" and all that other crap. |
| A NEW WORLD ORDER | |
|
|
|
| Soja | Apr 2 2008, 01:35 AM Post #4 |
|
Gentle Water, Crashing Waves
|
Technically, rendition isn't legal. That's why detainees are hauled to countries that are not privy to United States Criminal and Federal Law. |
Fusion Universe - FEF Fanfic Slayers Forth - Slayers Fanfic Smartest Member '06 & '07 & '08 & 'o9, Favored Debater '07 & '08 & '09, Most Popular '08, Manliest '08 & '09, Author of Nightmares, Scourge of the Luxon, Rules Lawyer, Nick's Former Hero, Crysta's Lover | |
|
|
|
| +Reaver | Apr 2 2008, 05:53 AM Post #5 |
Troll
|
I'm against it basically because it puts more power than the government deserves into the government's hands. I think the line for calling someone a terrorist can be easily abused to include those who speak against the government or criticize presidential policies, as one could simply say: "They're against out government! Get him!" Extraordination redindition should be b7 due to the possibility for abuse and, as PhantomRiku brought up, the possibility of innocents being put through a "perpetual" torture because the government refuses to let them go without the information. |
Favorite Staffer Summer 2008 -- Send me a Personal Message | |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Debate Forum · Next Topic » |
8:35 PM Nov 26
