Journal geoswan's Journal: Is General Sanchez getting away with perjury? 6
In another JE one of my correspondents has defended General Sanchez. He says General Sanchez may have denied authorizing torture, but that this wasn't perjury if he was using a very strict definition of torture.
This particular correspondent practices a cheap rhetorical trick I often see in US political discussions. Give a heated, emotional response to a something your debating partner never said.
General Sanchez was asked about authorizing certain extensions to the Army's approved interrogation techniques. The memos where he authorized those techniques are now public. Why doesn't that make his denials perjury?
I wonder if he would have told the truth (Score:2)
A fair discussion frighten you Mr Hawk ? (Score:2)
Readers, Mr Hawk thought that a simply listing links to his recent posts [slashdot.org] was an attack. In my reply I told him: "I find it interesting that you would characterize providing a record of your posts as an "attack" ... I think letting the full body of your comments stand for themselves is eminently fair."
The discussion already happened (Score:1)
relativism at its finest (Score:2)
Really cool, since that's exactly what they wanted to fry Clinton for.