05/05/2009 / UNITED STATES
The strong points were when she was talking about the situation in the country soon after September 11. It's true that a lot of people were scared and we were facing a very difficult time. A lot of the things she said at the beginning [were good], especially when she said that we can't always choose our allies. It's true that the world is a very imperfect place and that tough decisions need to be taken. But the excuse isn't valid enough. If we entrust these officials with important responsibilties, it's because we want them to take decisions without being influenced by public opinion. In the end, she didn't really convince me. My question about the United States and how we're supposed to move forward with all of those secrets coming out just turned into a regular defense of all the basic talking points within the administration. Finally, many other students shared my opinion that she was evasive and got very defensive."
Condoleezza Rice grilled over torture
A Stanford University student grills ex-US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice over the Bush administration's torture policy. Who sounds more convincing: Rice or Jeremy Cohn?
Condoleezza Rice, former US President George W. Bush's security advisor and then secretary of state (2005-2009), returned to teach political science at Stanford University, where she was a professor before entering politics, in March.
The torture memos released by US President Barack Obama's administration in April revealed that highly-placed officials in the Bush administration, including Rice, legally approved the CIA's controversial torture methods. They also gave interrogators the green light to resort to techniques like waterboarding.
Rice was given a rather luke-warm reception at Stanford University on Monday, when she visited a dormitory where she was confronted by a group of students. Among them was Jeremy Cohn, a fourth-year student who did not hesitate to grill Rice. The scene was filmed by another student, who then posted it on YouTube. Rice denied personally authorising waterboarding and simply confirmed "communicating the administration's authorisation to the CIA."
Contributors
"All legal methods which help improve the country’s security need to be implemented"
"Many other students shared my opinion that she was evasive and got very defensive"
Jeremy Cohn is a student at Stanford. We see him questioning Condoleeza Rice in the video.
The strong points were when she was talking about the situation in the country soon after September 11. It's true that a lot of people were scared and we were facing a very difficult time. A lot of the things she said at the beginning [were good], especially when she said that we can't always choose our allies. It's true that the world is a very imperfect place and that tough decisions need to be taken. But the excuse isn't valid enough. If we entrust these officials with important responsibilties, it's because we want them to take decisions without being influenced by public opinion. In the end, she didn't really convince me. My question about the United States and how we're supposed to move forward with all of those secrets coming out just turned into a regular defense of all the basic talking points within the administration. Finally, many other students shared my opinion that she was evasive and got very defensive."
Sign up via 
The Observers TV show
Observers' Tips
What we’re working on now...
Most popular
Comments
Interesting
Submitted by xpress music (not verified) on Wed, 06/05/2009 - 17:01.The document she cites, the UN Convention on Torture, does not provide any cover whatsoever for the tortures, or for her claim that she was just a conduit. Article 2 provides that "An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture."
Unregistered user
Is that the UN whose
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Wed, 06/05/2009 - 17:56.Is that the UN whose soldiers were accused of sex trafficing in Africa, raping 7-14 year old girls etc. and nothing was done about the charges and UN whose soldiers HAD to stand by and watch the massacres in the Congo because of UN "rules"?
Unregistered user
it is a US concept
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Wed, 06/05/2009 - 22:26.The UN convention on torture was written with massive U.S. input, drawing on Nuremberg proceedings. These were the days, when the U.S. set a clear moral direction for the world. Long gone, based on the skwirming here.
Unregistered user
I have to agree with the
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Thu, 07/05/2009 - 20:11.I have to agree with the other comment. The UN did nothing about it's own immoral acts - so who's skwirmming here? At least, according to the released information, stopped some bombings - what was gained by the sex trafficing and raping?
Unregistered user
I think she did a good job.
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Wed, 06/05/2009 - 14:39.I think she did a good job. This is an excellent example of misinformation used to promote hatred. Abu Grab shows just how misinformed this guy was. The military had already charged those "soldiers" 3 months BEFORE the story broke. So Abu Grab has NOTHING to do with this subject. The military thought that was wrong long before everyone else did. As for the water borading, let's bring this down to a level one can understand. If you were the leader of your community, and there was a group of child rapist and murderers killing and raping children in your community - your community is depending on you to stop it - your capture a few of the group but more are out there still raping and murdering - these few you caught won't talk - won't tell you anything - and there's another killing, and another 2 and another 4 and these few guys still won't talk - and their parents are all over you demanding you do something - children are being murdered and raped every week - and these guys won't talk - parents are DEMANDING you DO SOMETHING!!! Can you look into the face of the parents that had their child left raped, mutilated and murdered and say "it would have been immoral to water board those few guys to stop that from happening to all your children - I refuse to water board one or two of those guys just to stop the raping and slaughter of your children" - could you look someone in the eye and say that?
Unregistered user
The power of fear
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Mon, 11/05/2009 - 23:02.Wow you are a clear example of U.S use of fear to get citizens to ok illegal actions. So based on your scenario, you believe it is ok to waterboard "suspected" rapists based on suspicions? In this scenario,you, like the U.S government, had no absolute proof that the people detained were "rapists." Why have a judicial branch if we can just eliminate it when we choose? Is it not the job of the courts to investigate the validity of suspicions or is that only when it is convenient? The problem with your reasoning is that you are under the assumption that everyone ever detained is guilty. Lets think about our soldiers. If one were to be detained and tortured for information about future U.S military plans would they have any info to reveal? No because in all reality they aren't powerful enough to be given that info. Yet they would be tortured until they provided an answer. Many of those subjected to water boarding were not leaders and in many cases their involvement could not be fully supported. We as a country can not choose when we believe in the justice of courts and when we don't. In doing so we are violating everything the constitution stands for. Fear does not justify violation of laws or else we find ourselves on very slippery slope.
Unregistered user
RUBBISH!!!!
Submitted by Emerson (not verified) on Thu, 07/05/2009 - 19:44.What a bunch or rubbish!!! You don't knwo what was to be there after the attack that kill 3.000 people. Yes she might know very well what is to know she participated on this.
Anyway, she was totally evasive and arrogant!!
http://umanovaordemmundial.blogspot.com/
Unregistered user
WOW!! A little angry are
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Thu, 07/05/2009 - 20:17.WOW!! A little angry are we? You might want to rewrite this. It's a little hard to understand. Didn't the first person say something about hatred? Rewrite, you're only proving their point.
Unregistered user
She may have been defensive
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Tue, 05/05/2009 - 21:19.She may have been defensive because she was doing what she thought was best during her time in the Bush administration. Waterboarding has given us major information on Al-Queda and other terror orgonizations. She probably did not look kindly on being criticized for a legal action that was used to help protect the country
Unregistered user
she and the rest of the administration got nothing from torture
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Wed, 06/05/2009 - 22:23.... unless you take Cheney's propaganda for fact. The early public claims whereby Zubayda spoke after 37s of torture have been thoroughly debunked as the spouting-off of a self-aggrandizing ex-agent who had nothing close to direct knowledge of the situation. So, the comment that "Waterboarding has given us major information on Al-Queda and other terror orgonizations" is wrong until proven otherwise, and rather dishonest in the "other terror organizations" part if one thinks of what Al-Queda is.
Unregistered user
The knowledge gained was in
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Thu, 07/05/2009 - 20:04.The knowledge gained was in the released memo's from the Obama administration. So, if one is honest, that's the proof you required.
Unregistered user
Aquellos vientos Trajero esta Tormenta
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Wed, 13/05/2009 - 16:18.Mayo 13, 2009
French Senate approves anti-piracy bill
Hadopi, a la caza de los «piratas»
Hadopi
No es mas que otro forma de aplicar la cesura con otros mecanismos
el imismo instrumento para violar la privacidad y parar cualquier
movimiento democratico, despues de ponerlo en funcionamiento lo
hara de la siguiente forma cuando un grupo de ciudadanos se traten
de unir para derrogar una ley absurda, u otro tipo de interes colocan
un ilegal a bajar musica y desconextan al grupo por el tiempo que estimen
conveniente, se auxiliaran de broacaster que se presten, esa es la desventaja
de digitalizar todos los medios.
Esto es maravilloso el Gobierno alega que al dia se producen 10,000 infraciones
que afectan el 1% del revenew de 10,000 individuos, pero no se dice que la libertad
de millones se pone en total riego.
Quedan por resolver bastantes problemas técnicos, cómo pescar al pecador en flagrante
delito porque para poder detectar al infractor se debe acceder a la dirección IP del
ordenador.
No es nada dificil ya se esta practicando por la mayoria ISP los Franceses tienen muy corta memoria
se olvidaron el "Incidente entre Colombia y Ecuador", bueno tambien este mecanismo serviria para
entorpecer el comercio entre naciones o productos de una nacion.Ademas tambien esta la posibilidad
de sacar de la web todos los comentarios de un politico malo cuando le conviene a otro, o'
el de entorpecer al partido contrario cuando se esta en el poder.
Sera una Idea de Pascal Lami para entorpecer el Libre Comercio.
En nuestra particular opinion al que hay que remover del internet es al President Nicolas Sarkozy
por anti-democratico, y darle un puesto en la policia francesa.
Unregistered user