don't virtually all progressives and Democrats argue that torture produces unreliable evidence? If it's really true (as Obama defenders claim) that the evidence we have against these detainees was obtained by torture and is therefore inadmissible in real courts, do you really think such unreliable evidence -- evidence we obtained by torture -- should be the basis for concluding that someone is so "dangerous" that they belong in prison indefinitely with no trial? If you don't trust evidence obtained by torture, why do you trust it to justify holding someone forever, with no trial, as "dangerous"?
1More
Board Institutes Unified IPR on Rothschild Patent - 1 views
Urgings To CJ Maraga To Advance 'Hunger-Torture in Incestuous and Homosexual-Harassment... - 0 views
1More
Unified Settles, Dismisses Verify Smart IPR Petition Prior to Institution - 1 views
1More
Unified instituted on all challenged claims of Acacia owned American Vehicular Sciences... - 1 views
1More
Unified Filing Results in Successful Adverse Judgment against Qurio Patent - 1 views
1More
Personal Injury Lawyer Los Angeles Ca | West Coast Trial Lawyers - 2 views
1More
Board Institutes Unified IPR on Ruby Sands, LLC Electronic Payment Patent - 1 views
1 - 15 of 15
Showing 20▼ items per page