Bush Signs Terror Interrogation Law

**Jayhawkk** · 10-17-2006, 02:33 PM

Quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush signed legislation Tuesday authorizing tough interrogation of terror suspects and smoothing the way for trials before military commissions, calling it a "vital tool" in the war against terrorism.

Sendo · 10-18-2006, 11:08 AM

Really this is pretty scary stuff. If you read the Bill carefully this is really an Anti-Bill of rights.

I really find this disgusting and I can't believe that it passed.

**DAdams91982** · 10-18-2006, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sendo

Really this is pretty scary stuff. If you read the Bill carefully this is really an Anti-Bill of rights.

I really find this disgusting and I can't believe that it passed.

F*CK THAT. A way to bring people to justice that need it. F*CK these bastards lived better in our detention system than prior, and they killed american citizens on our own soil. Talk to someone who had family in one of the buildings.

Adams

Rage (SoCal) · 10-18-2006, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sendo

Really this is pretty scary stuff. If you read the Bill carefully this is really an Anti-Bill of rights.

I really find this disgusting and I can't believe that it passed.

It's quite interesting what it actually does too. Any pending requests of any sort from terrorist suspects will be void now.

If the sh1t ain't hit the fan enough right now, Japan is now heavily considering acquiring nukes.

glg · 10-18-2006, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sendo

Really this is pretty scary stuff. If you read the Bill carefully this is really an Anti-Bill of rights.

I really find this disgusting and I can't believe that it passed.

I agree. Big brother is here he just arrived 20 yrs late.

wastedwhiteboy2 · 10-18-2006, 01:31 PM

our bill of rights should only apply to americans. screw the terrorists. Let the military do their job. red tape sucks.

klugman · 10-18-2006, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wastedwhiteboy2

our bill of rights should only apply to americans. screw the terrorists. Let the military do their job. red tape sucks.

You got that right brutha!!!

Also, did these f*cking animals give Nick Berg any rights???

**BigVrunga** · 10-18-2006, 02:53 PM

Quote:

You got that right brutha!!!

Also, did these f*cking animals give Nick Berg any rights???

That's what Im saying.

Its understandable why people are alarmed by this though. This bill is to 'protect' us from terrorists. But its the government who defines what a 'terrorist' is. Its pretty clear right now that that's a extreme muslim-type - but what about 25-50 years from now? Maybe it will be someone who doesnt want to pay their taxes, or someone who verbally criticizes the government.

If they really wanted to take a hard line on terror and bring down radical Islam, there are more direct routes than this. A lot of the decisions made by this administration just reek of ulterior motives.

BV

**spatch** · 10-19-2006, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sendo

I really find this disgusting and I can't believe that it passed.

I find it disgusting but wasn't surprised at all. It's one of those "yeah I heard about that... can you pass the salt" things.

Edit- i'm not disgusted with the law on paper, but this will lead to worse things down the road.

**Frank Costanza** · 10-19-2006, 11:00 AM

Maybe some of you need to read it before being disgusted.

DETAINEE BILL AT A GLANCE

Highlights of legislation on the treatment and prosecution of terrorist suspects the House approved Wednesday:

War crimes:

• The bill outlines specific war crimes. These include torture, cruel or inhuman treatment, murder, mutilation or maiming, rape and biological experiments. The law provides extensive definitions of each crime.

• The bill does not include a provision President Bush wanted interpreting U.S. obligations under the Geneva Conventions, the 1949 treaty that sets international standards on prisoner treatment. Also, the president would not be allowed to authorize any interrogation technique that amounted to a war crime.

But he can "interpret the meaning and application" of Geneva Convention standards applied to less severe interrogation procedures. Such a provision is intended to allow him to authorize methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts.

Court system:

• Establishes a legal system to prosecute "unlawful enemy combatants." An unlawful enemy combatant is defined as a person "who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents."

• The court would not be used to prosecute U.S. citizens or individuals who fight in foreign forces on behalf of a sovereign state. The phrase "purposefully and materially" is intended to clarify that a person must knowingly support terror networks to be deemed an unlawful enemy combatant.

• The individual must be selected by the government to be prosecuted under the court system, known as a "military commission." The commission can determine the punishment, including death.

Evidence rules:

• The agreement requires that a defendant be allowed to examine and respond to any evidence given to a jury. If classified information is needed for prosecution, an unclassified summary can be provided.

• When the government wants to protect classified information and an unclassified substitute is not available, the government could opt to drop the charges. Under the laws of war, the president would not be required to release the combatant.

• Defendants could be convicted on hearsay evidence so long as a judge finds it to be reliable.

• Coerced testimony would be allowed in narrow circumstances, generally if the statement was acquired before a 2005 ban on cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and a judge finds it to be reliable. Bans coerced statements taken after the 2005 ban took effect if it violates constitutional definitions of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Habeas corpus:

• Bars defendants from protesting their detention or treatment in civilian courts.

**Frank Costanza** · 10-19-2006, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigVrunga

TIts pretty clear right now that that's a extreme muslim-type - but what about 25-50 years from now? Maybe it will be someone who doesnt want to pay their taxes, or someone who verbally criticizes the government.

It doens't apply to US Citizens.

**Frank Costanza** · 10-19-2006, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rage (SoCal)

It's quite interesting what it actually does too. Any pending requests of any sort from terrorist suspects will be void now.

Thats flat out wrong.

They first go through a Combatant Review Tribunal to determine if he is an unlawful enemy combatant.

He has the right to appeal that status in the D.C Court of Appeals.

If the D.C Court of Appeals uphold the decision he has the right to petition the U.S Supreme Court.

Even after all that and the person is convicited he still appeals again through the same measures as mentioned above.

jomi822 · 10-19-2006, 12:00 PM

legislation legalizing torture, not a good idea.

when is bush going to stop. it seems that as long as he says "it will protect american lives" you people will let him do anything.

how long before provisions like these dont apply to just non-U.S. citezens?

**Pioneer** · 10-19-2006, 12:25 PM

sounds good to me

**Frank Costanza** · 10-19-2006, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jomi822

legislation legalizing torture, not a good idea.

when is bush going to stop. it seems that as long as he says "it will protect american lives" you people will let him do anything.

how long before provisions like these dont apply to just non-U.S. citezens?

Why don't you get a clue. It PROHIBITS TORTURE.

The senate is going to approve a bill that outlines torture as a war crime yet they are going to allow torture to obtain that information. Yeah, that would pass in a minute.

And who is "you people" ?