Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Bush Signs No More Torture Law !!!

Score one for the terrorists! I'm sure the ACLU is partying with Osama right now!

Sleep deprivation, playing loud rap music and forcing an archaic 12th century minded person to answer the questions of a woman is not torture. Putting someones balls in a vice is torture.

How pathetic of a society have we become when Osama Obama and Hitlary call for free abortions to all, but hey no playing loud music for the guy that wanted to explode a nuclear weapon in New York City!
 
Torture is subjective to the one being tortured. I'm all for using means to get the objective accomplished when lives are at stake but they should be regulated as well as detailed records kept. This keeps the mission as the focus without torture for the sake of torture.

In another thread you get upset because of a fake news ticker on fox news but you compare Hilary and Obama to a terrorist and a crazed genocidal maniac. That is as stupid as calling Bush, Hitler.
 
Jayhawkk said:
In another thread you get upset because of a fake news ticker on fox news but you compare Hilary and Obama to a terrorist and a crazed genocidal maniac. That is as stupid as calling Bush, Hitler.
Click to expand...

I am only calling her Hitlary as a joke. Stalinary would be more appropriate but its doesn't fit her name as well. The Osama Obama part was started by Ted Kennedy himself.

Invalid Link Removed
 
That was my point though. I look at them and call them as such when I see the context...As in your statement but I also see the Simpsons doing the same. You have to pretty much laugh at all of it since you can, in most cases, replace the subject of the joke and add another for the same effect.
 
I'm sure IF a situation occurs where they need to squeeze info out of a terrorist to save the world...they'll do what they want and I don't have a problem with that.

I do have a problem with my govt being able to declare me or any other American an "enemy combatant" and be held indefinitely, mildly tortured or whatever. Before I assauged with macho chest beating comments..think about this. If you're OK with these new rules of engagement under the watch of the Bush Administration..how would you feel about them being used and possibly abused by some other administration? Say like, Hillary decides to silence some rowdy neocons?

That's the catch. It opens the door for the govt to abuse it's citizens, political rivals, and dissenters of any stripe. We can fight terrorist the same way we always have IMO...just make the various agencies more accountable than they were pre-911.
 
bioman said:
I do have a problem with my govt being able to declare me or any other American an "enemy combatant" and be held indefinitely, mildly tortured or whatever. Before I assauged with macho chest beating comments..think about this. If you're OK with these new rules of engagement under the watch of the Bush Administration..how would you feel about them being used and possibly abused by some other administration? Say like, Hillary decides to silence some rowdy neocons?
Click to expand...

Not sure if that applies.

"To authorize the President to detain an enemy combatant who is a United States person or resident who is a member of al Qaeda or knowingly cooperated with members of al Qaeda, to guarantee timely access to judicial review to challenge the basis for a detention, to permit the detainee access to counsel, and for other purposes."

Just as in any charge, they need to prove it.

And nothing has really changed since 1942 except the the use of the term enemy combatant which was originally:

"The term 'enemy combatant' has historically referred to all of the citizens of a state with which the Nation is at war, and who are members of the armed force of that enemy state."

The change has occurred here:

"Under the provisions of the Secretary of the Navy Memorandum Implementation of Combatant Status Review Tribunal Procedures for Enemy Combatant Detained at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base Cuba ... An enemy combatant has been defined as "an individual who was part of or supporting the Taliban or al Qaida forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. This includes any person who committed a belligerent act or has directly supported hostilities in aid of enemy armed forces."


If you are a US citizen and charged you get full judicial privileges. If you are a non citizen you go through a military tribunal. Non citizens deemed enemy combatants get more rights in the US than any country in the world.

If you are worried about this one then you should be worried about the rights you give to police because they have the same authority and subject to the same abuse. In other words, they can't hold you without proof. So I don't think they will be snatching you up anytime in the near future.
 
I think the concern is that even though the law protects US citizens from being rounded up gestapo style, mistakes can happen.

Once the US goes to the National ID card (May,2008?) and melds with Canada and Mexico (North American Union,2010?) your citizenship will become like an all access card for any government services.

If a mistake is made and your ID becomes inactive, then you become vulnerable to seizures. You may be in a detention camp before the lawyers can work it all out....YIKES!
 
The chance of that happening should all that happen is slim to none. You have to weigh the total risk versus reward of anything in these situations to justify its use.
 
Jayhawkk said:
The chance of that happening should all that happen is slim to none. You have to weigh the total risk versus reward of anything in these situations to justify its use.
Click to expand...

While the probability of a US natural born citizen being sent to a detention camp is very low.

The "possibility" now exists where as before the Patriot Acts and the BUSH enemy combatant declaration, it would have been impossible for anyone, citizen or not, to be arrested on American soil and sent to a detention camp, because they did not exist.
 
anabolicrhino said:
While the probability of a US natural born citizen being sent to a detention camp is very low.

The "possibility" now exists where as before the Patriot Acts and the BUSH enemy combatant declaration, it would have been impossible for anyone, citizen or not, to be arrested on American soil and sent to a detention camp, because they did not exist.
Click to expand...

The "possibility" was certainly there before as well. Nothing in the Patriot Act changed that and nothing in the new criteria to establish "enemy combatant" has either. They all need proof.
 
Bobo said:
The "possibility" was certainly there before as well. Nothing in the Patriot Act changed that and nothing in the new criteria to establish "enemy combatant" has either. They all need proof.
Click to expand...

Yes, proof is the "key" to possibility !!!
 
anabolicrhino said:
Yes, proof is the "key" to possibility !!!
Click to expand...

Then apply it to everyone with a badge down through history. It didn't start with Bush and it certainly won't end with him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top