Politics - 10 August 2006

2006-08-10 12:04:10 · 8 answers · asked by hawkeyes 3

I would like to have some validation of the answer to this question. Is this public information? Where can it be found? Etc...

2006-08-10 12:02:46 · 2 answers · asked by amcaloon74 1

NOTE: Mary Jo Kopechne was unavailable for comment.

2006-08-10 11:58:35 · 18 answers · asked by smutulator 1

White New Yorkers are often jailed if they commit violence against other groups, and the bigger crime is the language they use when attacking. If they use what are termed, "racial epithets" , the charges are much greater than if they just beat the crap out of someone.

Should the same rules apply to our bigoted president?

2006-08-10 11:57:20 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

Why do most americans say that the lebenese should fight the cause and not the effect , when the americans attacked the effect and not the cause.

P.S. i worded it so you could only answer it if you studied the situation carefully.

2006-08-10 11:55:26 · 5 answers · asked by hawkeyes 3

2006-08-10 11:51:09 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-08-10 11:50:58 · 10 answers · asked by smutulator 1

I asked if the news statement below was an admision of guilt.So now same news story - is it okay with you if US soldiers abuse prisoners. Is it okay if US soldiers rape girls in foriegn lands? Is what Pte. Lindsay English did in Iraq wrong or is that really what they deseve?
Wed Aug 9, 2:05 AM
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Political appointees, CIA officers and former military personnel would not face prosecution for humiliating or degrading wartime prisoners under amendments to a war crimes law drafted by the Bush administration, the Washington Post reported on Wednesday
The amendments are part of the administration's three-pronged response to a June 29 Supreme Court ruling that struck down as illegal and a violation of the Geneva Conventions the military tribunal system set up to try Guantanamo prisoners, the Post said.
The court's ruling gave prisoners captured in Afghanistan protections under the Geneva Conventions, which the administration previously maintained did not apply to them

2006-08-10 11:45:06 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-08-10 11:44:51 · 1 answers · asked by JAMES 4

I saw it on the news... so should we?

2006-08-10 11:44:44 · 12 answers · asked by ♥s!mply @m@z!ng♥ 2

2006-08-10 11:43:30 · 7 answers · asked by playtoofast 6

Many of your friends probably feel defensive when it comes to Israel. They are defending themselves against the voice of their own conscience. They are morally sensitive people. That’s what is so frustrating. They care deeply about social justice in every other arena. But there is something peculiar about this Israel thing that seems to throw their normal ethical compass out of whack.

This summer’s war has only created more rage among Israel’s neighbors. It’s entirely predictable that Israelis will be less secure for a long time to come. Lots of Israeli Jews are criticizing their government on this crucial point. They are certainly not “anti-Israel.” You are not “anti-Israel” either, just because you criticize the Israeli government's policies.

2006-08-10 11:41:51 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

Liberal or Conservative or just FU to everyone.

Mine is: Bush-Cheney 2004 (on top) and Eat The Poor (on bottom)

2006-08-10 11:40:04 · 32 answers · asked by HelloKitty 3

I'm just curious what made you switch. Maybe you could give me 1) one or two or three (the more the better) issues that did it, and
2) also if there are any issues that you stayed with on the liberal side.

I'm not attacking, insulting or mocking; I'm just curious. Thanks.

2006-08-10 11:38:40 · 10 answers · asked by eskimo 3

that he is the Commander in chief of this religious movement? And, if so, why?

2006-08-10 11:38:24 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

On the diplomatic front, the United States cannot abandon the field to other nations (not even France!) or the United Nations. Every secretary of state from Henry Kissinger to Warren Christopher and Madeleine Albright negotiated with Syria, including those Republican icons George Shultz and James Baker. Why won't this administration follow suit, in full consultation with Israel at every step? This would clearly be in Israel's interest. Instead, administration officials refuse direct talks and say publicly, "Syria knows what it must do" -- a statement that denies the very point of diplomacy.

Richard Holbrooke, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations

Looks like we a blundering our way to disaster.

2006-08-10 11:35:48 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

I mean, come on, how transparent can they get?

2006-08-10 11:33:16 · 5 answers · asked by squirellywrath 4

I remember his calling suicide terrorists cowards. They can be called a lot of things, but cowardly? NOT.

Now he uses the term, Islamo-fascist. don't you think he has tremedous nerve calling anyone a fascist considering his family's close ties with the Nazis?

Who here is as angry as I am at his blatant actions toward making this conflict another religious crusade?

2006-08-10 11:29:39 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

i mean if some idiot refines cordite into a tread size strand then wove it into a handbag such os a carry on bag then will the mrshal law then be imposed is the water getting warm slowly starting to boil and we just dont know it I maen really civil libertys should not be infringed upon and we are being manipulated into a socialist state other than a free demacracy I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees this so were is all the people who will stand up to this and say enough is enough terrorist exist we know and are aware we pay taxes alot of them so our government can protect our way of life not alter our way of life to accomidate a governmental easeing of the job we pay them for then we are letting the terrorists rule how we live and thier utilizing our own government to terrorize us enough has got to be enough

2006-08-10 11:24:55 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

1)Who has the navy, tanks, and jet fighters?
2)Who occupied a large part of whom for 18 years (and still occupies a little land)?
3)Who has nuclear weapons?
4)Who is being bankrolled by the only superpower in the world?
5)Why does it have about 15,000 Lebanese people in jail (from the last time they were even deeper in Lebanon) yet they faint over two soldiers?

Yes, I know. Rocket attacks into Israel. Where are those attacks going? Into the places where Israel still occupies Lebanese land.

2006-08-10 11:24:35 · 14 answers · asked by eskimo 3

People quote from certain passages of the bible and leave others - somtimes it's used as a justification of Israel's existince. Israel should exist but there is no way youj can say that it's biblical without acepting the whole book.

Slaves according to Jesus were okay he just wanted masters to be understanding and slaves to work hard .

Homosexuals have to be killed and it's okay to have multiple wives etc.

Are you willing to take the whole book lock stock and barrel ? The New testament alone okay it's not a nicey nice book either .

Is the bible hate litrature?

2006-08-10 11:24:31 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

sounds wierd but true a trained monkey can reach the 85 - 90 IQ bracket which is the same as Bush . Clinton had the highest IQ of those tested and Bush the lowest of all the presidents. and no im not affiliated to any US party its just a fact.

2006-08-10 11:22:17 · 17 answers · asked by splinterfoot66 1

I have seen a few sites on new world order and was really spun out about it.

2006-08-10 11:17:52 · 4 answers · asked by cj 1

2006-08-10 11:17:41 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

How many of you voted for Bush and why? I voted for Bush simply because he is against abortion and gay marriage...maybe thats wrong but those are my beliefs...

2006-08-10 11:16:48 · 11 answers · asked by Katherine A 2

2006-08-10 11:16:39 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

This question has plagued me for many years... who would win in an all out battle to the death.. Lady Liberty or Honest Abe? Remember, even though she is bigger, she is also a french chick, and Lincoln may look a little on the scrawny side, but he is wiry for sure.

2006-08-10 11:11:53 · 12 answers · asked by timmybear 2

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/09082006/6/n-usa-seeks-shield-its-war-interrogators-report.html


Wed Aug 9, 2:05 AM



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Political appointees, CIA officers and former military personnel would not face prosecution for humiliating or degrading wartime prisoners under amendments to a war crimes law drafted by the Bush administration, the Washington Post reported on Wednesday.

ADVERTISEMENT

The amendments are part of the administration's three-pronged response to a June 29 Supreme Court ruling that struck down as illegal and a violation of the Geneva Conventions the military tribunal system set up to try Guantanamo prisoners, the Post said.


The court's ruling gave prisoners captured in Afghanistan protections under the Geneva Conventions, which the administration previously maintained did not apply to them.

This is a slippery slope - or does every one think it's a necesity?

2006-08-10 11:11:04 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-08-10 11:09:59 · 25 answers · asked by kl0wnie 3

And yet there are people that dont find anything wrong with that image and also defend Israel's actions so blindly it makes you think some ppl dont have normal rationalization skills????

2006-08-10 11:02:38 · 8 answers · asked by a.liya 1