Americans: Do you agree to Bush's recent anti-terror methods?

Question

( For those who have ill will towards USA, please do not bother to spit wicked words... Not interested )

I was reading the article below, made me wonder how americans are dealing with it...

" The president's measure would go further than the Senate package in allowing classified evidence to be withheld from defendants in terror trials, using coerced testimony and protecting U.S. interrogators against legal prosecution for using methods that violate the Geneva Conventions." - Yahoo! news sept 15th 2006


1. Why is it ok for Bush to use torture methods, but when other nations do that, its a huge issue of Human Rights Violation

My main question is How are Americans dealing with it? Do you all agree or disagree.

p/s1: I agree... "dealing with it " is a wide spectrum, when I say deal with it I mean, how does an American feel about the fact that other leaders are regularly being castigated for anti-human rights war-crimes, but isn't what was mentioned on yahoo news showing Bush doing the same thing? If any leader wants to question another leader's methods then he himself should keep to his word... its like Parents telling kids "Don't smoke, it'll kill ya, but the parents are like walking chimneys"

ps2: I totally agree that what terrorist did to their captives were cruel and really beyond humanitarian behavior. But from THEIR point of view, its their version of Torture methods... for THEM its ok... just like for the Bush Admin. its ok to withhold "Classified info" from captives in trial. Where does one draw the line on classified? Cannot expect fair treatment from foes when we also treat them with dual standards of fairness

Answer 1

if the USA is always complaining about other countries going against the Geneva conventions.what makes the u.s administrations think that they are above the Geneva conventions rules.i do not agree with these new policies.

.

Answer 2

70% of Americans are not dealing with it in any way. Only about 30% of Americans, the United Statesians do.

As far as the torture aspect of this question. It was proven a very long time ago that torture IS NOT a valid method of interrogation, if you have any doubts about that read anything related to the Christian Inquisition, they would torture people in the most horrendous ways and they got confessions from them that are simply not possible, for instance many people declared being witches, consorting with the devil and transforming themselves into bats so they could fly at night. Many were tied hands and feet so that they could not move, then thrown in the lake if they floated they were guilty and burned at the stake, if they sank they were innocent and a religious pardon was given to their souls. If you think about it, those that held their breadth would float, those that couldn't hold their breadth long enough would get water in their lungs and sink.... Anyways, those that did confess were confessing to whatever they thought the torturer wanted to hear, if you read the scripts they are full of quotes like 'what do you want me to say?! please tell me what you want me to say, please don't turn the wheel again! please I'll say anything!'

Torture is not a valid method of interrogation, I bet I can get you to say you gave birth to Jesus himself, if I have enough time to torture you until I get the 'truth' out of you. You see at some point you'll realize that the torture WILL NOT STOP until you say what the other person wants to hear.

I wholeheartedly disagree!

Answer 3

I agree with torture methods, i mean, having law in a war is about as stupid as anything. None of our enemies have really ever had laws when fighting us, except "kill americans at all costs!"

So i don't see how torture is as bad as what they are doing, with there chopping head thing, defiantly not abiding by any rules there.

PS. I didn't know Yahoo gave out their articles in a day advance, it is the 14

Answer 4

I disagree with Bush's measure. I disagree with most of what he has to say (what I can understand of his personal language). If we as a "government" want to try a terrorist, we must do so according to our own rules. We can't just make up new rules for a separate group of people. Well, I guess we can, but we shouldn't.

Answer 5

I agree with President Bush's anti-terrorism methods.
The quotation you typed is not relevant to your question.
Your grammar is less than perfect. You transition from anti-terror methods to coercion to torture methods without any logical connection.
President Bush does not, and never did, use torture.
Your last two questions are impossible to answer, because I cannot tell what you are asking.
Dealing with what?
Agree or disagree about what?

Answer 6

It's so nice of you to care so much for terrorists.
But they don't need your help.
And they would kill you just a quick as they would kill anyone else.

Don't worry about terrorists. Go do something nice for an elderly neighbor.
Did you care about the Americans that got their heads cut off?

Answer 7

Fortunately, you are still alive and we have not been attacked again.. Rather than being so sour, you should start counting your blessings. The worst is yet to come and Bush has nothing to do with it..There is a reality out there......... why not try and find it???

Answer 8

I agree with those who disagree with him. It's amazing to me how someone who claims to be a Christian like our President could be so enthusiastic about torture and war.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
For those interested in 9/11, the Iraq war, etc. check out this website: http://www.wanttoknow.info/9-11timeline60pg
It's a time line of events surrounding 9/11 from the 70's to the present. Each entry is referenced with articles in the main stream media. No theories, just facts.

Answer 9

Bush rocks

Answer 10

No, Bush is a hypocrite and a shame to all Christians.