Why are they opposing Bush and other Republicans on the clarification of standards of conduct under the Geneva Conventions? Some of our CIA agents are now taking out insrance in case they are sued for doing something illegal. The only thing I've heard McCain say is that he doens't want the rest of the word to think badly of us.
Why do they oppose protecting the people are are trying to protect US, and helping our own people do their jobs? Have those four gone completely mad????
2006-09-18 14:22:39 · 20 answers · asked by Mike N 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
The RINOS don't understand this enemy we are fighting and what it takes to win. They convey to the American people that we are currently torturing prisoners. WE ARE NOT. At Club Gitmo, they get medical and dental care, and eat the same food our guys eat. They are allowed to pray to their god (they behead us for praying to God). They are furnished with their koran(which was never flushed down the toilet).
Section 3 of the Geneva convention is undescriptive. Thus the interrogation process cannot go forward as is. President Bush is not promoting torture. He has asked for clarification of section 3. We don't behead, dismember, pull finger nails out, gouge out eyes, etc. But there are extreme measures that we should be able to take to get information. This information leads to the capture of terrorists and thwarting of their evil missions.
So what problem do you liberals have with protecting the American people, and all other people for that matter, from terrorist acts?
Is it that you want to oppose President Bush just because you hate him so much? Is it the popular thing to do? We will see what's popular November 7th. I believe you liberals and RINOs will be unpleasantly surprised.
2006-09-18 15:14:39 · answer #1 · answered by babe 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Well, let's look at this in a more personal perspective.
Say you are arrested by police for drug posession. You get arraigned, get your lawyer, and prepare to go to court. Suddenly, you are not allowed to see all of the evidence against you - the same evidence that will be used to send you to prison. You will not know it. You will not see it. And you will not get a chance to argue it or rebut it. The ones that will know about it are the prosecutor, the judge and the ones convicting you (the jury).
Now do you see? In the cases of the "tribunals", it is a matter of life and death. These people will not be allowed to see or explain away evidence. So they could lose their lives based on a lie - but they don't know because THEY DON'T GET TO SEE THE EVIDENCE.
The other reason for it is IT IS AGAINST THE GENEVA CONVENTION. Basically, Bush is asking for the congress to pass a law that allows us to violate the Geneva Convention. That is where they are having an issue. I think I have an issue with that as well.
But we all know that Bush isn't really that big on a person's civil rights, is he??
2006-09-18 14:51:00 · answer #2 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Don't you find it odd that anyone who started out with Bush and actually had military and war time experience has walked away from him. I think you should be afraid of a President who wants to change all the rules including the Geneva Convention. They are concerned that if our guys end up detained by another country in another war , it will decide to make it"s own rules. Why don't people see this.
2006-09-18 14:39:33 · answer #3 · answered by chi chi 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Actually, I can understand McCain not voting for it. He suffered a great deal of torture during the Viet Nam War when he was captured by the VC and they failed to follow the Geneva Conventions. He probably doesn't want anyone else to go through what he went through.
You have to remember, too, that there's an election in, what? six weeks? They need to distance themselves from Bush to make sure they get elected if we can believe what Answers says. Once they are re-elected, I wouldn't be surprised if they have a change of heart and then liberals will have to wait another six years to vote them out.
2006-09-18 14:30:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because they have finally found the guts to stand up for the sanctity and dignity of human life and personal rights. If 70-90% of the "detainees" are innocent civilians, do we have the right to torture them or hold them indefinitely? How would you feel if a member of your family was subjected to that? You don't know for sure someone is terrorist just by listening to polticians or watching the news from thousands of miles away. The Geneva Convention is the accepted human rights standard for wartime. It does NOT need to be interpreted. If the CIA is afraid of being accused of doing something illegal, then don't do it. Invading Iraq was illegal enough.
2006-09-18 14:27:05 · answer #5 · answered by Joe D 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
There is no "clarification" in the works.
There is an effort underway to weaken the Geneva Conventions by declaring that they don't really mean anything.
It is an attempt to retroactively declare that the US can hold secret prisoners, and try those prisoners in secret trials with secret evidence that was obtained through legal torture.
It is an abomination to everything that America holds dear.
2006-09-18 14:27:33 · answer #6 · answered by oohhbother 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
They are democrats in republicans clothing.
Do people really think putting women's panties on a man's head is torture?
I guess all the democrats think so and McCain? Does he really think the above is torture? Maybe he has no mind. Didn't the Viet cong break his arms? They were signers to the Geneva convention and it did not help him.
Let's see, we find a bunch of terrorists in Afghanistan, with bombs, pictures of WTC, and books that say "death to America". We bring them back to Guantanamo, the democrats say we need to give them full protection of the US constitution. The judge says are you a terrorist? No sir just minding my own business and these filthy Americans kidnapped me. OK case dismissed for lack of evidence.
The democrats think terrorists do not really exist. They think 9/11 was a conspiracy by the White House.
If those four and the dems keep us from preventing terrorist attacks, it's OUR funeral.
2006-09-18 14:38:46 · answer #7 · answered by buybeforeitstoolate 1 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Read the actual laws being proposed.
One retroactively changes the definition of federal laws, so that what had previously been a felony crime no longer is. Meaning that people who did commit felonies now get full retroactive amnesty, and are immune from prosecution.
The other law removes the US from Geneva Convention rules, so that US troops are no longer protected in any future war. And while the terrorist may not follow those rules, do you really want to assume we're never going to fight another country ever again?
So, no they are not crazy. They are determined to ensure that we continue to follow our own laws, and respect our treaty obligations. It's only BushCo that thinks it's alright to ignore the law.
2006-09-18 14:26:49 · answer #8 · answered by coragryph 7 · 7⤊ 2⤋
They are opposed to trampling on the Constitution, endangering American servicemen captured in the future, dishonoring our country's word and disgracing American honor by engaging in crimes against humanity--even if (some of) the victims are themselves criminals.
I'd say those four have not only kept their minds, they've retained their souls.
We could all take a lesson from them.
2006-09-18 14:30:39 · answer #9 · answered by zahir13 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Nope. They are trying to help those of you who are suffering temporary insanity by blindly following the administration's calls for legalized torture.
Graham made a very compelling and intelligent case for his actions on Face the Nation yesterday. I'm generally at odds with Senator Graham, but he is spot on regarding this issue.
He and they deserve your support....because it is right for America. Step out of the darkness man.
2006-09-18 14:25:31 · answer #10 · answered by KERMIT M 6 · 6⤊ 2⤋