English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I would have a modicum of respect for this weasel if he just admited it. We know that is what he actually wants to do. Remember how hard Bush fought against the McCain amendment against torture?
Then when they lost, Bush signed a "signing statement" saying they could torture
detainees anyway.

2006-09-19 15:44:56 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

26 answers

He DID come out and say so - not publicly, but he gave the military the OK a long time ago.

By the way, there is no way I could ever respect George Bush. He is a lying hypocrite and a political puppet.

2006-09-19 16:48:32 · answer #1 · answered by valmay 3 · 2 1

This is one of the worst examples of mistating the truth I have ever read. Come on, you are actually saying that a sitting President WANTS to torture detainees. You have no idea how easy the "detainees" have it in US custody. They get 3 meals a day. They are guaranteed 5 prayer periods per day. They cannot be interrogated more than 4 hrs at a time. They are guaranteed 8 hrs of uninterrupted sleep per 24 hr period. They send letters back and forth to each other that cannot be screened because they use the envelopes from their lawyers. That brings up another point. Of the 442 detainees in American custody, there are nearly 1200 lawyers representing them, that WE, the American taxpayers are paying for. These animals throw feces and urine on the gaurds, stab them and cut them with homeade weapons. There are roughly 8 incidents a day of "prisoner misconduct" that the guards have to deal with. They do not deserve the good treatment they get from us. These are terrorists who would cut the throats of every American they could get too, and smile doing it. Where is the proof that this torture happens. Other than the politically motivated far fetched left wing accusations designed mislead the American voters and unseat the Republicans, and you are one of the weak minded fools out there who believe it.
As for the BS comments about weakening the Geneva Conventions, where the hell have the idiots making those comments been. The soldiers who have been captured so far have really been treated humanely huh? The have been flayed, had their eyes poiked out, brutalized with power drills, burned, and had their heads cut off. How the @#$*&$#@ !!! are they going to weaken the Geneva Conventions any further!?!? We are not on a level playing field in dealing with theses bastards, and it's our own internal enemies like the ACLU and the National Lawyers Guild doing it. That and fools like yourself who believe and propagate the incredibly egeregious lies coming form the Democrats and the Left.

...and NO, I'm not a Bush fan, but I will NEVER vote for the Democrtas because of this incredible lack of ethics in dealing with the truth. That, and the way they are Representative of this kind of slanderous BS.

2006-09-19 16:20:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

What you are calling torture is not what most reasonable people would call torture. What Bush and most people I have discussed this with want is the ability to use tough interrogation methods. We do not want to use blow torches, electric drills and other excruciatingly painful methods that our enemies use. We do not object to loud music, sleep deprivation and uncomfortable situations if it is going to save our nation and the lives of our citizens. You would probably rather see people have to jump out of tall buildings and have their heads cut off rather than cause some discomfort to those who would commit those atrocities.

2006-09-19 15:54:25 · answer #3 · answered by scarlettt_ohara 6 · 0 2

Let thy answer this question::: During Clinton Admin. our field agents hands were tied and they could do nothing about something since they found out about a plot to attack the USA back in 1993 we all know the end result= 9/11. Now thee President Bush Un-Ties the field agents hands to stop this from happening again and all you panzies out their are crying for the enemy. Give me a break. This will in know way danger U.S civilians, or Military. We have not fought one(1) enemy in any war who obied the Geneva military treatment of war prisoners guideline. NOT ONE!! Not the N. Viet, nor the Koreans, Germans, Japs NONE of THEM people. You think the Musilims will stop beheadings?? Think about it. Not one enemy we ever faced obeyed the Geneva rules. We are the only one's who've done it.

2006-09-19 15:58:09 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

The Geneva convention treaty protects only those in uniform who represent a state or country. Your bleeding heart liberal a s s wants to coddle the terrorists. Bush is right, lean on them heavy for information.

2006-09-19 15:54:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

i imagine Cheney dictated moves quietly backstage and had Bush carry them out. Now that those moves are being talked about as unlawful he's making an attempt to offset the backlash for his involvement. "protecting Bush" is truly merely protecting himself. click proper the following to get entry to the despatched link: Dick Cheney: Why So Chatty hastily?* circumstances "Cheney is clearly bothered both by making use of Obama's rollback of the guidelines he championed and the exhilaration on the left that a sitting President may prosecute a predecessor who took those guidelines too far. Cheney has persistently charged the White domicile with proceeding with prosecutions hostile to the Justice branch attorneys who stumbled on the criminal foundation for the guidelines and the CIA officials who finished them." "A more advantageous likely rationalization is that Cheney, who championed the idea of preemptive-attack doctrine as vp, is definitely-known with that in politics as well the acceptable protection is in many circumstances an outstanding offense."

2016-11-28 03:13:03 · answer #6 · answered by akerley 3 · 0 0

George also has 30 Felony Charges he committed with his NSA Wiretaps ... The Geneva Convention is not the "Geneva Suggestions" and George is squirming to change the rules "To define them" so he won't also face potential war crime allegations.

2006-09-19 15:49:44 · answer #7 · answered by pickle head 6 · 3 2

Who do you think it REALLY is that Bush wants to ultimately torture!?...
http://www.global-conspiracies.com/fema_concentration_camps.htm
http://www.rinf.com/news/sep-2005/49.html

2006-09-19 16:15:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Torture is listening to John Kerry say anything. US special ops go through training that is similar to the special CIA prison techniques.

Look at what those terrorist vermin do.

2006-09-19 15:54:32 · answer #9 · answered by rjf 3 · 2 3

He has admitted that he wants to do things that you would consider torture, and others would consider uncomfortable. He is looking to get congress to give him a law to make it legal.

2006-09-19 15:48:08 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

fedest.com, questions and answers