This Bill set the standards for detainee treatment and court system to try them.
2006-09-28 11:51:37 · 10 answers · asked by dwh320 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It passed by a vote of 65 to 34.
2006-09-28 12:24:18 · update #1
To the answerers who think it GIVES the president too much power, wrong. It actually LIMITS the unchecked power he already has (and yes, under the Constitution, get to know it).
I'm okay with what I've seen of it.
2006-09-28 12:04:29 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I'd vote no. The writ of Habeas Corpus goes back to the Magna Carta, which predates our Constitution by over 500 years. Not only are we throwing out our Constitution and the Geneva Convention, we are going back to being literally Medieval. Bush has thrown that word "Crusade" around a lot.
2006-09-28 12:15:05 · answer #2 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
everyone who votes yes for this Bill should start and train the following words: "Jawohl, mein Fuehrer!"
Does it really make a difference? They will do it again anyways! They did it in WWII to German POW`S, by changing their official status of POW to Illegal Combatants and murdered almost 1 Million of them (in a single Camp that is) with torture, lack of food and medicine and these guys where Uniformed Servicemen. Geneva Convention my ***! Do you really think a guy like "junior" and his Republi kkk ans give a rats *** about the guys in gizmo or the others he took all over the world? Or his own Citizens btw? I am going to watch this one very closely if it gets through we will probably have to go and get us a nice brown uniform, to be a "patriot" in this country. Either that or a few white bedspreads and burning crosses.......after all.........he is an "All American Country Boy" right?
2006-09-28 12:28:24 · answer #3 · answered by Mr. T 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I didn't read it but what is wrong with the language of the Geneva Convention? It is not vague, it is concise and simple and to the point AND it has worked just fine since it's last updated change in 1949.
2006-09-28 12:34:48 · answer #4 · answered by Dr. Zhivago 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. It puts too much power in the hands of the president. I predict it wil be struck down by the Supreme Court.
2006-09-28 11:56:28 · answer #5 · answered by notme 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would vote no. I do not support torture. I also do not support holding prisoners without a lawyer, without outside contact and without any charges. that is tyranny. In Iraq now there are 14,000 prisoners being held without charges, with no lawyer and no outside contact, not even the Red Cross.
2006-09-28 12:04:17 · answer #6 · answered by jl_jack09 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think its nothing...just election year BS...All these laws will come back to haunt ordinary Americans sooner rather than later...this senate and congress and president and indeed this time in our Nations history...will go down as one that was full of SH IT
2006-09-28 11:58:06 · answer #7 · answered by dstr 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It applies only to foreign fighters not American Citizens, so I'd say, Yes.
2006-09-28 11:57:57 · answer #8 · answered by MEL T 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am not sure, I have not read it, however if George Bush wants it, I would be wary of it as he is downright immoral.
2006-09-28 11:55:59 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
YES for sure, it's weak though.
2006-09-28 11:53:35 · answer #10 · answered by thomasnotdoubting2 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋