Hahahahaha... you're funny!
Why would he appoint someone that would expose his position on constitutional corruption?
I get the feeling that Gozo's post will go un-maned for the next 16 months.
2007-08-28 03:09:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
Robert M, just because the Geneva convention does not apply to terrorists "suspects"(you do know what the difference is right?), does not mean our own principles should not be extended to all people in order to show some kind of integrity. Lacking integrity doesn't prove to anyone, that we are fighting the good fight.
But to answer your question, I would be happy if he would appoint someone, for once, who believes in honesty and justice, to that position. If he cannot do that, someone who can at least recall, from day to day, important decisions they make, will do.
2007-08-28 03:13:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by Boss H 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
first off if you are asked under oath if in the constitution the right of habeas corpus is granted; if you answer yes it is, you are lying. Second foreign terrorists are not guaranteed US rights. taking judicial action against someone from a battle field across the world is not feasible to allow the same court rights as a US citizen. why is that so hard to grasp.
2007-08-28 03:14:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by CaptainObvious 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Bush has gone through his Presidency selecting divisive candidates at every turn. Expect no gesture toward cooperation.
His statement announcing the Gonzales resignation showed that he will not recognize that the country has rejected his attempts at increasing the power of the Presidency, the lessening of protections toward individual citizens, and the mis-use of government offices for partisan political purposes.
2007-08-28 03:10:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by oohhbother 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus for captured confederate soldiers.
Why can't Bush do it for foreign terrorist fighters???
2007-08-28 03:07:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Not a question of what they believe. It is a right to any citizen that they cannot do anything about.....HOWEVER the fault here is that it requires Congress to actually do their job and enforce the issue...so since weak pansy democrats are in control of Congress they cannot stand up to the Klan GOP
2007-08-28 03:43:12
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Can the democrats admit that the Geneva convention is not grated to terrorists??
They do not fight for a country, and they are not a uniformed army.
So it does not apply. Unless your a dem and want to hold hands light candles and sing Kum Ba Yah, and think they will not chop off your head.
2007-08-28 03:09:22
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
I hope not for radical Islamic animals. I would subcontract them over to Mexican Prisons.
2007-08-28 03:13:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by GABY 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
I'M SPARTACUS!!!!
2007-08-28 03:06:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋