Bush not restricted by torture bans...

[Galmin]

Quote:

---

How is it illegal? Show me where terrorists are governed by the articles of the Geneva Convention...and then show me those articles. They're not there and you know it! It's like two parties with only one signing the contract...unless the other signs, there are no obligations.

---

...how about US federal law?

Chapter 113C covers it pretty nicely.



Sec. 2340A. - Torture

(a) Offense. -

Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.



There is also a chapter 113B about terrorism!



Here is one regarding war crimes.

[DreamTone7]

Federal Law. Sorry...but there have been folks operating outside Federal Law for a long time. FBI, CIA, etc, etc. Nothing new under the sun there. Nothing in the Geneva Convention, though...which is what I was asking for. Politicians use the same tactic...answering a different question than the one that was asked. And since we are at war with the terrorists, Federal Law does not apply under all circumstances...in fact, that is part of what the Geneva Convention was meant to address!

[Galmin]

What part of "There is no mention in the memo that restricts the presidents "proposed" carte blanche to terrorists" is it that you feel I do not express clearly enough?









88 of the prisoners held at Guantanamo have been set free.



Where they not terrorists? If not what where they? Soldiers of the Taliban regime? Random civilians rounded up and shipped to Gitmo? A mix of both? The children held, are they Al Qaeda operatives?

[DreamTone7]

Gimme a break, Galmin. In times of war, there are going to be inconveniences. It is regrettable, but unavoidable. Many innocent people are held for questioning in every government in the world. Why are you not championing their cause as well?

[questionnaire]

DreamTone, your waffle is sickening.



While people like you sit around prattling about minor legal details in national and international systems of law that powerful nations and corporations constantly disregard in any case (remember Bhopal???), since 1948 US-sponsored meddling and military intervention in other nation's affairs has been responsible for over 30 million deaths. Worse than those monsters Stalin and Mao put together, and it includes over 500,000 deaths of Iraqi children because of sanctions in the 1990s.



Why? So that a global elite can get filthy rich and a bunch of fat burger-guzzling airheads in Britain and America can drive around in 8-litre trucks and gorge themselves on produce that has been made unnaturally cheap by 3rd world exploitation and grossly unfair trading arrangements. 'Quality of life'. It's all really worth it, isn't it?



Want to know what I mean? Go to the Brazilian countryside, where you will see how millions of peasant farmers were thrown off their land with tiny compensation packages and forced into shanty-towns around major cities where the only means of earning a living for many of them are drugs and prostitiution. Why? To turn the Brazilian countryside into a prairie to produce cheap meat for fat Westerners.



For a taster, instead of sitting round watching Hollywood junk and reading stupid right-wing websites, go and see Fernando Meirelles' incredible film 'City of God'. If it doesn't move you, you are emotionally and intellectually closed down.

[Galmin]

[

Quote:

---

Bush says he never authorized illegal interrogations



President questioned about prisoner abuse

Friday, June 11, 2004



President Bush gestures as he talks to reporters Thursday.



SEA ISLAND, Georgia (CNN) -- President Bush said Thursday he never authorized the use of any interrogation techniques in the war on terrorism that would violate U.S. or international laws.



......

Asked whether he has seen the memos, Bush replied, "I can't remember if I've seen the memo or not." But he reiterated that he had instructed that the treatment of terror suspects stay within U.S. and international laws.

---

Bush says *Illegal*. Do you believe he think the memo suggests thay he may break the law or do you think he says this since he is convinced that torture is, in some certain aspects, legal?



Why is Ashcroft sitting on paper requested by capitol hill?

Edited by: Galmin  at: 6/11/04 13:39

[DreamTone7]

Galmin - "Bush says *Illegal*. Do you believe he think the memo suggests thay he may break the law or do you think he says this since he is convinced that torture is, in some certain aspects, legal?"



I would think that it is up to him to say exactly what he means. Taken out of context, I have no idea. But as to whether or not it is or is not "legal", I would say that it would be a tough call to make. (Didn't I say that already?) It would be a matter of whether or not the terrorists do or do not fall under the Geneva Convention (I would say not), and in which way.

[questionnaire]

The sanctions against Iraq were illegal under international law.



The invasion of Iraq was illegal under international law.



This treatment of prisoners is illegal under international law.



That constitutes state terrorism.



Britain and America are at present still not fully civilized nations, and their current leaderships represent their uncivilized elements.



Because the US-led corporate Judaeo-Christian West constantly flouts international laws that are inconvenient, and has done so since 1948, weaker nations have come to feel vulnerable and totally unprotected. Thus terrorism is their only resort. Ironically (the sort of irony that exists only in a climate of lies and misinformation - in a climate of transparency it wouldn't be ironic but tediously predictable), you have created your own terrorists in your attempt to dominate the world. Al Queda was created in a deal between the USA and Islamic extremists to drive out the Soviets from Afghanistan. And now the violent, psychotic little child has turned on its parents because it witnessed the parents turning on Islamic states once the Soviet threat had been removed. No real surprises there.



If I didn't realize how stupid, incompetent and mendacious your cultural and political leaders are, I might think you were trying to deliberately engineer your own downfall.

[DreamTone7]

Q - Stick to the subject at hand or start a new thread.

[questionnaire]

.... don't tell me what to do.



I have no interest in your agenda-setting. The heart of the matter interests me more, and your waffle constantly obscures it.

[Galmin]

Quote:

---

It would be a matter of whether or not the terrorists do or do not fall under the Geneva Convention

---

You take for granted that a presumed carte blanche for the president would only include terrorists, when the memo doesn't make that limitation at all.

[DreamTone7]

Have you read the memo?

[HKRockChick]

that terrorists do not fall under the geneva convention. For the sake of YOUR argument DT.



so what about innocent folks taken off the street and from their families during raids? Remember how many prisoners the US released in Iraq, who were simply imprisoned and tortured with no charge??? 80-90% were innocent, estimates say.



its likely they are now terrorists, but weren't before...



so what do you say to that, johnny head-in-sand? Was the torture illegal/unethical one or both or neither?

[DreamTone7]

First of all, who says anyone was tortured? You? Let's get some sources here.



Let's say for the sake of your arguement that they were tortured. Is it unethical? Yes...certainly. At least as far as I'm concerned.



If they were not tortured then I have no problem with it...and unless you want to champion the cause.

[HKRockChick]

CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS GUY????



What are you saying, that NO ONE was tortured in these camps and prisons?????????







I'm sorry, I never did take anything you said seriously, but now I'm beginning to think you are a comedian in real life...