1  2  3  4  5  Next

<strong>Title: </strong> <a href="/link.php?id=14120" target="_blank">US Congress gives Bush the right to torture and detain people forever</a> (click to view)

<strong>Category:</strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=News_Links&file=category&catid=12" target="_blank">Uncle Sam</a>
<strong>Posted By: </strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=Your_Account&op=userinfo&username=Scape" target="_blank">Scape</a>
<strong>Date: </strong> 2006-09-28 22:48:48

   

Oh well, habeas corpus was 701 years old, it had lived a long and full life. R.I.P.

   

I'd rather be tortured and detained by the Americans then befriended by the Islamofascists.

   

That's some nice artistic license taken with the title of this news item.

   

While I don't necessarily agree with the substance of the article, I really take exception to the title of this forum.

"US Congress gives Bush the right to torture and detain people forever"?? WTF is that about? A little sensationist isn't it?

Since when did CKA become CNN?

I'm no expert in US law, but I had a quick scan through of resolution HR 6166 and I fail to see the areas of this law which grant the US government the authority to use torture...

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin ... ih.txt.pdf

Quite the contrary in fact - articl 948r clearly sates:

<i>EXCLUSION OF STATEMENTS OBTAINED BY
TORTURE.—A statement obtained by use of torture shall not be admissible in a military commission under this chapter, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made</i>

Nice try Scape - way to keep an unbaised point of view.

   

Glad to see I'm not the only one paying attention.

   

On this issue I do not think it is possible to have an unbiased POV. That being said at this point I am ambivalent as to the law and how it is interpreted. I am not arguing the law or the merits. This allows for unlimited detainment and torture. That is the fact that must be dealt with, sleep well.

Senate Approves Detainee Bill Backed by Bush

   

I can't wait till ridenrain see's this, as he was given a lecture about not properly titling his threads. I expect that the person that bitched to ridenrain should be on here complaining about this.

   

Ah, This will do nicely as my news bit in Social Studies.... (we report a news article every morning) I'm sure this'll flare up something in the teacher... Maybe I'll actually get full marks for once...

I must admit, title is just a a little extreme there Scape...

   

Holy fuck.... There is just a touch to much wiggle room there for the government to do as they fucking please. How can ANYONE be ok with people getting imprisoned without a reason, without being told what they are being charged for, and having NO ONE know where they are? To argue for such a thing is BEYOND rediculous, into the realm of incredible.

Go read some of the articles on the CNN webpage. Read how they talk about these issues:

"While Democrats warned the bill could open the way for abuse, Republicans said defeating the bill would put the country at risk of another terrorist attack."

"Republicans called it a test before the election of whether Democrats want to fight or coddle terrorists."

You want to talk about fearmongering? What the fuck man?? The US is nothing more than a police state now. Thier citizens are losing rights every which way. I will NEVER set foot into that country until it gets it shit straight.

What a sick sick joke.

   

Well... if the Washington Post says it allows torture it must be true... despite what the actual law says (and it doesn't leave much room for interpretation except regarding statement attained through coercion prior to the enactment of the law).

I have no arguement with the fact that the law allows for extended (even permanent) detainment, but saying it allows torture is incorrect. Don't beleive everything you read in the newspaper.

Funny thing is that this law actually <i>improves</i> the rights of these detainees. The US military has been working off of outdated military law created after WWII (and minorly ammended after Vietnam). According to the Geneva Convention and the Vietnam Protocol these guys (illegal combatatns) have <u>no</u> rights.

   

Stop reading CNN... it will hurt your insides.

This law has <i>nothing</i> to do with US citizens. This is a military law granting the US military the authority to try unlawful combatants. This law, while pretty harsh in many regards, improves the rights of unlawful combatants who, under the Geneva convention, are entitled to a bullet in the head.

   

I agree. The title of Senate Approves Detainee Bill Backed by Bush was the WP title and Raw had it as Senate passes Bush detainee bill. Both are accurate but so is mine. It's like having a lead in the news as, 'Woman died last night' when she was raped, stabbed 16 times, left in a dumpster and set alight. Questioning that she died is not the issue, nor is congress passing a simple bill the issue here either.

   

I read the article and it didn't say anything about torture, so your title isn't accurate.

   

Are you saying then that average US citizens who might be "suspected" of being a terrorist, or some other reason a government agency dreams up, cant be imprisoned indefinately without being told what he is being held for, with no access to a lawyer? As far as I had heard the keen ol' PATRIOT act made that possible for bush.

   

1  2  3  4  5  Next