Posted on 07/11/2006 5:20:08 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 11, 2006
CONTACT: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider 202-226-7616 Pelosi Statement on Providing Detainees Protections Under the Geneva Conventions
Washington, D.C. – House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today in response to the Department of Defense’s announcement that detainees in U.S. military custody are entitled to protections under the Geneva Conventions:
“Today’s decision by the Department of Defense to reverse the mistaken interpretation of the Geneva Conventions that President Bush and his Administration clung to for so long is an acknowledgement at last of the primacy of the rule of law. This decision shows that at least some people within the Bush Administration understand the Supreme Court’s decision in Hamdan and are moving to conform policies and practices to it.”
Proof positive of devolution (see also: "the "DU")
Who cares what facelift thinks?
AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!! I feel much better now.
the problem is not what she thinks.
the problem is that this step had to be taken.
Under the GC, since they are non-uniformed enemy agents, they can be handed as spies.
With the MSM and the Damnrats would afford our own fighting men and woman the same courtesies.
I wish she would release a statement detailing the extent of her plastic surgery.
Just wait till these statements get replayed to the American public as we approach November!
Release them out onto a deserted plain in Afghanistan....
two minutes later, let the A-10 Warthogs come in for some good training, hehehehehe...........
Terrorist loving POS!
under which geneva convention? the one we signed in 1949, or the one 5 members of the SCOTUS just reframed a couple of weeks ago.
These people are terrorists, represnting no flag. They should not be accorded anything resembling consideration granted a captured soldier.
The war against Islamic fascists and their communist facilitators is nowhere near won. And caving in on enemy combatants weakens our efforts.
The President should be vigorously defending his Constitutional powers as Commander-In-Chief. How about an Executive order staking claim to the President's power to hold non-uniformed combatants to a different standard than the Geneva conventions?
The truth of the Geneva Coventions and "the law" is 180 degrees from what the idiot Pelosi says and what the judicial dictators ruled.
They, the 5 renegade judges, essentially rewrote the terms of the Geneva Conventions, in total contradiction to what those Conventions say and ask the us to honor treaty conventions with non-state actors that the Geneva Conventions cannot, under international law be applied to - entities that are not signatories to the Geneva Conventions.
As usual Pelosi knows nothing of what she is talking about.
Instead of todays actions, Bush should have aksed the Chief Justice to go on the TV explaining the error of the 5 renegades, from his own defense of the administration in the orginal appeal of the case, and how he invites the administration to resubmit its appeal, to which he will not recuse himself.
We are past the point of a constitutional crisis over the judicial oligarchy and it is time Conservatives fought back vigorously, with any and every means we can.
I agree with you. It seems like very few pundits on the right have figured out that the executive is a coequal branch of the government, with as valid an understanding as the other two. It drives me nuts that the Bush administration has allowed this usurpation of power without protest. W should have had a nationally televised speech that night, stating the supremes have no jurisdiction and he will ignore them. That would have shown real sand.
Nancy Pelosi : On the side of the Gitmo murderers.
Anything to destroy America.
Oops! I meant "hanged as spies".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.