Posted on 09/15/2006 5:03:46 AM PDT by demkicker
WASHINGTON - On a frantic day of Republican infighting, the Senate Armed Services Committee defied President Bush on Thursday as four Republicans joined Democrats in approving a plan for the trial and interrogation of terror suspects that the White House has rejected.
The Republican rebellion was led by Sen. John Warner of Virginia, the committee chairman, with backing from Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Susan Collins of Maine. The White House had warned that their legislation would leave the United States no option but to shut down a CIA program to interrogate high-level terror suspects.
The vote came despite an all-out effort by the White House to win support for its own approach, which provides far fewer protections for detainees. Bush himself traveled to Capitol Hill with Vice President Dick Cheney on Thursday morning, and the administration released a brief letter in which the top lawyers for the military branches said they did not object to the White House proposal to redefine a key provision of the Geneva Conventions.
But former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell sided with the senators, saying in a letter that Bush's plan to redefine the Geneva Conventions would encourage the world to "doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism" and "put our own troops at risk."
Powell's statement amounted to a rare public breach with the White House he served, but reflected his opposition while in office to the administration's assertions that the war against al-Qaida should not be bound by the Geneva Conventions.... (continued at link)
(Excerpt) Read more at houstonchronicle.com ...
Our enemy is inside the nation, on our streets, soon to be on our radio and TV, and in the elected highest offices in DC.
Anyone counted how many RINOs we're up to now? What is the real breakdown?
Is there going to be a House version of this bill?
Now tell us what are the terrorist tactics that we are going to use if the Senate approves President Bush plan?
Rather than continuing with behind the scenes quiet diplomacy with these Senate jihadists, I hope this will be the last straw for Bush and that he is willing to put EVERYTHING on the line and for once go ballistic publicly so that this cannot stand!
There is not a doubt in my mind that the country will support him. There is absolutely no excuse for him to stand by and let these traitors aide and abet the terrorists and endanger our military and country. This is war!
you haven't heard....we are going to ask the terrorists questions.....the shame of it all.
How about this, could Zell Miller be right?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38251
I've heard that neither citizen Democrats nor Republicans are pleased with McCain/Graham.
But just think about this - in 2008 - the GOP opponents to the presidency can make some great commercials about McCain's desire to give the jihadists access to classified documents and how he caved to SCOTUS so how can he be expected to fight the terrorists.
The legislature in my state is so corrupt, I couldn't trust them to make an honest decision, but I understand what Zell is thinking.
The point about danger to the troops stems from what they consider the precendent our actions now would set for the next war. If other countries adopt a two-tiered system the way we proposed to do, then our captured special ops or intel guys could automatically face a "Geneva free" hotel stay. They have information vital to the defense of the capturing nation, after all. Why shouldn't they use every means necessary to extract it?
The enemy abuses our prisoners anyway, when they think no one is looking. The only way we can avoid that is to avoid war altogether. Still, under a two teired system, our future enemies wouldn't even have to pretend to be humane. They can shrug, much like we intend to, and say, "Well, we needed to know everything. What's the big deal?"
I honestly don't know how you can look at it any other way than a coup attempt. And your quote is irrelevant since our President isn't resorting to terrorist tactics to win! Tell our military men and women that we are in an ideological war with al-Qa'ida while they try to hang onto their heads. Sorry, but your 'U.N. speak' doesn't hold water.
This pisses me off especially when Graham was all over the airwaves a few months ago saying how much of a travesty it was that the Supreme Court decided the way it did.
JERK!
"This is so crazy, I cannot even believe it!"
It is.. just like the 190 Taliban that got off the hook the other day.. we can't win playing pc games with barbarians.
Americans interrogating enemy combatants have never been the way you describe (except for a few isolated incidences) and then it was nudity and panties on their heads not sawing a person into little pieces as is the practice of the enemy. I'm telling you the truth, now what is your argument again.
I can't stand McCain, and I'd have to pray long and hard if it came down to having to vote for him. I'd be happier if he just up and joined the Democrats and got it over with.
Still, let's be fair. For the dozens and dozens of bad things I could say about him, let's recognize that the guy clearly suffered a lot in Hanoi. You can't blame him for wanting to make sure that American forces never treat anyone the way that he was treated by the Viet Cong. It has nothing to do with changing the world; it's just keeping your own house in order.
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.