VOTE ON TERROR RULES DEFIES BUSH (GOP-led panel gives detainees more protections)

The Houston Chronicle via The NY Times ^ | 9/14/06 | KATE ZERNIKE

[From One - Many]

prevention they're looking at may prove worse than the disease.

If I were a vengeful person, I would / could nail you to the wall for typing this. Hope your day goes well and fine.

[CSM]

"Everyone knows the true colors of Iran, North Korea, or Syria."

If everyone already knows, then how is it different for them to "openly" do those things. Your argument is that they don't openly flaut the GC, but that they do it anyways. Yet, now you are saying that everyone already knows.

The reality is that this prevents nothing and is just a CYA move to kiss the buts of the loony left/MSM. It does nothing but give another notch on the belt of the terrorists.

[Steel Wolf]

If everyone already knows, then how is it different for them to "openly" do those things. Your argument is that they don't openly flaut the GC, but that they do it anyways. Yet, now you are saying that everyone already knows.

Here's an analogy that FReepers should be able to follow.

It's the difference Bill Clinton getting a b/j in the Oval Office, being discoverd, and being busted for perjury, versus Bill Clinton getting a b/j in the Oval Office, bragging about it, and facing no punishment.

Does everyone know Clinton is a sleaze? Yeah. Is he open about it. No.

It this really that difficult a concept?

[RoseofTexas]

That turncoat Graham has been the BIGGEST disappointment! Didn't y'all see the RED FLAG coming when he was running for Senator at that time? Just curious.

[CSM]

I worry about results, not impressions. The result is no different in either of your scenarios, but they did just show weakness to the enemy.

[HawaiianGecko]

Also, further to your post, didn't SCOTUS basically advise that Congress should look at Article 3 and determine what some of the phrases meant?

I didn't read the decision itself, as I was too busy getting my eyeballs that had rolled up into my skull back into their normal positions after hearing the decision and just read quotes and summaries;  but I do remember Justice Stevens in his plurality opinion writing "that the court has traditionally held that offenses against the law of war are triable by military commission only when they are clearly defined as war crimes by statute or strong common law precedent."

And this does seem to me to be exactly what the President is asking for.

[demkicker]

Yep, McCain's taken a triangulation page out of Clinton's book.

I'm counting down to the President's news conference. Is it true he's having it in the Rose Garden? I'll be devastated if he's too nice. I want him to pick a very public fight with the four RINO senators. It will make me sick if he lets them get away with their dangerous stunt yesterday.

[no dems]

Somebody help me out here. Is this the same John McCain that is hoping to get the GOP nomination for President?

(Sarc.)

[TexKat]

Bookmark

[cookcounty]

"They can shrug, much like we intend to, and say, "Well, we needed to know everything. What's the big deal?"

You mean, in the future captured American troops will be forced to listen to the music of the Ditzy Twits over and over while having to saty up at night??? Oh, horror of it!! I think I'll tell my son not to re-up rather than face the threat of this awful fate!!! How did John McCain ever survive those 7 years of bad music???

[demkicker]

Here's my theory on McCain's presidential run

Peach thinks McCain might be using this issue to force the wedge and give himself an excuse to run as an independent.

If this happens, I'll go a step further and predict that Graham will most likely be his VP running mate.

[Peach]

Yes - it's in the Rose Garden and it is indeed time to take the gloves off. I don't think the average Americans wants jihadists to have access to classified information. NO way.

[Peach]

LOL.

[demkicker]

I advocate scraping the Geneva convention altogether or at least apply it to countries we are at war with that have a formal uniformed military. Today is a very different world and the war we are fighting doesn't remotely resemble past wars we have fought. It's vitally necessary that we give our military all the advantages they need in order to win this war on terror.

[NeoCaveman]

If this happens, I'll go a step further and predict that Graham will most likely be his VP running mate.

I'd sooner vote Democrap that for an Independent McQueeg/Lispy ticket.

[antiRepublicrat]

"put our own troops at risk."

Put our own troops at risk? I would understand this if we were at war with a country that normally abided by the Geneva Convention, but we're fighting people who would simply cut their heads off anyway. What have we to lose?

The White House would bar the suspect from seeing classified evidence that the jury used to convict him;

Bush needs to compromise on this. These trials must be fair, and fairness means showing all the evidence against a suspect. Of course we can't let him directly see everything because we're screwed if he's acquitted. At least give him a summary, and have military defense lawyers with security clearances who can see it all.

Yes, a military defense lawyer would be fair. We use them with our own troops all the time when they are facing court martial and don't want a private attorney.

[demkicker]

I've got to take a FR break and say a prayer that our President will do an outstanding job in his news conference articulating what he must to arouse the American people and explain in detail what the Senate must do and the resulting consequenses if they do not.

Look forward to chatting with you afterwards. :-)

[meandog]

These five have clearly embarked on an attempt to weaken our President, country and war on terror. The President put forth a request that has already been legally scrutinized for a Supreme Court test so there is no excuse for their revolt.

I can't understand their reasoning either but I cannot believe that they are doing it just to weaken Bush. John Warner has always been a very principled man (I suppose if you don't toss in Elizabeth Taylor, he might be right up there with Harry Flood Byrd here in Va.). I have always believed that Graham, a former JAG officer, is principled too and I know that Powell certainly is. McCain, well, I support him because I believe he's Machiavellian enough to throw caution to the wind in his belief of what's best for the country. I just don't see how going against Bush benefits any of them in the eyes of the public which must certainly have to juggle how our captured troops and citizens are treated compared to the terrorists at Gitmo.

[Peach]

You too. Hoping the President takes off the gloves.

[NeoCaveman]

(C) The point of my post was that future opponents could openly torture our guys and shrug it off as necessary, and leave us no room to protest. It turns a potential war crime into an administrative shuffle.

If both parties are signatories I don't see why they'd violate it. If they aren't then it is moot.