BTW: the one in the skirt, hiding their face is a male...at least we think he is. We asked him but he isn't sure either.
Posted on 09/28/2006 8:54:10 AM PDT by MNJohnnie
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1709588/posts?page=1
House passes detainee bill
Republicans pushed a bill supported by President George W. Bush to set rules for interrogating and trying terrorism suspects through the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday and Senate Republicans were expected to follow within a day.
The House passed the bill 253-168 largely along party lines, dismissing warnings from Democrats that courts would strike down the plan for failing to meet judicial standards.
Republicans who control both chambers want to send the bill to Bush by the weekend, when lawmakers head out to campaign for November elections that will determine control of Congress.
The bill sets up procedures to try foreign terrorism suspects at the U.S. prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The Supreme Court struck down Bush's original plan, saying it violated U.S. and international standards.
As Senate debate on the bill got under way, Republicans defeated an attempt to pass an alternative that Democrats said would meet Supreme Court standards and help restore America's image, damaged by harsh treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay and abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
The Senate was expected to pass the bill on Thursday, after considering several other amendments.
Republicans, seeking to polish their terrorism-fighting credentials in the final days of their campaigns, depicted the new rules as tough but fair.
"By formally establishing terrorist tribunals, the bill provides a critical tool in fighting the war on terror and it provides a measure of justice to the victims of 9/11," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, a California Republican, said the bill provides "basic fairness in our prosecutions but we also preserve the ability of our war fighters to operate effectively on the battlefield."
But Human rights groups and many Democrats said the deal gave Bush too much latitude to allow harsh interrogations and to deprive detainees of legal rights.
Rep. Ellen Tauscher, a California Democrat, said agreeing to "such an ambiguous compromise would allow the president to define torture when and how he sees fit."
Rep. Louise Slaughter, a New York Democrat, said the bill sends a signal that "America's leaders are willing to abandon our values ... in favor of thuggish tactics they hope might make them safer for a little while."
Democrats also predicted the courts would find the bill unconstitutional because it deprived detainees held without charges of the right to file legal challenges to their imprisonment.
Under a compromise worked out last week, the CIA will be able to continue aggressive interrogations, but supporters of the bill said agency interrogators would comply with the Geneva Conventions' requirement for humane treatment.
The bill also expands the definition of "enemy combatants," who can be held indefinitely without charges, to include those who knowingly support terrorist groups with arms, money and other activities.
Backers of the bill said that provision would choke off supplies to terrorist groups, but critics said it was too broad and could subject many more people to indefinite detention.
LOL!
TRUE!
I promise to work tirelessyly to piss them off and do ALL I can to create MORE terrorists!
;-)
I wish i could what he was doing on the Cam.
the Saudis and Jordanians and other so called "moderates" are the ones dropping oil so much because they're afraid that high oil prices will help the Democrats win in November, and if that happens, they know we'll pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and when that happens, within a year or two the Middle East will be overrun with AlQaeda and other terrorists and those "moderate" governments will be screwed and they know it. I heard that earlier this week and I think that's the most accurate reason for the oil prices dropping. The "moderate" Middle Eastern governments SO TOTALLY don't want us out of there, because we're keeping their nutz from being slid into the terrorist fire.
not touching that...
;-)
Sounds like you've perked up.
LOL
YUP!
A good rant will do that for me!
;-)
Now that could be a problem. };^)
(since Johnnie isn't here to rub me....)
If they're smart they'll do that. I can sure understand them being nervous as they're intependent. I'd sure be looking at changing chains. :) If they're going to stay as CITGO, they might as well put up a sign that says "Screw America!". CITGO is not going to recover from Chavez's rant, not for a long while I don't think.
BTW: the one in the skirt, hiding their face is a male...at least we think he is. We asked him but he isn't sure either.
I HOPE YOU ARE RIGHT!!!
Oh it's okay, Rush barely talked about it. He was making fun of to more than anything else. What a stupid non-story. :) If the Democrats were tearing up the polls I doubt we'd even of heard about Owens in any news reports outside of Dallas.
Problem is that the dems actually side with the terrorists and would complain if we stated doing what we need to do and take out the enemy whenever and wherever they are.
WOO HOO!
GREAT TUNE!
I'm not even a real person. Sensei Ern programmed a bot(me) to do his typing while he is working.
HEY YOU!!
How are you?
mookie!!!!
Good for us, if Al Sadyr's militias are splitting off from him, we can kill them more easily. Split off like that, they're weaker and compromised. GOOOOOOD. :) This is great news. A disconnected spread out cut off bunch of small enemies, who don't work together is MUCH easier to kill. :)
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.