Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
WHAT LAW.. I have asked NUMEROUS times for THE LAW that you CLAIM were broken.. NAME IT!!
p.s. International laws against torture do not apply, the US Supreme Court has already ruled that the "terrorists" have the legal authority in US Criminal Court.. International laws would mean the Surpeme Court would not have jurisidiction..
Pre 9/11 there were NO LAWS, except the Geneva Convention, which is NOT A LAW EITHER, it is a treaty, but, obviously, our former pres. and v.p. claimed the Geneva Convention did NOT APPLY to FIGHTING TERRA-ISTS. BTW, I never said or claimed either one of your previous fearless leaders broke a law, as they were 2 lawless individuals, and assumed anything and everything they did, was righteous, which it was not. 6 gun dubya, the 'WAR PRESIDENT', SHOOT FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER, HIS WESTERN STYLE OF JUSTICE SUCKED.
so, there you have it, the whole thing in a nutshell. SEE, all of us libs aren't as dumb and stupid as you think we are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Geneva_Convention
There was a reason all these detainees were not kept on US soil.
Can you say "loophole" ?
Bingo.... Its no coincidence they were not brought into a US military base.. The letter of the law was followed, and anyone who says otherwise needs to tell me WHAT LAW was violated..
Instead of just repeating your feelings, or what you think SHOULD BE the law, tell me the ACTUAL law that was broken.
Millions of liberals in this country cant name THAT LAW.. they just keep repeating, a law was broken, a law was broken, and other liberals just keep repeating the lie and eventually they all think its true, but when questioned THE ACTUAL LAW, they all just jump around from one argument to another, which proves they dont have a darn clue..
bingo.... Its no coincidence they were not brought into a us military base.. The letter of the law was followed, and anyone who says otherwise needs to tell me what law was violated..
Instead of just repeating your feelings, or what you think should be the law, tell me the actual law that was broken.
Millions of liberals in this country cant name that law.. They just keep repeating, a law was broken, a law was broken, and other liberals just keep repeating the lie and eventually they all think its true, but when questioned the actual law, they all just jump around from one argument to another, which proves they dont have a darn clue..
Pre 9/11 there were NO LAWS, except the Geneva Convention, which is NOT A LAW EITHER, it is a treaty, but, obviously, our former pres. and v.p. claimed the Geneva Convention did NOT APPLY to FIGHTING TERRA-ISTS. BTW, I never said or claimed either one of your previous fearless leaders broke a law, as they were 2 lawless individuals, and assumed anything and everything they did, was righteous, which it was not. 6 gun dubya, the 'WAR PRESIDENT', SHOOT FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER, HIS WESTERN STYLE OF JUSTICE SUCKED.
so, there you have it, the whole thing in a nutshell. SEE, all of us libs aren't as dumb and stupid as you think we are.
Stop making up arguments as you go along and listen.. Your starting to look foolish
In 2004 the US Supreme Court had ruled in 2004 that the terrorists would face a military commission, which would comply with the Geneva Convention.. Then in 2006, they REVERSED their ruling, stating that the terrorists were entitled to question their inprisonment IN THE US COURT SYSTEM, meaning that they ruled that the Geneva Convention DID NOT APPLY.. Geneva Convention means MILITARY actions, not CRIMINAL..
Sorry but the Supreme Court said YOUR WRONG. and through all of your liberal garbage about the "WAR PRESIDENT", you failed to tell me WHAT LAW was broken, and dont come backw ith the Geneva Convention, the US Supreme Court already ruled that did not apply..
Pre 9/11 there were NO LAWS, except the Geneva Convention, which is NOT A LAW EITHER, it is a treaty, but, obviously, our former pres. and v.p. claimed the Geneva Convention did NOT APPLY to FIGHTING TERRA-ISTS. BTW, I never said or claimed either one of your previous fearless leaders broke a law, as they were 2 lawless individuals, and assumed anything and everything they did, was righteous, which it was not. 6 gun dubya, the 'WAR PRESIDENT', SHOOT FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER, HIS WESTERN STYLE OF JUSTICE SUCKED.
so, there you have it, the whole thing in a nutshell. SEE, all of us libs aren't as dumb and stupid as you think we are. Third Geneva Convention - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
No they didn't break any law. They worked around it so they could get what they wanted while still keeping to the "letter of the law".
Morally and ethically...yeah they broke the law but legally they didn't.
Stop making up arguments as you go along and listen.. Your starting to look foolish
In 2004 the US Supreme Court had ruled in 2004 that the terrorists would face a military commission, which would comply with the Geneva Convention.. Then in 2006, they REVERSED their ruling, stating that the terrorists were entitled to question their inprisonment IN THE US COURT SYSTEM, meaning that they ruled that the Geneva Convention DID NOT APPLY.. Geneva Convention means MILITARY actions, not CRIMINAL..
Sorry but the Supreme Court said YOUR WRONG. and through all of your liberal garbage about the "WAR PRESIDENT", you failed to tell me WHAT LAW was broken, and dont come backw ith the Geneva Convention, the US Supreme Court already ruled that did not apply..
You claim that pre 9/11 there were no laws, (nothing but anarchy I guess), except the Geneva Convention, which the US Supreme Court has already ruled did not apply. So lets think about this, you claim that Bush was "lawless" and claimed there were no laws..
You then claim that Bush and Cheney stated that the Geneva Convention did not apply to the terrorists, (which they didnt) but then liberal lawyers who filed lawsuits on behalf of terrorists confirmed that argument when they asked that the terrorists should be tried in the US Court system. The US Supreme Court agreed initially stated that the Geneva Convention rules applied, then they REVERSED their decision and ruled that the Geneva Convention laws did not apply, and during the same ruling giving terrorists LIMITED access to our court system by ONLY ruling that they are entitled to question their inprisonment..
The liberal lawyers, AND the Supreme Court ALL agreed with Bush that the Geneva Convention DID NOT APPLY..
Then you come back and claim they are lawless, make all kinds of hate comments, and nothing but BS right after you claimed that Bush lied which is a lie, and all of the hate monger garbage about shoot first, ask questions later, another lie, especially considering that Obama is coming to the EXACT same conculsions Bush did..
You claim that pre 9/11 there were no laws, (nothing but anarchy I guess), except the Geneva Convention, which the US Supreme Court has already ruled did not apply. So lets think about this, you claim that Bush was "lawless" and claimed there were no laws..
You then claim that Bush and Cheney stated that the Geneva Convention did not apply to the terrorists, (which they didnt) but then liberal lawyers who filed lawsuits on behalf of terrorists confirmed that argument when they argued that terrorists should be tried in the US Court system. The US Supreme Court agreed initially stated that the Geneva Convention rules applied, then they REVERSED their decision and ruled that the Geneva Convention laws did not apply, and during the same ruling giving terrorists LIMITED access to our court system by ONLY ruling that they are entitled to question their inprisonment..
Then you come back and claim they are lawless, make all kinds of hate comments, and nothing but BS right after you claimed that Bush lied which is a lie, and all of the hate monger garbage about shoot first, ask questions later, another lie, especially considering that Obama is coming to the EXACT same conculsions Bush did..
you are impossible. bush admitted the intelligence he had was flawed. he is a liar, no doubt about ti. you go slowly, you're just not seeing the picture at all, and, I am not one of those liberal lawyers you speak of. I give up, I cannot have a meaningful discussion with a person who doesn't see the forest for the trees.
you are impossible. bush admitted the intelligence he had was flawed. he is a liar, no doubt about ti. you go slowly, you're just not seeing the picture at all, and, I am not one of those liberal lawyers you speak of. I give up, I cannot have a meaningful discussion with a person who doesn't see the forest for the trees.
I just have higher standards and dont believe every hate monger comment and lie I'm told, and I understand the difference between flawed intelligence and "a lie"..
I dont agree with Obama on many issues, but if one is going to accuse him of breaking the law or violating rights, one better be darn well able to list the laws broken and you better well not ignore Supreme Court rulings..
Maybe a better question is WHY arent Democrats asking for the LEGAL definition of Torture to be changed, or WHY arent Democrats wanting to investigate claims that the CIA "lies all the time to Congress".. Democrats have EVERY branch of government and can change laws tomorrow to guarantee that waterboarding doesnt take place again. They also can investigate to find out if its true that the CIA "lies all the time to Congress", because whats next? Another war due to "CIA lies"?
Democrats, the symbol of hypocracy anymore, first claim there were lies that got into an "illegal" war, and then when they have FULL power to question and investigate "lies", they ignore it and make excuses.
WHAT LAW.. I have asked NUMEROUS times for THE LAW that you CLAIM were broken.. NAME IT!!
18 USC 2340
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
p.s. International laws against torture do not apply, the US Supreme Court has already ruled that the "terrorists" have the legal authority in US Criminal Court to ONLY question their detainment. International laws would mean the Surpeme Court would not have jurisidiction.
The Supreme Court has ruled no such thing. We can and have tried people under international law in the United states.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
