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.
It is amazing how far some will go to defend terrorists!
Don't want them "tortured?" Fine, then let the soldiers kill all of them on the battlefield instead of capturing them. Maybe the libs will finally stop whining!
Not defending terrorist only defending laws and principals...
"It is way worse than I thought it would be, and that's no joke," Mancow said. "It is such an odd feeling to have water poured down your nose with your head back... It was instantaneous... and I don't want to say this: absolutely torture."
LAWS that you cant even LIST... mmm, are they laws that exist in "dukester land"?
A deeply divided Supreme Court yesterday ruled that terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have a right to seek their release in federal court, delivering a historic rebuke to the Bush administration and Congress for policies that the majority said compromised, in the name of national security, the Constitution's guarantee of liberty.
"The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for a five-member majority clearly impatient that some prisoners have been held for six years without a hearing.
A deeply divided Supreme Court yesterday ruled that terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have a right to seek their release in federal court, delivering a historic rebuke to the Bush administration and Congress for policies that the majority said compromised, in the name of national security, the Constitution's guarantee of liberty.
"The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for a five-member majority clearly impatient that some prisoners have been held for six years without a hearing.
Yes, we've been all through this already, I AGAIN, know where the Supreme court ruled on their DETAINMENT, (odd that Obama now support Bush on the issue) the topic is ILLEGAL "TORTURE", Waterboarding, not the detainment..
You've jumped from The US Constitution, to the Geneva Convention, and everywhere in between to talk about WATERBOARDING, and you list a Supreme Court case that has NOTHING to do with Waterboarding..
Yes, we've been all through this already, I AGAIN, know where the Supreme court ruled on their DETAINMENT, (odd that Obama now support Bush on the issue) the topic is ILLEGAL "TORTURE", Waterboarding, not the detainment..
You've jumped from The US Constitution, to the Geneva Convention, and everywhere in between to talk about WATERBOARDING, and you list a Supreme Court case that has NOTHING to do with Waterboarding..
Fact under the law waterboarding is NOT considered torture.
Ask Eric Holder, he cannot find it in the law books and he is the fake attorney general.
Wow, we waterboarded 3 terrorist and got vital info from them and the terrorist have killed 7,000 of our fellow citizens.
How many fellow Americans have been beheaded liberals?? But you have not said a word about that have you?
Who's side is the libs on anyway?????
I saw line them all up and water board them all so we can stay safe, it is not against the law and is not considered torture by any definition of the law period.
So it is legal.
Now ask Fidel Obama why has he not worked on changing the law to outlaw waterboarding yet? Answer: Because he would use it himself if he needed to is why and you all know it.
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.