Should terrorists be treated according to the Geneva Convention?

stop confusing people with the facts

 

Was he getting medical attantion in Iraq? Maybe

Was Saddam Harboring him? no

 

Now THAT'S funny! Well done.

Oh...that wasnt meant to be funny?

Sorry.

 

Neither Truman nor Johnson had an Administration lawyer draft memos justifying the use of torture or the scrapping of the Geneva Conventions.

 

So basso if this is the "truth" how come the administration won't release it and how come it hasn't caught on with the MSM?

just wondering...

[edit] I love this quote from the article

 

You are truly delusional then. Even Cheney has admitted that there was absolutely no link between Iraq and 9/11.

 

Once again, andymoon is trying to distort the issue by removing the word 'terror' and inserting 'al Qaeda'. Iraq did in fact have strong links to terror. Ever heard of the Palestine/Israel conflict? This is just the tip of the iceberg, but obviously enough to sit moon down again for swinging and missing.

 

Yeah, I'M the one who is swinging and missing.



How are you doing on that response to the Krugman thread, O economic genius?

 

Pretty easily, none of the participants of 9/11 were trained there. WHOOPS. And if you're going to list this, an ALLEGED terrorist training camp that has not been linked to one single terrorist attack, as the basis for a war that has killed more than 100,000 and crippled many more, then you are on really thin ice from an ethical/logistical standpoint.

 

Not enough for the 9/11 commission to rate the evidence as credible. If a GOP controlled commission couldn't find credible evidence of such a link in today's environment, then it is very safe to say that such claims are baseless.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46254-2004Jun16.html

 

This is why all the rage shown from the pro-torture crowd is completely nonsensical. You don't know if these people being captured are guilty of any crime and the majority are later released after long detainment periods and torture. I think the majority here wouldn't have much issue with torturing convicted terrorists, even if they felt it was immoral. Furthermore, you're not torturing as punishment but rather to extract intelligence, so I don't see where all the anger from the pro-torture crowd is coming from. It's already been documented that torture does not provide useful intelligence as they usually just tell you what they think you want to hear.

I have to believe that the only motives behind torturing any detainee regardless of innocence/guilt are vengeance and racism.

 

It shouldn't be that difficult for even you to be able to make a distinction between terrorists and insurgents and innocence/guilt. Your rage is what is most amusing.

 

How you haven't been banned yet for your blatant racism is beyond me. It's funny hearing your defense of torture though, so I hope they let you stick around.

 

Sorry to be a stickler but they weren't from Afghanistan either, although they spent some time there. The hijackers were a mixture of Saudis and Egyptians. Two countries we haven't invaded.

 

You are aware that our good allies the Saudis also fund the Palestinians. According to some Israeli sources Hamas gets 60% of their funding from the Saudis.

Here's a link: http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/ml_gen/ml6_12_03.htm

Would you agree then that even our allies have strong links to terror?

 

There is nothing wrong with using an assumption, as long as you clearly notate that your (assumption) is an opinion, and not that your (Ass U Me ption) is a fact.

 

they have but we already have bases and make money off their oil so they get a pass..

 

Ummmm.

Let's see here.

Dictator at the time? Check.
Knew everything that went on because of the fear of him and control he had? Check.
Civilian citizens of Iraq had a hard time getting medical attention, much less foriegn "visitors?" Check.

Pass the pipe back to andymoon. You been hittin' it too long.

At least andymoon uses links.