news.yahoo.com — Of course, he gets to decide what is considered torture and what is considered "coercive interrogation", but don't we all know its the same thing in the end? Now that he has taken this bold step, we should expect an immediate drop-off in insurgent attacks in Iraq, right? Another step in the wrong direction.
Oct 17, 2006 View in Crawl 4
designerOct 18, 2006
It won't because Bush, Rove and Cheney will still be there! Yay for Big Oil!
mfsalpOct 18, 2006
@bobcrotchYou're surprised that there's a bias toward one side in a forum which allows the freedom of opinion? Well if you wanted the forum to be fair and balanced we would have all just "/shrugged" the past 791 years that Habeus Corpus has been in existence. It was part of the Magna Carta signed in 1215. Please.
Closed AccountOct 18, 2006
Because the families of the ones abducted would surely stay silent, right?
zunipusOct 18, 2006
"You're surprised that there's a bias toward one side in a forum which allows the freedom of opinion? Well if you wanted the forum to be fair and balanced we would have all just "/shrugged" the past 791 years that Habeus Corpus has been in existence. It was part of the Magna Carta signed in 1215. Please."The phrase 'fair and balanced' is now part of the Double Speak lexicon (read '1984'). Hate is love. War is peace. Wreckless and biased news is fair and balanced.Where will the world of humanity go now that my beloved USA has been infected with lies and relentless FUD?
danimal7229Oct 18, 2006
mikerosoft,I've read the law. It specifically talks about it's application to "enemy combatants". It allows the president to define who is an enemy combatant and does allow for US citizens to be defined as such. Not only is this an attack on our constitutional rights but a consolidation of power to the executive branch. I don't care if people love Bush or hate him but I to see the change for what it logically and legally is a centralization of power and the erosion of our constitutional rights. What's next? Who's next?Again if you think I am over reacting explain to me how is this different than the ability to detain Americans during WWII?
wisgaryOct 18, 2006
"Six weeks later, after a highly publicized dispute with key Republicans over the terms of the bill, Bush signed the new law "in memory of the victims of September the 11th.""What a GOD DAMN assh**E. If I died there I sure as hell wouldn't want something that will mean out-of-control abuse of power, and a move towards further violence in my memory.
williamdyerOct 19, 2006
I am proudly a paleocon. Neocons infected the Republican Party with big-government, authoritarian, Israel-can-do-no-wrong idiocy that will cost money, lives, and credibility for conservatism. To HELL with neocons.
thegoldstandardOct 19, 2006
It does allow the President to define even a US citizen as an enemy combatant. Read the bill CLOSELY.
saveaworldOct 19, 2006
why don't all you cry babies quit whinning.go live in an Islamic country.when you come back (if they let you out) maybe you'll appreciate america.I think you should all be shipped out.
lebaigeOct 19, 2006
I wonder how many people in this thread have actually read the act as compared to relying on other's readings and interpretations.