The Greens.

A breath of fresh air. No one likes torture. No one defends torture, per se. But when the choice is defending one's homeland against homicidal maniacs, horrible awful choices have to be made. Not enough people get this.

And I can't say it enough that torture is horrible and I don't know if it is completely forgiveable. But when faced against defending one's country vs. figuring how to lump enough rights on an unlicensed agent of war and giving him all the protections of a US Citizen...this either/or thinking is just crazy. If there is information to be had to prevent innocent deaths, then yes, I favor torture.

Can't we just start a Common Sense Party? Perhaps fill it with people who DON'T do stupid shit?

Colinism said:
Your assuming that everything people say under torture is the absolute truth/QUOTE]
It's not about whether they tell what they may or may not have been responsible for. That information is almost beside the point in the prosecution of a war. It's about what new information can be had. It's about finding a bomb about to go off. It's about finding a hostage sitting in their own shit for the past X days. It's about taking action to right things; not about finding blame.

..and 100% of the people in favor of abortion have not been aborted. Where the f*ck is the logic in that?

So what you're saying is that you believe that if there is no formal declaration of war, the United States can go ahead and disregard all international standards of human rights and conduct, without reservation? Because those being tortured are not protected by the Geneva Convention, it's okay to torture them however we see fit?

Well, no one can say you don't pull off a convincing impression at any rate.

It is unfortunate that we will have to deal with the blatant corruption of the Executive Branch until 2009, but the Democrats are simply biding their time before taking complete control on the Executive and Legislative branches of government, compliments of the voting public. Bush and Cheney should certainly be impeached, but impeaching them would probably put the Republicans in a better position to win more Congressional seats and perhaps even threaten future control of the White House.

Hopefully, the new Democratic President will be able to make some liberal appointments to the Supreme Court that will pass congressional muster.

The ultimate goal of Democratic control of all three branches of government is within reach if we stay the course and turn out in droves on Election Day.

I am pretty sure you know about an upcoming terrorist attack, so you should probably just simmer down.

Regarding the actions in Iraq: It's not about a formal declaration of war, it's about not having to follow the rules if the other side doesn't. We could always decline to take prisoners. The Geneva Conventions protects civilians. It doesn't protect people who fight without uniforms

As for the the "War on Terror": That's a whole separate issue, and standard police protocol should apply there.

Yeah, because the only thing keeping us trying for the moral high ground is the presence of another side who has to play by the same rules. Let's not let actually wanting to be better than that get in the way.

Give me a fucking break.

This is just so much bullshit. It really is. We're waterboarding people who have been in custody for years. What kind of imminent crisis is that meant to prevent? Many of these men never took up arms against the United States at all. Many of these men were turned over to the military by Pakistani border guards looking to pocket the bounty offered by the military at the expense of some foreigners fleeing the war in Afghanistan. Many of these men have been held for years without charge or opportunity of any kind to even have their combat status reviewed by a neutral finder of fact. The 'bomb about to go off' scenario is patent bullshit.

Read Hamdi v Rumsfeld, Hamdan v Rumsfeld, and Rasul v Bush if you want to have the beginning of an idea of what you're talking about. If you can't be bothered then go to silliness and start a Jack Bauer appreciation thread because you're not engaging factual issues.

Note: links are to synopses, not full opinions of the court.

I propose that one of the litmus tests for calling a society civilized should be it's commitment to doing the right thing even if other's don't. After all, the "But dad, he did it first!" excuse stops being valid right about age 5.

No no no. If she drowns, she was not a witch, and was vindicated in death.

If she floats, then she's a witch.

Or if she weighs the same as a duck.

I've got a boogieboard!*

*(May not have a boogieboard.)