....., I doubt it will do any good.


Vito wrote:
Not when your references support my position and impeach yours.

Hardly


Those being held at Gitmo are war criminals tried by Afghan military courts.


Yeah, right.


Those held at Gitmo were not fulfilling these conditions hence they are war
criminals not POWs


And did it say that war criminals can be held indefinitely, shot on
whim, etc etc, without trial?

I notice that you have yet to provide one single scrap (other than your
conitnued ludicrous assertion) that these prisoners have had anything
resembling a trial.




Cuba, and using dogs to frighten them. He later rescinded those tactics and
signed off on a shorter list of "exceptional techniques," including 20-hour
interrogations, face slapping, stripping detainees to create "a feeling of
helplessness and dependence," and using dogs to increase anxiety."

So DoD and DoS disagree. I agree with DoD. YMMV

So, no you realize that Rumsfeld *did* give the orders? Only you think
it's OK because he changed his mind... sort of?




Why is President Bush insistent on Congress not restricting his "right"
to torture prisoners? Why are they denying that they knew these foreign
gov'ts practiced torture ("I mean, really... nobody told us!")?


I have no idea why Bush does things but my slight aquantance with psychology
suggests he is mad - that like many religious people, he hears "voices" he
attributes to God that tell him to do things. I never heard anyone deny
that these foreign government practiced torture, just that these governments
had promised not to torture the ones we deported to them.


Yeah right.

Never mind, I'm not interested in arguing with your "voices."

DSK