US AND THEM: US, UN & Iraq, version 8.0

60.7 percent of eligible voters participated in the 2004 presidential election, the highest percentage in 36 years. However, more than 78 million did not vote. This means President Bush won re-election by receiving votes from less than 31% of all eligible voters in the United States.

A clear mandate?

More evidence of the administrations strong arming methods. But maybe it's starting to get weak.

Quote:

Detainee Policy Sharply Divides Bush Officials
By TIM GOLDEN and ERIC SCHMITT

WASHINGTON, Nov. 1 - The Bush administration is embroiled in a sharp internal debate over whether a new set of Defense Department standards for handling terror suspects should adopt language from the Geneva Conventions prohibiting "cruel," "humiliating" and "degrading" treatment, administration officials say.

...


"If we don't resolve this soon," one defense official said, referring to the overlapping debate over Senator McCain's proposal, "Congress is going to do it for us."

The non-partisan 9/11 Commission Report in Chapter 2.5, page 67, note 78.
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
The Taliban seemed to open the doors to all who wanted to come to Afghanistan to train in the camps. The alliance with the Taliban provided al Qaeda a sanctuary in which to train and indoctrinate fighters and terrorists, import weapons, forge ties with other jihad groups and leaders, and plot and staff terrorist schemes. While Bin Ladin maintained his own al Qaeda guesthouses and camps for vetting and training recruits, he also provided support to and benefited from the broad infrastructure of such facilities in Afghanistan made available to the global network of Islamist movements. U.S. intelligence estimates put the total number of fighters who underwent instruction in Bin Ladin-supported camps in Afghanistan from 1996 through 9/11 at 10,000 to 20,000.78

From al Qaeda’s 1996 fatwah
http://www.mideastweb.org/osambinladen1.htm
[scroll down to find it].
Few days ago the news agencies had reported that the Defence Secretary of the Crusading Americans had said that "the explosion at Riyadh and Al-Khobar had taught him one lesson: that is not to withdraw when attacked by coward terrorists".

We say to the Defence Secretary that his talk can induce a grieving mother to laughter! and shows the fears that had enshrined you all. Where was this false courage of yours when the explosion in Beirut took place on 1983 AD (1403 A.H). You were turned into scattered pits and pieces at that time; 241 mainly marines solders were killed. And where was this courage of yours when two explosions made you to leave Aden in less than twenty four hours!

But your most disgraceful case was in Somalia; where- after vigorous propaganda about the power of the USA and its post cold war leadership of the new world order- you moved tens of thousands of international force, including twenty eight thousands American solders into Somalia. However, when tens of your solders were killed in minor battles and one American Pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu you left the area carrying disappointment, humiliation, defeat and your dead with you. Clinton appeared in front of the whole world threatening and promising revenge , but these threats were merely a preparation for withdrawal. You have been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew; the extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear. It was a pleasure for the "heart" of every Muslim and a remedy to the "chests" of believing nations to see you defeated in the three Islamic cities of Beirut , Aden and Mogadishu.

By Christine Kearney 2 hours, 25 minutes ago

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Thousands of protesters staged rallies on Wednesday across the United States against the policies of
President George W. Bush, including the war in
Iraq and response to Hurricane Katrina.
ADVERTISEMENT

The World Can't Wait organization, a coalition of groups formed recently to stage the rallies, used the anniversary of Bush's re-election to call for his resignation in protests that took place in cities including New York, Los Angeles, Seattle, San Francisco and Chicago.

In New York, students walked out of schools and colleges and joined other supporters as thousands rallied in Union Square before marching nearly 2 miles to Times Square along avenues lined with police on motorbikes.

"The Bush regime is out to remake the world with its policies," said organizer Sunsara Taylor. "From the war in Iraq to environmental policies to the remaking of the Supreme Court ... we are staring down the barrel of fascism in this country."

Demonstrators chanted and carried banners in a mainly peaceful protest. Police said three people were arrested.

Olivier Martineau, 16, walked out of his high school with 17 others to join the march. "I am strongly against the war in Iraq," he said. "We are always sticking our noses into other people's business when we don't even realize our battles at home."

Student Tuarian Wolfe, 19, carried a sign reading "No Iraqi ever left me on my rooftop to die," to protest the slow response to help poor people stranded in New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina.

Organizers said they planned to interrupt Bush's next State of the Union address in January.

In Chicago, organizers estimated more than 500 people attended a downtown rally amid police dressed in riot gear. A few masked protesters waved Iraq flags and vandalized American flags.

James Crimmins, 59, said he objected to "a war based on lies," while Gloria Rosenzweig, 60, said she protested Bush's record on the environment and believed young people were becoming more politicized.

"This war is now resonating with youth with the military recruiting in their high schools and they know they are not far away from danger," she said.

(Additional reporting by Michael Conlon in Chicago)

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:

Ican we all love you, (well perhaps not all) but for ****s sake STOP posting such long POSTS

I perceive my longposts here on this topic to be acts of hardwork and loving charity. They are my way of helping the manic fantasizers here recover from their mania, and turn their attention to what matters far more to their welfare and to the welfare of those they love, than their resentments of various domestic politicians.

I pray I can at the very least deprive the manics here of that classic mindless excuse: "no body told me." Hence, I shall continue telling them.

Whether or not it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that George Bush and members of his administration are all fools and/or frauds, we all have a real, life and death problem to solve:

How can we and how shall we eliminate terrorism as a threat to our way of life?

Unfortunately, that problem does not go away if we remove the entire Bush administration.

That problem does not go away even if we were to convince ourselves that problem does not exist.

That problem exists whether we like it or not no matter who failed to solve it previously.

Those prisoners whose forces obey the Geneva Conventions may not be tortured.

Terrorists do not obey the Geneva Conventions. They violate the Geneva Conventions at least two ways:
(1) They murder civilians.
(2) They murder prisoners they capture.

Torturing terrorists we capture to learn what uncaptured terrorists are contemplating or where they are hiding will help reduce these two terrorist violations of the Geneva Conventions. That will of course save civilian lives.

WASHINGTON -

National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley would not confirm or deny the existence of a secret, Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe that was described in a Washington Post account. The story said the facility was part of a covert prison system set up nearly four years ago that at various times has included sites in eight countries.

Hadley said that "while we have to do what is necessary to defend the country against terrorist attacks and to win the war on terror, the president has been very clear that we're going to do that in a way that is consistent with our values."

"And that is why he's been very clear that the United States will not torture," Hadley said, responding to questions at a White House briefing. "The United States will conduct its activities in compliance with law and international obligations."

Asked about secret prisons, Hadley said, "The fact that they are secret, assuming there are such sites, does not mean" torture would be tolerated. "Some people say that the test of your principles (is) what you do when no one's looking. And the president has insisted that whether it is in the public or it is in the private, the same principles will apply and the same principles will be respected. And to the extent people do not meet up, measure up to those principles, there will be accountability and responsibility."

Led by Vice President Dick Cheney, the Bush administration is floating a proposal that would allow the president to exempt covert agents outside the Defense Department from a Senate-approved ban on torturing detainees in U.S. custody or weakening the prohibition.

In a statement Wednesday, Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, reiterated his call for a detailed congressional review of the "fundamental legal and operational questions" surrounding terror suspects in U.S. custody.

"Once again, it appears to me that the White House has dictated that the Republican-controlled Congress not conduct oversight of an important national security matter," Rockefeller said. "They have made it clear that anyone who suggests that oversight is needed should be labeled as unpatriotic."

In that case, you have no right to say that Saddam cannot torture people and that nations elsewhere cannot torture people. If you torture people yourself, you hve no right to say other people can't do it.

The means does not justify the end. If it does, then I suggest that all Christian fundamentalists convert everyone by force or kill those that do not wish to convert.

Terrorists do not obey the Geneva Conventions. They violate the Geneva Conventions at least two ways:
(1) They murder civilians.
(2) They murder prisoners they capture.

ican711nm wrote:

Those prisoners whose forces obey the Geneva Conventions may not be tortured.

Terrorists do not obey the Geneva Conventions. They violate the Geneva Conventions at least two ways:
(1) They murder civilians.
(2) They murder prisoners they capture.

In a way, you're true, but the Taleban aren't terrorists. Al Qaeda are terrorists, but not Taleban. Therefore the Taleban prisoners at least, do fall under the Geneva Convention, despite the fact that they currently don't.

Faulty logic. The fact that terrorists don't fall under the GC does not mean that all non-terrorists do.

Ticomaya wrote:

Faulty logic. The fact that terrorists don't fall under the GC does not mean that all non-terrorists do.

Who decides, who falls why not under the GC? Is there a list online or off-line?

Don't you know you're talking about a revolution
It sounds like a whisper
Don't you know they're talking about a revolution
It sounds like a whisper

Quite frequently, you and I hang out in threads wherein idealists argue for mandatory curbs on global warming, a steep rise of the minimum wage, protective tarriffs, an end to nuclear energy, and whatnot. In all these threads, you and I agreed in our response: However noble the idealist's intentions were, their policy proposals ignored reality, and therefore had to be rejected. Shouldn't this approach also apply when the shoe is on the other foot? Shouldn't we approve and support someone who, possibly for egoistic reasons, views the facts realistically and makes them publically known?

For the sake of the argument, I am not denying that Valery Plame, Joseph Wilson, Eric Shinsake and Larry Lindsey's had agendas, and telling the truth was a means rather than an end for them. But just like the Greenpeace activist's idealistic denial of reality does the country a disservice and thus must be opposed, the whistleblowers' self-serving realism does the country a service and accordingly deserves public support.

I intend to continue giving this support. It sure makes more sense to me than continuing to make excuses for a president's lying his country into a war, then punishing those who expose his lies.