BF2S Forums Bush attempting to pardon himself & his administration for war crimes

IRONCHEF wrote:

lol, not sure if i should respond here...it's pretty funny!  But what they hay...

Ya, your so funny I forgot to lol.

IRONCHEF wrote:

When you use irrelevant hypotheticals like this, you leave us no choice but to say "Quit avoiding the fucking topic that your loser bitch president is the worst president EVER and ANYBODY, even Arnold could do a better job!"  Give or take some epithets.

I'll spare you ther history lesson and not bother explaining the many ways in which I am not in favor of GW...
however, the things the libs seems to pick to harp on are really the most bullshit parts: i.e. the recent ruling and controversy over the geneva conventions and the terrorists rights.

Last edited by ATG (2006-09-28 18:31:20)

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

Jack Cafferty @ CNN wrote:

President Bush is trying to pardon himself. Here’s the deal.

The House just passed President Bush's bill to redefine the treatment of detainees, and the Senate is expected to do the same thing tomorrow. Buried deep inside this legislation is a provision that will pardon President Bush and all the members of his administration of any possible crimes connected with the torture and mistreatment of detainees going all the way back to September 11 2001.

At least President Nixon had Ford to do his dirty work - President Bush is trying to pardon himself.

Here's the deal: under the War Crimes Act, violations of the Geneva Conventions are felonies, in some cases punishable by death. When the Supreme Court ruled that the Geneva Convention applied to al Qaeda and Taliban detainees, President Bush and his boys were suddenly in big trouble. They’ve been working these prisoners over pretty good. In an effort to avoid possible prosecution they’re trying to cram this bill through Congress before the end of the week before Congress adjourns. The reason there’s such a rush to do this? If the Democrats get control of the House in November this kind of legislation probably wouldn’t pass.

You wanna know the real disgrace about what these people are about to do or are in the process of doing? Senator Bill Frist and Congressman Dennis Hastert and their Republican stooges apparently don’t see anything wrong with this. I really do wonder sometimes what we’re becoming in this country.

Edit: added more text

TheGenevaConvention wrote:

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

(1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
FAIL

(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions: (a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
FAIL
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
FAIL
(c) that of carrying arms openly
FAIL, they don't do it consistiently (IED's, etc)
(d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
MAJOR FAIL

(3) Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
FAIL

(4) Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization, from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model.
FAIL

(5) Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.
FAIL

(6) Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

Last edited by AlbertWesker[RE] (2006-09-28 20:49:13)

Last edited by kr@cker (2006-09-28 21:28:28)

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

Whats the Democrats solution to terror and i dont mean saying how much you dont like Bush...?

Close your eyes and  they will go away is not the answer im looking for either... lol


Also if you hate the US... Leave today... no harm no foul... good luck in your new country...

GATOR591957 wrote:

In the case of war crimes quite often war crimes are found to have been committed long after they had been committed.  First of all the statute for abuse has been in the Geneva convention since inception.  I'm sure when it's all said and done there is going to be more atrocities uncovered that our military or CIA has committed.  Bush is trying to cover his ass because he most likely already knows of these atrocities and knows full well he is and will be held accountable seeing as he is the commander in chief.  Gutless!!!!!

Kracker, send pics of the red high heels, we need to judge for ourselves..LOL

GATOR591957 wrote:

Excuse me, but the Supreme Court just ruled on this forcing Bush where he is today, pardoning himself.

ATG wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:

lol, not sure if i should respond here...it's pretty funny!  But what they hay...

Ya, your so funny I forgot to lol.

IRONCHEF wrote:

When you use irrelevant hypotheticals like this, you leave us no choice but to say "Quit avoiding the fucking topic that your loser bitch president is the worst president EVER and ANYBODY, even Arnold could do a better job!"  Give or take some epithets.

I'll spare you ther history lesson and not bother explaining the many ways in which I am not in favor of GW...
however, the things the libs seems to pick to harp on are really the most bullshit parts: i.e. the recent ruling and controversy over the geneva conventions and the terrorists rights.

The guys you back, ^{if your really are American} squak about geneva convention rights while knowingly voting to fund secret prisons and overseas interrogation of prisoners so useful idiots such as yourself think they hold some sort of high ground.

     I have been consistantly ANTI government in most aspects of all my posts.

     Why don't you guys do something other than bitch and moan; like say what you would do differently and how or stfu for christ sakes.

IRONCHEF wrote:

Oh, and I'd love for you to cite some of the "science" that proves evolution.  Then I'd love for you to tackle the truth that scientist are just dumb, slow, vain men and women trying to discover how God created things, seasons, time and space.  They get it now and then, but mostly they are dealing with adversaries beyond their understanding.

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

The_Shipbuilder: Where is the provision for Pardon in the bill, for President Bush and the rest of his administration? This is your claim based on some CNN journalist  opinion.

Try here

Section 8 of HR 6054 (the revised bill approved by the Senate) wrote:

SEC. 8. RETROACTIVE APPLICABILITY.

      This Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply retroactively, including--

            (1) to any aspect of the detention, treatment, or trial of any person detained at any time since September 11, 2001;

I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that this provision is intended to do anything other than clear the President and his administration of any previous wrongdoing.

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

The_Shipbuilder: Where is the provision for Pardon in the bill, for President Bush and the rest of his administration? This is your claim based on some CNN journalist  opinion.

Try here

Section 8 of HR 6054 (the revised bill approved by the Senate) wrote:

SEC. 8. RETROACTIVE APPLICABILITY.

      This Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply retroactively, including--

            (1) to any aspect of the detention, treatment, or trial of any person detained at any time since September 11, 2001;

I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that this provision is intended to do anything other than clear the President and his administration of any previous wrongdoing.

It is pretty clear to me if you take into context what the Military Commission Act of 2006 is about its purpose in being a new law, it is clearly defined.

Sec.8 of HR 6054 had to be put in the Bill, or provision as you describe it. This whole Act give the US Constitutional rights and power, that we never had before this being passed into law. Why do we need this new law, you might ask.  Well back in September of 2001, the 11th to be exact, this country was attacked like never before, by an enemy we had been blind to for, too long. If some genius would of had the forethought to write this law before then or directly after, we wouldn't be talking about this right now. You see, we didn't have any law describing the power and the due process this clearly allows for. We signed the Geneva Conventions Act, when? 50 years ago, this Bill was created , because the Geneve Conventions didnt have the experience of a nation being attacked, by a force that is described in that Act. It didn't exist, and it wasn't needed.

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

Now the RETROACTIVE APPLICABILITY, clearly give the US Government and its agencies to carry out plans in accordance under the US Constitution. It also clearly describes the due process in a Military Court Tribunal. (All kinds of boring reading if you want to indulge further.) Therefore, this Bill, and even the "provision" you state, has nothing to do with Pardoning the President of the United States, any White House Official, or any Member of the Armed Forces.

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

Cheers *pours another one*