Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (50989)	9/10/2006 2:02:21 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 90947

The Legal Debate Interrogation Methods Rejected by Military Win Bush’s Support By ADAM LIPTAK Published: September 8, 2006 Many of the harsh interrogation techniques repudiated by the Pentagon on Wednesday would be made lawful by legislation put forward the same day by the Bush administration. And the courts would be forbidden from intervening. The proposal is in the last 10 pages of an 86-page bill devoted mostly to military commissions, and it is a tangled mix of cross-references and pregnant omissions. But legal experts say it adds up to an apparently unique interpretation of the Geneva Conventions, one that could allow C.I.A. operatives and others to use many of the very techniques disavowed by the Pentagon, including stress positions, sleep deprivation and extreme temperatures. “It’s a Jekyll and Hyde routine,” Martin S. Lederman, who teaches constitutional law at Georgetown University, said of the administration’s dual approaches. In effect, the administration is proposing to write into law a two-track system that has existed as a practical matter for some time. So-called high-value detainees held by the C.I.A. have been subjected to tough interrogation in secret prisons around the world. More run-of-the-mill prisoners held by the Defense Department have, for the most part, faced milder questioning, although human rights groups say there have been widespread abuses. The new bill would continue to give the C.I.A. the substantial freedom it has long enjoyed, while the revisions to the Army Field Manual announced Wednesday would further restrict military interrogators. The legislation would leave open the possibility that the military could revise its own standards to allow the harsher techniques. continued.............. nytimes.com

To: tejek who wrote (50989)	9/12/2006 12:06:55 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

Let's see.....Israel invades Lebanon in 1982. Hezbollah formed to oppose illegal invasion by Israel. Who did you say started it? Started what? Started the 1982 war? The PLO who attacked Israel from Lebanon. Started the recent war? Hezbollah. Israel had invaded in the past, but had been out of Lebanon for years before the recent conflict. Does it negate the UN resolution passed years ago that requires Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah? No, but you seem to think that violation gives Israel carte blanche to do what they want. No but the act of war by Hezbollah (invading, and killing and capturing Israeli soldiers) gives Israel the right to wage war against Hezbollah.