Article 3 of the Geneva Convention: (What words don't you understand GW?)

[cyberpj]

Article 3 of the Geneva Convention:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.

The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.

With thanks to DUer Mortos :thumbsup:

[babylonsister]

1. Indeed. Also, how many other (p)residents wanted to modify it? nt

[stellanoir]

2. He has no concept of dignity whatsoever.

and wants only to legalize sadism which will only "perpetuate (further) retribution."

Sick bastard.

[spindrifter]

3. The Geneva Conventions--

assurance of basic morality despite the insanity of war--and you think you have a better way, Chimpy? What genius rock have you been smokin'?

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

4. Exactly. It requires no clarification nor do...

...we (the U.S.) have any standing to revise it or subject it to any twisted, creative interpretations that would somehow excuse torture. Article 3 is well written and clear. We're bound by international law as a signatory to abide by it, which we have NOT done. Bush is a war criminal plain and simple and Congress has no standing to exonerate him.

[MasonJar]

5. I think the phrase "by civilized people" is the probleml these

neo-cons are far from civilized. Atilla the Hun undoubtedly had more class.

[GetTheRightVote]

6. Makes for easy reading for me, but then I have an education

looks like * does not, atleast he didn't get to far ????

:kick:

[133724]

13. didn't know * could read...

[colorado thinker]

7. Why has no one else in the last 50 years

been unable to understand it? Can they really think we don't see through this crap??

[ananda]

8. butbut

he needs to torture to keep America safe.

Why should he have to contend with a stupid
law to do that? Huhhh????

Sometimes I think it's torture just listening to
the smirking, ratass bastard talk such idiocy
while mangling the English language.

[Erika]

9. Dupe Error

based on an individual country's determination and interpretation. He needs to be impeached.

I thinks Powell, McCain, and Warner are approaching that conclusion also.

[Erika]

10. If he plays with this, he exposes our troops to torture

based on an individual country's determination and interpretation. He needs to be impeached.

I thinks Powell, McCain, and Warner are approaching that conclusion also.

[clmbohdem]

11. He is covering his ASS becuase he broke U.S. code for War Crimes

The 14 that just got sent to Gitmo were torchered. This will come out in the Military Tribunals and someone will be going to jail. Take a look at the U.S. code.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002441----000-.html

[Disturbed]

12. Busholini continues to violate The Constitution and dares

The Congress and the states to Impeach him.

He DEMANDS that the Interogation methods need to be clarified. Does the concept "humliating treatment" need specifics? Does Torture need to be detailed as to what will be allowed and what will not? Are Secret Prisons to deemed Constitutional? This is what Busholini is after. He DEMANDS that his Regime be free to do whatever he and his Criminal Cabal deem necessary to break detainees. I fear that the Congress will bow down to Busholini's demands.

[Subdivisions]

19. "Does Torture need to be detailed as to what will be

allowed and what will not?"

If Bush was able to describe which forms of torture were to be allowed, there would be nothing left to disallow.

It's called CYA - cover your ass.

[mom cat]

14. He does not understand the word "NO".

[cyberpj]

15. Best answer yet! You are so right.

Know anyone affiliated with AA? They have a personality type called King Baby or Baby King or something like that -- it's GWB perfectly described!

[Scout1071]

16. "It depends on what the definition of "is" is......"

You know, the biggest irony here is that they hate Bill Clinton because they said he parsed words, etc. But, they take what is clear law and muddy it up to suit their needs. Hypocrites.

[Solly Mack]

17. Oh, he understands - why do you think he's fighting it?

[DesertRat]

18. A * supporter told me that Article 3 is "vague"

She said that "Outrages upon personal dignity is vague" and that Article D is "unclear".
It seems pretty clear to me, but this is the argument that some Repubs will make.