--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], MDixon6569@ wrote:
> >  
> > In a message dated 1/4/07 3:26:04 P.M. Central Standard Time,  
> > jstein@ writes:
> > 
> [MDixon wrote:]
> > Well I'm  sure those rules that we observe helped all those people 
> > in the 
> > >  towers and aircraft that died as well as Richard Pearl and 
> Nicholas 
> > Berg,  not to 
> > > mention the African embassies.
> 
> Non sequitur.
> 
>  It doesn't protects us any more  if 
> > we observe 
> > > the rules and our enemies don't. In fact it shows  our enemies, 
> > that they can 
> > > do whatever they want and can in turn  expect us to not do like 
> > wise.
> > 
> > So we should just toss the rules and  behave like al Qaeda,
> > right?
> >
> > No, we don't need to behead anybody or intentionally attack 
> civilian  targets 
> > in order to terrorize anybody. But we don't need to grant them any  
> special 
> > rights that we have never granted prisoners of war in the  past.
> 
> We don't even give them the rights we grant prisoners
> of war.
>

Actually, the rights of POWs go way beyond the rights given to common 
criminals. 
However, the treatment of the Guananimo prisoners was neither defined by the 
criminal 
justice system NOR the POW system. It was something that was made up by BUsh 
and 
company as a test of Presidntial power.

Reply via email to