" The legislation also says the president can "interpret the meaning and application" of international standards for prisoner treatment, a provision intended to allow him to authorize aggressive interrogation methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts. " :shock:

[URL]http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CONGRESS_TERRORISM?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-09-28-19-09-50[/URL]

I am not sure I feel this is an adequate resolution. I almost feel we are going to stoop to their level. Tough subject, just do not want to know what goes on the background. Just get the results, and don't tell me what you did. They could do that anyway. :|

Re: terror'fuc'em'up bill.

This is a workaround because the wiretapping bit didn't get to go through.

The main problem is you start leaning into the world of "human rights" and how detainees should be treated, be it here or elsewhere....that and the US has been known to work and hold people that really they can't hold because there's little to no evidence...terrorist or not. BUT, if you have the right stuff against someone? Make them suffer...they want to try and attack people here, well, let's put the boot onto them a bit and see how they like it.

Ideally, the world would agree to a standardized method of terrorist interrorgations...problem is that some countries support it, so of course they're going to cry foul when someone from there gets held up....it just can't happen.

Re: terror'fuc'em'up bill.

I completely understand where that's coming from FM, but still... If we're the Free World, we should give the example, not lower ourselves to their standards. There's a thin line between vengance and justice and the US has been crossing it regulary since 9/11. Like I said, I can understand that, but it gives our enemies only more reasons to attack us and recruit more terrorists...

The level of civilisation of a society can be measured by the way a society treats its inmates...