"Geneva Convention does not apply to al Qaeda international terrorists"

[rman]

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
May 7, 2003
Statement by the Press Secretary on the Geneva Convention
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
1:40 P.M. EST
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030507-18.html

<snip>

"In addition, President Bush today has decided that the Geneva Convention will apply to the Taliban detainees, but not to the al Qaeda international terrorists."

<more>

Given that the new evidence of torture in Abu Graib is not being released by the government "because it would violate the Geneva Convention", should we conclude that Taliban detainees are being held at Abu Graib, and that they are not being tortured, while al Qaeda international terrorists are?

Or is it that neither are being tortured (according to this administrations new definition of torture), but releasing pictures of 'untortured' Taliban detainees would be a violation of the G.C., while releasing pictures of 'untortured' al Qaeda international terrorists would not be a violation? Would the latter not imply that we can expect the government to release evidence of 'non-torture' of al Qaeda international terrorists?

[CWebster]

1. End run around the purpose of the Geneva Convention.

What good is it if there is always a loophole?

Stealing a line from John Prine, who intended it in a different context, it looks as if the distortion is an attempt to state "some humans ain't human".

[magellan]

3. If there's a loophole the Republicans will always find and exploit it

Where's a lousy Klingon when you need one? At least they had honor.

[bluestateguy]

2. This is why they did not want a declaration of war

You know, kind of the way the framers had envisioned it. Doing so would have strengthened the legal case for following the Geneva Convention. Yet these folks continue to lecture us that we are at war, even though they have no intention of asking Congress for a declaration.

[Todd B]

4. Who is Shrub to decide who the Geneva Convention does and doesn't apply to

Who is Shrub to decide who the Geneva Convention does and doesn't apply to anyways?

Does this mean that Bush can't stay anything when American soldiers are tortured since, obviously, it's up to each side to decide who the Geneva Convention applies to?

Absolutely sickening the way Bu$hco tries to rewrite history on a daily basis.

[FloridaPat]

5. Since the repubs were the ones to fund and train al Qada orginially,

wouldn't that make them part of the group? So if we don't have to apply Geneva Conventions to people partaking in al Qada, then we should be able to jail these creeps without due process????