[Old Man G Funk]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/08/AR2006080801276.html

So, when he loses at the Supreme Court, he simply tries to change the law, instead of just accepting what the rest of the world already knows; that torture is bad.

 

[jonKranked]

somewhere i heard that the whole torture thing was a violation of the geneva convention and that if tried he could be put to death if convicted. not that this would happen but i have heard the e-speculation

 

[N8 v2.0]

OMFG OMFG!!!!

 

[MMike]

Does this theoretically make him a war criminal?

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Does this theoretically make him a war criminal?

Disregarding the Geneva Conventions would indeed make someone a war criminal. But, as jonKranked said above, I don't think anyone would have any success in bring Bush to court on this. It would be hard to disprove their, "It's a few bad apples" defense, like in the case of Abu Ghraib.

Still, they want to cover their bases by making sure the law explicitly gives them loopholes to scoot through.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Disregarding the Geneva Conventions would indeed make someone a war criminal. But, as jonKranked said above, I don't think anyone would have any success in bring Bush to court on this. It would be hard to disprove their, "It's a few bad apples" defense, like in the case of Abu Ghraib.

Still, they want to cover their bases by making sure the law explicitly gives them loopholes to scoot through.

The End of the World is 22 Aug so it isn't going to matter much anyway.