There’s not enough oil in all of American to change the supply / demand chart. The only way to drop oil prices at this point is to reduce demand. This means finding alternate energy sources or reducing demand. Simple as that.

Respectfully,
The Squid

In the meantime, the oil in the ground belongs to the American people. If we really think that right now is a good time to let it belong to oil companies to sell to us later, then go ahead and open up ANWR. But if you understand basic math, economics, future needs, our dependence on oil, and the fact that Alaska will still be there in the coming decades, I can strongly advocate doing nothing with our oil.

“The commentary on the existence of an intemediate status is a little contradictory”

I believe that they are from two different opinions, but I cant be sure right now.

As I said before, from a moral standpoint, I support ending waterboarding and closing GTMO, however, I am of the opinion that it is legal.

Respectfully,
The Squid

Interesting that you would quote the International Committee of the Red Cross. Let me quote them a little more, since you seem to value that source.

“Every person in enemy hands must have some status under international law: he is either a prisoner of war and, as such, covered by the Third Convention, a civilian covered by the Fourth Convention, or again, a member of the medical personnel of the armed forces who is covered by the First Convention. There is no intermediate status; nobody in enemy hands can be outside the law. We feel that this is a satisfactory solution – not only satisfying to the mind, but also, and above all, satisfactory from the humanitarian point of view.”

My emphasis.

You still have yet to prove that this is the case. I can not discount something not verified by anything but your own opinion. Are you able to divine the compitency of those who fill civil service positions in each area of government?

You must bo prolific.

Your argument about the age of my reference is as shallow as Oliver criticising McCain for referenceing Carter. My point was that this problem has been ongoing since the begining of the Republic.

Respectfully,
The Squid

Squid – let us restrict ourselves to stuff within at least my grandparents’ lifetimes, shall we? A misreading of history? How so? Because you say so? Please point out where any president in the last half-century at least has done more than Bush to insure that the civil services are staffed with incompetents who place loyalty to party over loyalty to country.

He worried that such a probe could be spun as “a partisan witch hunt.” However, he said that equation changes if there was willful criminality, because “nobody is above the law.”

Why would anyone object to that? Doesn’t say anything about war crimes. Any of that would be up to the Hague, anyway. We’re talking about criminality at the White House. If there is shown to be willful criminal acts, those responsible need to be held to account, regardless of party.
Tell me what is wrong with that?

The persons at GTMO are not considered prisoners of war under the Third Geneva Convention. The also nullify their status as civilians under the 4th Geneva Convention.

The commentary on the existence of an intemediate status is a little contradictory but this seems very telling:

“If civilians directly engage in hostilities, they are considered “unlawful” or “unprivileged” combatants or belligerents (the treaties of humanitarian law do not expressly contain these terms). They may be prosecuted under the domestic law of the detaining state for such action. Both lawful and unlawful combatants may be interned in wartime, may be interrogated and may be prosecuted for war crimes. Both are entitled to humane treatment in the hands of the enemy.”

For the record, I support closing GTMO.

Respectfully,
The Squid

For instance:

The US pays bounties for prisoners turned over as terrorists. The US in no way verifies or establishes the prisoner as a terrorist itself, but instead relies on the word of the bounty hunter. This has led to prisoners mistreated that turn out to be innocent and turned in simply for the money or personal motives of the bounty hunter.

There is no appeals process and no way to challenge the arbitrary classification. Without it, accepting Jay’s interpretation, the US faces the potential of (and reality of) breaking the conventions by torturing or mistreating civilians and other prisoners of war.

Way back when gas was a buck and a half a gallon, your boy Bush said he would go “jawbone” the Saudis to open up the spigots.

How’d that work out?

Really?

The government has no control over its budget? Over spending? Over our trade imbalance? Interest rates?

If you think that, then you must also believe that none of these things have an effect on the exchange value of the dollar against world currencies. Or that the value of the dollar has any relation to the state of the economy.

Fascinating.

The Geneva Convention does not apply to Al Qaida and its members. There was a federal appeals court ruling about this in regard to the military tribunals the Bush administration established for Gitmo detainees.