(BUFDRVR) wrote in message ...
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

No, you don't know that, you believe that. There is a difference.

I'm not sure why you guys are wasting your time with this "Walt" guy. This is
the same brain washed lunatic that claims Bush, as CinC, was personally
responsible for Abu Garib, but Clinton was not responsible for Somalia, but
Bush 41 was. How can argue with "logic" like that?


If Americans in Somalia were inspired by Clinton to committ crimes
then Clinton would be just as responsible for those crimes as Bush
would be for crimes he inspired at Abu Graib.

To my knowledge. Clinton never declared that the US would not
honor the Geneva conventions. Clinton never tried to create
ad hoc courts to conduct secret trials, in violation of both
the US Constitution and the Geneva Conventions. Clinton's
secretary of defense never ordered Americans to violate the
UCMJ or the Geneva Conventions. Clinton's Secretary of
Defense never ordered that prisoners be hidden from the ICRC.
Clinton's Justice Department never prepared a memo to tell him
that torture is OK, or at least you can get away with it.

If the press grows a spine, they'll interview the UN High
Comissioner for Human Rights. And someone will ask Rumsfeld
if he ever actually read the Geneva Conventions.

--

FF