Surely with the paucity of support that Beloved Leader seems to be getting from his minions as they run from him like lemmings heading to the sea as the mid-terms approach, we can find at least one or two Democrats whose Senate seats are not in danger this year to do the right thing (doing the right thing seems to be, in most cases, contingent on not having electoral issues, sad but true) and prepare to filibuster any changes to the War Crimes Act, which is being rewritten to become the Bush Administration Protection and No-Accountability Act of 2006.

Vice President Dick Cheney and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten appealed to Senate Republicans during their weekly policy lunch to pass legislation that would let Bush begin prosecuting terror suspects. The legislation also would limit the circumstances under which a government interrogator could be prosecuted for mistreating a detainee.
...
The administration would forbid what critics call a bare bones list of violations -- such as torture, murder and rape -- under the 1996 War Crimes Act that potentially leaves open the door for harsher interrogation methods. Warner, Graham and McCain are pushing more precise definitions, as well as a ban on coerced testimony, to ensure tough interrogations do not lead to abuse or violate the Geneva Conventions.

These definitions of war crimes have "shown to be the toughest part" of negotiations with the White House because it must be done "in a way that would adhere to your values but would not put your troops at risk for trivial violations," Graham said.

For the wingnut contingent who have never held a Geneva Convention Card or know what the categories of prisoners are, well fuck off if you somehow think this makes us all "weak on Terra™" it has nothing to do with coddling terrorists (although I'm sure that the Chickenhawks will try and make that argument). For those who understand the Geneva Convention and what the War Crimes Act means, it's a powerful incentive for a foreign power to refrain from mistreating our soldiers who find themselves as POW's. It gives us the moral and statutory authority to ensure that prisoners are treated well, so our troops will be too.

Bottom Line: The War Crimes Act is sort of an ultimate expression of "We Support Our Troops", something that unfortunately, republicans are not very good at in this day and age.

They are very good at covering their own asses:

Noting that the statute "prohibits the commission of a 'war crime' by or against a US person, including US officials," he warned that "it is difficult to predict the motives of prosecutors and independent counsels who may in the future decide to pursue unwarranted charges." The President's determination that the Geneva Conventions did not apply "would provide a solid defense to any future prosecution."

Unfortunately for top Bush officials, that "solid defense" was demolished this summer when the Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld ruled that the Geneva Conventions were indeed the law of the land.

Markey adds, "Every American citizen should call the White House and their members of Congress because these changes being made in the dead of night could be the green light for other countries that capture American troops to treat them cruelly or torture them."

A filibuster needs to be discussed, and now. If this bill reaches the senate floor, it's gonna pass and be signed so fast it'll make the Terry Schiavo bill look like the worlds slowest piece of awful legislation. There's nothing that the entire 1600 Crew wants more than absolution for their deeds, and destroying the War Crimes Act gives them that, in spades.