Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston

~~~

General John Kelly: "He said that, in his opinion, Mr. Trump met the definition of a fascist, would govern like a dictator if allowed, and had no understanding of the Constitution or the concept of rule of law."

Friday, February 15, 2008

MC CAIN BACKS TORTURE!


Pass the popcorn! All the radical right-wing, radio talk ninnies are out for John McCain's head. As are their faithful followers. They detest McCain because he wants to reach across the aisle for consensus so that we can get this country back on its feet after 8 years of Bush incompetence and national shame. And the goopers hate him for that.


But wait! This just in! McCain backed legislation that says torture is okay! So maybe the goopers will embrace him now that he has done a major flip-flop on a fundamental issue--torture. Torture of all things. Shame on McCain!


Senator McCain, as a former POW, is particularly sensitive to the issue of detention and interrogation of detainees from the War on Terror. On October 3, 2005, Senator McCain introduced the McCain Detainee Amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill for 2005. On October 5, 2005, the United States Senate voted 90-9 to support the amendment.

This amendment would establish the US Army Field Manual on Interrogation as the standard for interrogation of all detainees held in Department of Defense custody, including those held by the Central Intelligence Agency. The amendment would prohibit cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment and follow sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Amendment was initially opposed by the Bush administration, particularly Vice-President Dick Cheney. Before the vote supporting the amendment, the White House threatened to veto any language limiting the use of torture on suspected terrorists. However, due to the size of the majority voting in favor, this was not an option. The White House then sought alternative language which would exempt CIA operatives from the torture ban. The Senate refused the compromise.

On December 15, President Bush announced that he accepted McCain's terms and will "make it clear to the world that this government does not torture and that we adhere to the international convention of torture, whether it be here at home or abroad." Nevertheless, President Bush can interpret the law "in a manner consistent with his own constitutional authority." In his signing statement, or interpretation of the law, President Bush reserves what he interprets to be his constitutional right to torture in order to avoid further terrorist attacks.


Terror detainee treatment legislation
In September 2006, McCain drew attention when he joined with fellow Republicans John Warner (R-Va.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) to oppose legislation backed by the Bush Administration that would have given the government wide freedoms in the treatment, interrogation and prosecution of terror detainees. In addition, the legislation would have included a reinterpretation of the U.S. duties under the Geneva convention. The three senators proposed their own, more moderate legislation dealing with the same issue.

On September 21, the three dissenting senators reached a compromise with the White House which included many of the provisions from the administration's initial bill, but eliminated the use of secret evidence unavailable to the defense during terror trials and any explicit reinterpretation of the Geneva Convention.






But:


With his "no" vote yesterday on the Senate bill to ban waterboarding by the CIA, John McCain caved in the face of yet another betrayal by George W. Bush. President Bush, after all, stabbed McCain in the back with a 2005 signing statement that defanged the Detainee Treatment Act the now-presumptive GOP presidential nominee championed in the Senate. But in his never-ending quest to appease his party's conservative base, McCain revealed that no humiliation at the hands of George Bush is too great.

By a 51-45 vote, the Senate approved an intelligence bill that would restrict the CIA in its interrogation techniques, banning waterboarding and limiting the agency to 19 less aggressive tactics outlined in the U.S. Army Field Manual. But after the House passed similar legislation in December, the White House predictably promised a veto, arguing the bill "would prevent the United States from conducting lawful interrogations of senior al Qaeda terrorists to obtain intelligence needed to protect Americans from attack."


Just as predictably, John McCain kowtowed to the White House in just his latest affirmation of a de facto Bush third term. As the Washington Post noted:
But McCain sided with the Bush administration yesterday on the waterboarding ban passed by the Senate, saying in a statement that the measure goes too far by applying military standards to intelligence agencies. He also said current laws already forbid waterboarding, and he urged the administration to declare it illegal.


"Staging a mock execution by inducing the misperception of drowning is a clear violation" of laws and treaties, McCain said.


4 comments:

Anonymous said...

First of all waterboarding isn't torture and second of all who really cares if we waterboard somebody that would kill us if he or she were given the chance. Screw em! Why does it bother you? I think it's nothing more that Bush derangement syndrome if you really want to know.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Our US Laws contradict you:

"Now that George Bush and Michael Hayden have publicly confessed to government waterboarding in a press conference on February 6, 2008, and in testimony before Congress on February 5, 2008, you may find the following information useful:

The law review article referenced below (available at no cost at: http://www.law.utah.edu/_webfiles/ULRarticles/150/150.pdf ) makes clear that waterboarding is torture and is a crime and a war crime punishable under a number of treaties to which the United States is a party and several U.S. statutes.

The article also explains that there is no defense available due to either (1) prior legal advice, or (2) circumstances (including, without limitation, terrorist acts – see citations in Footnotes 21 and 25 in the article), contrary to the claims of Bush and Hayden.

The law review article (see pages 359 to 374) also establishes that under a number of treaties to which the United States is a party, the U.S. has an obligation to initiate an official investigation regarding confessed acts of torture. For example, the 1984 U.N. Convention Against Torture, (1465 UNTS 85), Article 12 reads as follows:

“Each State Party shall ensure that its competent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartial investigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed in any territory under its jurisdiction.” (NOTE: The article also explains why “territory under its jurisdiction” includes GITMO and all DOD and CIA secret detention sites for the United States.)

The following case, among others, has held that waterboarding is torture:

In re Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos Human Rights Litigation, 910 F. Supp. 1460, 1463 (District of Hawaii, 1995)

Waterboarding is torture regardless of the surrounding circumstances – there is no circumstantial or necessity defense to torture claims.


source: http://www.acsblog.org/separation-of-powers-cia-admits-waterboarding.html

Handsome B. Wonderful said...

I think that the Dem nominee (hopefully Obama!!) should just run McLame's comments about having a hundred year way in Iraq on a loop.

Handsome B. Wonderful said...

J_g:

Torture has been proven not to get accurate results. Plus it just gives our enemies even more incentive to torture our guys.

Not only that but we are proud of our Democratic values and the example that America has developed over the decades.

Unfortunately Bush has pretty much single handedly torn that image apart and this torture crap is a major stain on that image.

Now maybe our image abroad means nothing to you but if we want to lead the world then we can't torture. We can't have it both ways.