Cheney Goes to Bat for Torture

Every time I think the Bush administration can't venture any further into the world of the absurd, they come up with a whole new line of nonsense. This time, they're arguing that Congress shouldn't try to ban torture as it might somehow hamper the fight against terrorism. Oh, how I wish I was making this up.

Three Republican Senators -- John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and John Warner -- are working on legislation that would do little more than ban the use of torture by the American military. The Senators' goal is to set clear guidelines for the treatment of prisoners and make the military accountable for sticking to those guidelines.  Pretty simple, right?

But the White House has said they would veto any such legislation as it "would restrict the president's authority to protect Americans effectively from terrorist attack and bring terrorists to justice." Nevermind the fearmongering language. Nevermind the fact that hundreds of intelligence and law enforcement experts have repeatedly told us that torture doesn't work. Note that the White House believes that the mistreatment of prisoners is something that falls within "the president's authority."

Going even further than threatening a veto, according to the New York Times, Dick Cheney has been "leading a White House lobbying effort" to stop the legislation, meeting with these three Senators specifically to warn them from attempting to tie this legislation to the Pentagon's 2006 authorization bill.  Here's their breakdown of the proposals the Bush administration finds so offensive:

According to Senate officials, Mr. McCain is considering introducing four amendments. One would set standards for interrogating military detainees and would limit them to techniques outlined in a new Army field manual. It would not cover the Central Intelligence Agency.

A second provision would require that all detainees held by the military be registered with the International Committee of the Red Cross. This measures seeks to prevent the holding of unregistered prisoners, or ghost detainees, in Iraq and Afghanistan and at other military sites.

Mr. McCain is also weighing a provision to prohibit the practice of seizing people and sending them abroad for interrogation. This practice has become the subject of mounting international criticism, as some of the countries involved are known to use torture. It has caused a deepening rift between the United States and some of its strongest allies.

Finally, Mr. McCain's amendment would bar cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of detainees in American custody. This would effectively prohibit not only physical abuse but also practices like placing women's undergarments on the heads of Muslim male prisoners in an effort to humiliate them.

Mr. Graham, who has expressed some support for the idea of a wide-ranging independent commission to look into detainee abuses, is seeking to define the term "enemy combatant" for detention purposes, and to regulate the military tribunals to be held soon at the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

So in a nutshell, the White House is fighting their own party in the Senate to reserve the right to torture prisoners. Insane, and yet thoroughly unsurprising.



Display:


Democratic response? (none / 0)

This is very powerful language:

any such legislation . . .  "would restrict the president's authority to protect Americans effectively from terrorist attack and bring terrorists to justice."

How do we combat it? From the "Torture doesn't work" page linked to in the story:

  • Using torture will make it harder to protect Americans effectively from terrorist attack and bring terrorists to justice. -- according to the Army itself, it "yields unreliable results," and damage[s] subsequent [intelligence] collection efforts."

  • Using torture puts our troops at greater risk.

  • Torture is un-American and diminishes America's moral authority across the globe.

So this legislation, unlike current policy, would make Americans safer, make our troops safer, and is consistent with basic American values.

That seems like a pretty effective response. Now if only we could get Democrats to repeat that message over and over again.

by tgeraghty on Sun Jul 24, 2005 at 03:00:02 AM EST

Re: Democratic response? (none / 0)

I agree. I should've read this post first.
good post.
by turnerbroadcasting on Sun Jul 24, 2005 at 09:48:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Torture Doesnt Work (none / 0)

Dont forget that torture is NOT an effective intelligence collection tool. and may actually hamper future intelligence collection.

by HubrisSonic on Sun Jul 24, 2005 at 04:12:28 AM EST

pathetic (none / 0)

It is apthetic that it has come to this.  I keep waiting to be told that they are sending out secret police here in the US.

1984 anyone? (the book, not the year)

Trillin
http://www.mnleftyliberal.blogspot.com

by trillin on Sun Jul 24, 2005 at 09:34:07 AM EST

Sum it up in one word (none / 0)

Unamerican.

Lets hope that the midterms at least can
put one officer of the army into the
house of representatives.

You know, its funny, really. Humanity works
for hundreds of years through its history
to arrive at documents like the Geneva convention.
During WWII we were tortured by the Japanese,
but by and large there was an agreement between
both sides that was largely maintained - we don't
torture you, you don't torture us. That
really is the point. Once you have
a captured prisoner - he's not going to
shoot you. Just leave him alone and capture
more. Thats the idea.

And the real Al Qaeda, headed up by
the Sheik -  seems to be all about
spectacular attacks.. oh and by the way ..
my research shows it takes them about 5 years..
so mark your calendars..

Those posers out there in Iraq that are
torturing people don't really
seem to be so close to Al Qaeda. Bin Laden
never seems to be ok'ing their actions,
and they're trying to get money too
I think - I'm not sure about those
guys I think they're just bozos, Bin
Laden certainly doesn't seem to
be so cozy to them. Except for
maybe Zarqawi

But getting back to the point,
America is not going to get much out
of people by torturing them, seriously.
Hasn't gitmo shown this to be true?

And the downside is really to our men,
the enemy will certainly say torture
is fair game.

Oh yeah and another point. Torture
takes a long time. I think it would
be wierd if Gitmo finally cracked
those guys up and they started talking
and all the info was 5 years old or
something.

by turnerbroadcasting on Sun Jul 24, 2005 at 09:47:13 AM EST

Push this legislation (3.00 / 1)

pass it...

... and force Bush to veto a bill prohibiting torture.

Make him admit to condoning and promoting torture by vetoing this bill.

The 10,000 Things
by Andrew C White on Sun Jul 24, 2005 at 04:48:06 PM EST

Tru'dat (none / 0)

You know he will.. and you know that would be sooooo bad for him.
by teknofyl on Mon Jul 25, 2005 at 01:52:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.