Posted on 10/05/2005 8:08:18 PM PDT by FairOpinion
The Senate defied the White House yesterday and voted to set new limits on interrogating detainees in Iraq and elsewhere, underscoring Congress's growing concerns about reports of abuse of suspected terrorists and others in military custody.
Forty-six Republicans joined 43 Democrats and one independent in voting to define and limit interrogation techniques that U.S. troops may use against terrorism suspects, the latest sign that alarm over treatment of prisoners in the Middle East and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is widespread in both parties. The White House had fought to prevent the restrictions, with Vice President Cheney visiting key Republicans in July and a spokesman yesterday repeating President Bush's threat to veto the larger bill that the language is now attached to -- a $440 billion military spending measure.
But last night, 89 senators sided with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a former prisoner of war in Vietnam who led the fight for the interrogation restrictions.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The Senate sees a need to address all kinds of things it shouldn't. It saw a need to address steroid use in professional baseball, for cryin' out loud. The fact that the senate "saw a need" is precisely what I disagree with, not an argument in favor of it.
It's a politically motivated, dangerous piece of overreaction to an isolated problem. At the very least, it's micromanaging affairs that should be -- and were -- addressed within the military legal system.
This further highlights the old adage, "When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." This problem is not a nail needing to be hammered by dangerous legislation. The enemies of this country will take that hammer and beat our troops to death with it. If the military thinks it has recruiting difficulty now, just wait until the ICC is permitted to arrest and prosecute him for being too mean to the guy who's trying to saw his head off in the middle of a war.
The president should stand on principle and force these senators, who must think they're voting for motherhood and apple pie, to override the veto. That would give the public time to debate the amendment and discover its pitfalls.
Yes
No. They're doing their Constitutional duty. Baseball ain't in the Constitution.
I noticed you failed to come back with a correction stating that you were mistaken about Congress being on a path to grant rights to EPWs. This is about clarifying the rules. Maybe even making some where they didn't exist.
"just wait until the ICC is permitted to arrest and prosecute him for being too mean to the guy who's trying to saw his head off in the middle of a war."
This has absolutely nothing to do with an Int Criminal Court. Also, your not allowed to be mean and mistreat your prisoners. WHAT PART OF THAT DON"T YOU UNDERSTAND?
That's all this is really about. The ability to mistreat prisoners in the dark, out of the publics eye. This is about the ability to mistreat and torture them at your pleasure, because you think you can make them talk, they deserve it, or some other justification. That's the way of cowards and tyrants, not the way of the US.
BTTT
Brit Hume show on Fox
Mort Kondracke is showing himself for the doof he has become.. trying to defend the US senators that voted to stop many forms of "torture" of combatants in the WOT..
Never forget that Colin Powell is on the payroll of the Saudis and other Arabs!
Fact! He became an overnight millionaire after leaving the Clinton administration and becoming a paid advisor to the Arabs.
Check also the wealth accumulated by former Centcom Generals (ie Zinni (Powell's budy), McCaffrey, and others).
I wonder how much of the Nato Generalship has been corrupted by Saudi money. Many of them seem to be at the forefront of bootlicking the Muslims, as well.
Just a bump for the horses' patoots in the US Senate.
Wonderful, now they can review and address recent practices.
"Rules made by legislature are laws. Violations get litigated."
So? These will be handled under the UCMJ..
"ACLU obtaining favorable verdicts under the civil rights attorney's fees awards Act could apply for reimbursement."
POWs don't have civil rights and this move by Congress doesn't propose to extend them.
These aren’t POWs, and civil rights can also be extended by judges, perhaps selectively. And if that occurs, it won’t be tried under the UCMJ. And it’s more difficult to prove torture under international treaty than cruelty under US law.
They can do that regardless. If they do, it's pure fabrication either way.
" These aren’t POWs"
They're to be treated as POWs. That's all that matters.
THIS is where they get the rights of US citizens - rights defined by our Constitution. Does this mean they can 'take the Fifth"?
(d) Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Defined.--In this section, the term ``cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment'' means the cruel, unusual, and inhumane treatment or punishment prohibited by the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, as defined in the United States Reservations, Declarations and Understandings to the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment done at New York, December 10, 1984. "
Our detainees are not treated as POWs nor will they be under this legislation.
No. Grab a copy of the US Constitution off the net and read it. POWs are exceptions, which the 5th clearly states. Also, the GCs forbid forcing captives to talk. do you think US mil captives ought to be coerced into giving up info? Should they be mistreated, or treated by the enemy in a fashion similar to their own troops?
You're mistaken.
Mine will be short and sweet...
Voting for terrorists has a price, my vote at the ballot box.
We might get Max Cleland, Tom Daschle or any other yahoo back, but if that is what it takes to teach the GOP they represent us, not terrorists, not MSM, not special interest groups, so be it.
It is time for us to put our money where our mouths are. The question is, do we have the stomach for it? Or will we fold like the GOP?
What about all the DEMOCRATS who voted for this? Are you giving them a pass?
I think we should send ALL of them packing, who sold us out to the terrorists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.