Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The United States Of Torture

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-27-06 07:24 PM
Original message
The United States Of Torture
Edited on Wed Sep-27-06 07:28 PM by ProSense

The United States Of Torture

Matthew Yglesias
September 27, 2006

Matthew Yglesias is a staff writer for The American Prospect.

"The United States is committed to the world-wide elimination of torture," George W. Bush explained in a June 2003 speech, "and we are leading this fight by example."

Oh, the irony!

more...


Do Newspapers Have a Future?

Quarreling about staff cuts, the old medium is missing the bigger questions

By MICHAEL KINSLEY

Snip...

Meanwhile, there is the blog terror: people are getting their understanding of the world from random lunatics riffing in their underwear, rather than professional journalists with standards and passports.


William M. Arkin on National and Homeland Security

On the NIE, the Right and the Left Are Both Wrong

Snip...

The simplistic story line that the Democrats are pushing is all about and solely about Iraq: withdraw U.S. forces, defeat the Republicans, tidy up foreign policy by giving human rights to prisoners and being nicer in the world, and voila, terror subsides.


Better than a crazy world! WARNING GRAPHIC:


I'd rather be called nice American!



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-27-06 07:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. The Senate needs to stop this bill!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 06:25 AM
Response to Original message
2. This bill says to Americans and the world: Instead of exposing
Edited on Thu Sep-28-06 06:26 AM by ProSense
a U.S. President to war crimes, let's change the law to place him above existing law and give support to his torture policy:

David Wallechinsky
09.19.2006

Torture Fails Again

Snip...

Yesterday a Canadian commission of inquiry released a 1,204-page report relating to the case of Maher Arar, a Canadian wireless technology consultant, who was snatched by U.S. agents at John F. Kennedy Airport in New York City and transported to Syria, where, for ten months, he was kept in a six-foot by three-foot cell, before being transferred to a collective cell. Under torture, he confessed to being an Islamist extremist who attended a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. In reality, not only was Arar not an Islamist terrorist, but he had never even been to Afghanistan. He was ultimately released without charge and the Canadian commission affirmed that he was completely innocent.

more...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-wallechinsky/torture-fails-again_b_29757.html


But Rep. Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee, derided it for using "legal mumbo jumbo to obscure the fact that the CIA will continue to be allowed to use torture and will actually be insulated from legal liability for previous acts of torture."
Snip...

Levin complained that while the deal limits use of testimony obtained by coercion, "it inexplicably" allows such statements obtained before December 30, 2005.

A number of Democrats also object that the deal strips detainees' habeas corpus rights to challenge their detentions.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, said excluding habeas corpus rights was unconstitutional and set a hearing on the issue for Monday.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/09/22/us_democrats_wary_of_detainee_trials_compromise
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
A wise Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 07:11 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. If I'm not mistaking
Bush is trying to cover his ass in case he is charged with war crimes as well as impeachment.This Bill would be in effect after the fact.He can still be charged with war crimes of invasion and torture prior this Bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 07:16 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Welcome! Exactly! Here:
Other Views

Bush seeks immunity for violating War Crimes Act

September 23, 2006

BY ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN

Thirty-two years ago, President Gerald Ford created a political firestorm by pardoning former President Richard Nixon of all crimes he may have committed in Watergate -- and lost his election as a result. Now, President Bush, to avoid a similar public outcry, is quietly trying to pardon himself of any crimes connected with the torture and mistreatment of U.S. detainees.

The ''pardon'' is buried in Bush's proposed legislation to create a new kind of military tribunal for cases involving top al-Qaida operatives. The ''pardon'' provision has nothing to do with the tribunals. Instead, it guts the War Crimes Act of 1996, a federal law that makes it a crime, in some cases punishable by death, to mistreat detainees in violation of the Geneva Conventions and makes the new, weaker terms of the War Crimes Act retroactive to 9/11.

Snip...

Avoiding prosecution under the War Crimes Act has been an obsession of this administration since shortly after 9/11. In a January 2002 memorandum to the president, then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales pointed out the problem of prosecution for detainee mistreatment under the War Crimes Act. He notes that given the vague language of the statute, no one could predict what future ''prosecutors and independent counsels'' might do if they decided to bring charges under the act. As an author of the 1978 special prosecutor statute, I know that independent counsels (who used to be called ''special prosecutors'' prior to the statute's reauthorization in 1994) aren't for low-level government officials such as CIA interrogators, but for the president and his Cabinet. It is clear that Gonzales was concerned about top administration officials.

Snip...

When the Supreme Court recently decided that the Conventions did apply to al-Qaida and Taliban detainees, the possibility of criminal liability for high-level administration officials reared its ugly head again.

What to do? The administration has apparently decided to secure immunity from prosecution through legislation. Under cover of the controversy involving the military tribunals and whether they could use hearsay or coerced evidence, the administration is trying to pardon itself, hoping that no one will notice. The urgent timetable has to do more than anything with the possibility that the next Congress may be controlled by Democrats, who will not permit such a provision to be adopted.

more...

www.suntimes.com/output/otherviews/cst-edt-ref23b.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
A wise Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. It is quite obvious
that they know the democrats first agenda will be to impeach the lot of them first and then charge them for war crimes. Their is enough evidence now,if only the rethugs in the house and senate cared more about justic, the Constitution, human rights and the country more than its party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 06:57 AM
Response to Original message
3. Kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
7. Senate Kills Habeas Amendment on Torture Bill

Senate Kills Habeas Amendment on Torture Bill

By Justin Rood - September 28, 2006, 12:21 PM

The Senate just killed an amendment to ensure federal courts could review the legitimacy of individual' imprisonment on suspicion of involvement in terrorism. The amendment had been proposed by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. "It is a fundamental protection woven into the fabric of our Nation," said Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), who supported the measure. It was defeated 48-51, largely along party lines.

Former torture victim Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), portrayed as a "maverick" by earlier bucking the White House on the issue of detainee treatment, voted against the amendment. The White House also opposes the changes the amendment would make to the bill. Sens. John Warner (R-VA) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who had also challenged the White House over the bill, joined McCain in voting against the amendment.

The Senate is expected to vote on -- and pass -- the entire bill later today.

Update: The recorded vote of each senator on this amendment can be found here.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001622.php

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC