Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bush Administration wants an exception for CIA to commit torture

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bush Administration wants an exception for CIA to commit torture





    White House Seeks Exception in Abuse Ban
    By ERIC SCHMITT

    WASHINGTON, Oct. 24 - Stepping up a confrontation with the Senate over the handling of detainees, the White House is insisting that the Central Intelligence Agency be exempted from a proposed ban on abusive treatment of suspected Qaeda militants and other terrorists.

    The Senate defied a presidential veto threat nearly three weeks ago and approved, 90 to 9, an amendment to a $440 billion military spending bill that would ban the use of "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment" of any detainee held by the United States government. This could bar some techniques that the C.I.A. has used in some interrogations overseas.

    But in a 45-minute meeting last Thursday, Vice President Dick Cheney and the C.I.A. director, Porter J. Goss, urged Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican who wrote the amendment, to support an exemption for the agency, arguing that the president needed maximum flexibility in dealing with the global war on terrorism, said two government officials who were briefed on the meeting. They spoke on condition of anonymity because of the confidential nature of the discussions.

    Mr. McCain rejected the proposed exemption, which stated that the measure "shall not apply with respect to clandestine counterterrorism operations conducted abroad, with respect to terrorists who are not citizens of the United States, that are carried out by an element of the United States government other than the Department of Defense and are consistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and treaties to which the United States is a party, if the president determines that such operations are vital to the protection of the United States or its citizens from terrorist attack."

    Spokesmen for Mr. McCain, Mr. Cheney and Mr. Goss all declined to comment on the matter Monday, citing the confidentiality of the talks.

    Human rights organizations said Monday that it was unclear whether the language in the changes proposed by the White House meant that the president would decide exemptions case by case or whether there would be more of a blanket authority. But they said the administration's proposal would seriously undermine Mr. McCain's measure.

    Elisa Massimino, Washington director of Human Rights First, formerly the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, said the administration had interpreted an international treaty banning torture to mean that a prohibition against cruel and inhumane treatment did not apply to C.I.A. actions overseas.

    "That's why the McCain amendment is important, and that's why this language they're floating now would gut it," said Ms. Massimino, who provided a copy of the administration's proposed changes to The New York Times.

    Human rights advocates said that creating parallel sets of interrogation rules for military personnel and clandestine intelligence operatives was impractical in the war on terrorism, where soldiers and spies routinely cross paths on a global battlefield and often share techniques

    "They are explicitly saying, for the first time, that the intelligence community should have the ability to treat prisoners inhumanely," Tom Malinowski, Washington advocacy director for Human Rights Watch, said. "You can't tell soldiers that inhumane treatment is always morally wrong if they see with their own eyes that C.I.A. personnel are allowed to engage in it."

    Mr. McCain's provision faces stiff opposition in the House, which did not include similar language in its version of the spending bill.

    The White House has threatened to veto any bill that includes the McCain provision, contending that it would bind the president's hands in wartime.

    But Mr. McCain has kept the pressure on as the issue moves to a House-Senate conference committee, perhaps later this week or next. Shortly after the Senate vote on Oct. 5, Mr. McCain's staff sent members of the conference committee letters endorsing the provision signed by more than two dozen retired senior military officers, including former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and John M. Shalikashvili, both former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    The matter will probably be settled in a private meeting in the next week or two among four senior lawmakers: Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska and Representative C. W. Bill Young of Florida, both Republicans; and Senator Daniel K. Inouye of Hawaii and Representative John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania, both Democrats. All are on the conference committee.

    Mr. McCain originally offered his measure earlier this year, when the Senate was working on a bill setting Pentagon policy. But Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, the majority leader, scuttled that bill, partly because of White House opposition to the amendment.

    Now it appears that senators have struck a deal to revive the budget bill for Senate floor debate and action. One of the principal amendments that Democrats are expected to offer, sponsored by Senator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, would create an independent commission to review accusations of prisoner abuse by American forces in Iraq, Afghanistan, Cuba and elsewhere. The White House has also threatened a presidential veto if any bill comes to Mr. Bush's desk that contains the provision.
    “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
    - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

  • #2
    This keeps getting more and more strange from my POV.
    I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
    For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

    Comment


    • #3
      Why would the Bush administration be so happy to cede the moral high ground and revert to torture?
      Resident Filipina Lady Boy Expert.

      Comment


      • #4
        Well,
        if anyone has wondered why the Bush government put up so much resistance into the law which would malke it illegal to give torture orders,
        here we have the reason.

        And to be honest, this article sounds like an confession of the Bush government, that there are indeed prisoners which are tortured in the name of the war on terror by people working for the US Administration.
        Tamsin (Lost Girl): "I am the Harbinger of Death. I arrive on winds of blessed air. Air that you no longer deserve."
        Tamsin (Lost Girl): "He has fallen in battle and I must take him to the Einherjar in Valhalla"

        Comment


        • #5
          I really don't understand this. Is there a particularly effective form of interrogation that skates near the edge of abuse or torture?

          I always was taught that abuse and torture weren't very effective in getting good information anyway, so I'm curious as to why there should be an exception.
          I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

          Comment


          • #6
            Supposedly Cheney was the one who pushed for the original ambigous treatment of prisoner policies which lead to Gitmo and Abu Gareb. Is he also the big backer of this proposed change?
            Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by DanS
              I really don't understand this. Is there a particularly effective form of interrogation that skates near the edge of abuse or torture?

              I always was taught that abuse and torture weren't very effective in getting good information anyway, so I'm curious as to why there should be an exception.
              Torture is a great way to get people to answer questions the way you want them answered. Might produce a lot of good convictions.
              If you don't like reality, change it! me
              "Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
              "it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
              "Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw

              Comment


              • #8
                Let me just say, it's proposed changes like the one in the OP that make me utterly confident in the direction this country is going.

                damn, this GOP kool-aid is awfully tasty...
                B♭3

                Comment


                • #9
                  The administration has been against McCain's anti-torture bill since day one. That's just wrong. If we want to make sure our guys aren't tortured then we need to lead by example or we'll have no moral standing to complain when it happens to captured GIs.
                  Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I think most of us know already that both our countries secret services have and do use torture methods to extract information. Hand on heart we know it goes on, but publically is denounced. IRA years? South America etc?

                    I think the thinking might be that as we do it already, and have it done back to us, then why not remove the red tape that makes it harder for our countries to get the answers they want out of a suspect?

                    Its a bad thing though.
                    'The very basis of the liberal idea – the belief of individual freedom is what causes the chaos' - William Kristol, son of the founder of neo-conservitivism, talking about neo-con ideology and its agenda for you.info here. prove me wrong.

                    Bush's Republican=Neo-con for all intent and purpose. be afraid.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The ludicrous thing is that McCain's bill is pointed at agencies like the CIA who may be engaging in this behavior already. To make an exception for the CIA basically means that the bill is worthless, which is the Bush Administration's intent.

                      Secondly, the Administration must be a bunch of idiots because this basically admits they are using inhuman activities. If they really really wanted to do it, they'd probably sign the bill and do it hush-hush.
                      “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
                      - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        they want to torture Democrats
                        Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..

                        Look, I just don't anymore, okay?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          They accomplish that with every state of the union address
                          Lime roots and treachery!
                          "Eventually you're left with a bunch of unmemorable posters like Cyclotron, pretending that they actually know anything about who they're debating pointless crap with." - Drake Tungsten

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            This is idiotic. Whatever the benefits of torture, they can't outweigh the damage to public image done by stuff like this.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I really don't understand this. Is there a particularly effective form of interrogation that skates near the edge of abuse or torture?


                              This is just a guess, but I think maybe the inclusion of the term "degrading" in the amendment...

                              The Senate defied a presidential veto threat nearly three weeks ago and approved, 90 to 9, an amendment to a $440 billion military spending bill that would ban the use of "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment" of any detainee held by the United States government. This could bar some techniques that the C.I.A. has used in some interrogations overseas.


                              ... may have something to do with it. There are some interrogation techniques that are not torture that would potentially fall under the ban on "degrading treatment." I fully support a ban on actual torture and inhumane treatment, but I don't really give a **** if the CIA plays mind games with detainees that use the Islamist's own cultural views against them, behavior that some critics have labeled "degrading". Maybe the Adminstration feels the same way.
                              KH FOR OWNER!
                              ASHER FOR CEO!!
                              GUYNEMER FOR OT MOD!!!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X