White House accepts McCain amendment

[lord of the mark]

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/us/terrorism

well, im glad thats done. Leaves alot of the folks (like Krauthammer) who opposed the amendment twisting in the wind. Also shows the strong influence of McCain, and, maybe, waning influence of Cheney.

[Ramo]

After the House suprisingly overwhelmingly supported the McCain Amendment (in a nonbinding resolution), Dear Leader didn't have much political capital left on the matter.

[child of Thor]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4533342.stm

i like the picutures on the bbc version best - at the top showing 'freedom+democracy' how it is and further down a better picture of ol bushy. You get the feeling in that photo like the other guy wants to be as far away from bush as possible

propaganda can be fun

[Dinner]

I'm glad Bush finally stopped fighting this one. They got tired for trying to explain how they didn't support torture but wanted to prevent an air tight law which would outlaw torture I'm also glad they lost their Rovian attempt to pass the law but make it so that breaking it meant nothing. McCain stuck to his guns and the bushies had to give up their support of torture in the end.

What they were really pissed off about is that it took away their weasel room to torture people and later claim it wasn't torture. Now what is allowed is completely in black and white and if you use any technics which aren't specifically authorized then you're breaking the law and will go to jail.

[Sava]

a dark day for freedom

America's enemies grow stronger

[Drake Tungsten]

Now what is allowed is completely in black and white

No, it isn't. The language used in the McCain amendment is vague and will require interpretation. I would much rather have seen an amendment specifically authorizing or denying specific techniques, but it appears we're stuck with terms like "degrading treatment" whose meaning differs from person to person.

[Dinner]

Last I heard it said that only interigation technics authorized in the US Army Field Manual we allowed.

[Drake Tungsten]

The restriction to techniques authorized by and listed in the Army Field Manual only applies to detainees in Department of Defense hands or facilities. The restrictions on all US personnel (including the CIA) only says that detainees should not "be subject to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment."

http://www.phrusa.org/research/torture/mccain_text.html

Like I said, the wording is very vague and open to interpretation. Good for lawyers, but does little to clarify the issue.

[snoopy369]

CIA

Bigger issue: Patriot Act

[Odin]

The resolution is nonbinding, Shrub will just ignore it.

[Dinner]

It seems pretty clear.

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.

[Dinner]

http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html

For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

Likely the administration didn't like article three either since it would stop their torture flights.

No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

[Drake Tungsten]

For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person

This isn't clear at all. What's the dividing line between "severe" pain or suffering and other forms of pain and suffering? It's difficult enough to determine that for physical pain and suffering, but it's damn near impossible for mental pain and suffering.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Odin
The resolution is nonbinding,

Not as far as I know.

[Arrian]

White House accepts McCain amendment

Shrub & Co. had to be dragged kicking and screaming. They only surrendered when they had no choice. Yay.

-Arrian