Themes

• Amazing GraceAutumn ConceptBlueBlackExcelFalling LeavesIsland After SunsetPlatinumVidiyal

Tags

barack_obama beauty climate_change death_penalty earth faith follow_jesus forgiveness god grace human_dignity human_rights humility interrogation iraq jesus justice love movie peace politics poverty prayer revenge rule_of_law stoney terrorism torture ucc war

• Recently Written

  • not my world
  • conflict and community
  • “miah and friends”
  • an extremely regressive tax
  • one more state gives up the death penalty
  • killing bin laden
  • kilauea erupts
  • becoming our own worst enemy
  • illegal to love your neighbor in arizona?
  • easter sunrise 2010

• Recent Comments

  • Emavel D.: Death penalty is a good verdict for a criminal. So that it is good and it just shows how big and unlawful...
  • gabzo: This is my new fave song! so beautiful! that is exactly what happened to me! Wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Eric the courier: After listening to Jesus tell this parable, can we possibly think that Jesus means the church to...
  • Rev Arthur R Stees: Harriet: I love your O’Henry-type story, “He’d Come Here” and will be...
  • Victor: This fits I think with the Buddhist concept of letting go.

• Admin

  • Log in
  • Wordpress
  • XHTML

Subscribe

 Print This Post

saying “no” to torture means “no”

Posted on January 20, 2006 | Filed Under torture 

I am hopeful that we may be of one mind as a nation in saying an unequivocal “No” to using torture in any and all circumstances. I am concerned, as are the retired miltary officers cited in the following article, that the “signing statement” appended to the bill undermines the intent and effect of the McCain amendment banning cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment of detainees in any form.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A group of retired military officers urged President George W. Bush on Thursday to spell out how he will enforce a ban on the torture of U.S.-held prisoners, complaining he muddied the issue in a statement last month.

Bush reluctantly accepted the ban, pushed by Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, after scandals over abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, harsh interrogations at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and reports the CIA ran secret prisons abroad to hold terrorism suspects.

Retired military leaders including Marine Gen. Joseph Hoar, who was U.S. Central Command commander-in-chief, said Bush should clarify his stance after making a statement last month that some experts said signaled he would bypass rules for treatment of detainees when he saw fit, even after he signed them into law.

The 22 former military officers in their letter said Bush should ensure that “your administration speak with a consistent voice to make clear that the United States now has a single standard of conduct specified in law that governs all interrogations.”

In a telephone news conference, Hoar said Bush’s statement last month “diluted the impact of the McCain amendment” by indicating “that there were going to be exceptions and the president has the ability to do that.”

McCain, who endured torture as a war prisoner in Vietnam, spearheaded the bill to set standards for detainees’ treatment that won big majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives.

Bush’s statement, issued on a Friday evening after he signed the bill putting the amendment into law, said the “executive branch shall construe (the law) in a manner consistent with the authority of the president … as commander in chief.”

The statement also said the White House’s approach would be “consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power, which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the president … of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks.”

Elisa Massimino, Washington director of Human Rights First, said Bush should “clarify the signing statement so there is no question that the commander-in-chief considers this law binding on all U.S. personnel.”

Human Rights First held a news conference on the letter from retired generals and admirals.

Retired Rear Admiral John Hutson, a former Navy judge advocate general, said the McCain amendment reinstated long-standing U.S. policy on the treatment of prisoners. “Then to have a signing statement in which that becomes blurred again causes us great concern,” he said.

By Vicki Allen

Tags: interrogation, torture

Related posts

• national religious campaign against torture Thank you to Rev. Dr. George Hunsinger of Princeton Theological Seminary for notifying this weblog of the work of the National Religious Coalition Against Torture. Read their statement, “Torture Is ...
• more debate over interrogation guidelines From the Boston Globe, September 18, 2006: In the fight over rules for the interrogation and trials of terrorism suspects, there is a split — not so much between Republicans and ...
• tipping the scales in “balance of powers” From the Boston Globe (Read the entire article) By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | March 24, 2006 WASHINGTON — When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act ...
• it’s about who we are Last Wednesday evening, the United States Senate overwhelming passed an amendment sponsored by John McCain to be attached to a defense spending bill. The amendment specifies that: “No person in ...
• a time and a place for torture? The debate over the McCain amendment continues. The amendment, attached to a defense appropriations bill, bans the use of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment by any agent of ...

Comments