Bush to sign law authorizing harsh interrogation

[Neil D]

Tue Oct 17, 12:56 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -

President Bush, keeping his election-year focus on national security, is to sign a bill into law on Tuesday that allows tough interrogation and prosecution of terrorism suspects.

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 sets standards for interrogating suspects, but through a complex set of rules that human rights groups say could allow harsh techniques bordering on torture, such as sleep deprivation and induced hypothermia.

With Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales looking on, Bush is to sign the bill which was negotiated in September after senior Republicans rebelled against the president's plan and forced concessions from him.

The new law means Bush can continue a secret

CIA program for interrogating terrorism suspects whom he believes have vital information that could thwart a plot against America.

It establishes military tribunals that would allow some use of evidence obtained by coercion, but would give defendants access to classified evidence being used to convict them.

"The president will mark a historic day in which he will sign a bill that he knows will help prevent terrorist attacks," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

Bush is expected to speak briefly at the ceremony. He is trying to help Republicans maintain control of the U.S. Congress by contending they are stronger on national security, a stance with which Democrats vehemently disagree.

Bush, interrogation, military tribunals

[Dr. Shane]

Well you have to hand it to the Republicans in Congress. At least they got something worthwhile done before they lose control to the Democrats.

[Neil D]

Yeah, undermine the very foundations of this nation's freedoms....

[Naomi]

Yeah, undermine the very foundations of this nation's freedoms....

Kinda gives you a warm-fuzzy feeling, doesn't it

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Yeah, undermine the very foundations of this nation's freedoms....

Sounds like some folks need a history lesson. Should we start with the Wilson Administration or the FD Roosevelt Administration?

[Key Guy]

Maybe, if we coddle the terrorists, give them warm milk and a story before bedtime, hug them and teach them to say 'please' and 'thank you', we could get them to spill the beans on the next plot or where Bin Killin' is.

[Bravus]

Terrifying to me that Christians can call harsh treatment (since Shane objects to the correct term for this stuff, which is 'torture') of other human beings 'progress'.

[bevin]

Quote:

Maybe, if we coddle the terrorists, give them warm milk and a story before bedtime, hug them and teach them to say 'please' and 'thank you', we could get them to spill the beans on the next plot or where Bin Killin' is.

Actual analysis of the success rate of torture at getting correct information shows it is very low. Indeed, "coddling" as you label it - being kinder than expected and forming relationships has been demonstrated to be as effective.

For instance, during WW-II the British caught *EVERY* German spy in England, and "turned" a significant number of them into double agents - feeding back to Germany what they wanted the Germans to hear, and getting told about the next round of spies that were being infiltrated - and they did this without water-boarding or similar techniques, and without even pretending to be doing them.

Conversely the treatment the Bush Administration has been directing American's to do has actually played a significant part in turning much of the world against us, and in causing MORE recruits into the front lines and terrorists prepared to use violent means against us.

You have to be both ignorant and stupid to think that torture is a good policy - which explains why GWB is in favor of it.

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Actual analysis of the success rate of torture at getting correct information shows it is very low. Indeed, "coddling" as you label it - being kinder than expected and forming relationships has been demonstrated to be as effective.

Spin Alert!

German soldiers and Mulsim jihadists are apples and oranges.

Try again.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Terrifying to me that Christians can call harsh treatment... of other human beings 'progress'.

We agree that the entire situation is terrifying. The right thing to do is sometimes not easy to discover. Some times we have to choose the lesser of two evils.

[bevin]

Quote:

German soldiers and Mulsim jihadists are apples and oranges.

Alert! Random guess based on completely no evidence being used to justify national policy

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

Waterboarding is pretty barberic and I believe this bill does allow it to be done by the CIA under some circumstances.

[Neil D]

Quote:

Yeah, undermine the very foundations of this nation's freedoms....

Sounds like some folks need a history lesson. Should we start with the Wilson Administration or the FD Roosevelt Administration?

Oh, let's start at the begining...Let's talk about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.... For example-

But the demand to secure a definitive roster of individual rights against government infringement and the uncertainty of politics persisted. [color:#990000]Unless assured that a bill of rights would be passed, many states threatened to withhold ratification of the Constitution. Consequently, in 1789, the First Congress of the United States adopted the first ten amendments to the Constitution, known collectively as the Bill of Rights. Ratification of these amendments by the required number of states occurred in 1791. And the Ninth Amendment, by expressly protecting fundamental rights not specifically described in the Constitution, lay to rest the Federalists' concern that the singling out of any right for protection jeopardized the protection of all other rights not similarly identified.

The Bill of Rights restricts government invasion of certain individual liberties, including freedom of speech, press, assembly, and religion. It also prohibits the "establishment" of any official religion. The values embodied in the Bill of Rights center on individual worth and dignity and refer to certain inalienable rights that inhere to us all as human beings, and citizens of a constitutional democracy.

Nearly two-thirds of the Bill of Rights is devoted to safeguarding the rights of persons suspected or accused of crime. These rights include due process of law, fair trial, and freedom from self-incrimination, cruel and unusual punishment and being held in jeopardy twice for the same crime.

The Bill of Rights, when first adopted, applied only to the actions of the federal government. An individual whose civil liberties had been violated by the state had to rely on that particular state's constitution or bill of rights for recourse. Restraining state incursions into civil liberties was the subject of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the so-called Reconstruction Amendments, ratified in 1865, 1868, and 1870, respectively, and intended to dismantle the institution of slavery. The Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery, and the Fifteenth Amendment granted newly freed male slaves the right to vote, but the amendment that paved the way for a broad and comprehensive application of the Bill of Rights to the states was the Fourteenth Amendment. Over the past 100 years, many of the liberties articulated in the first ten amendments have been incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee to state citizens due process and equal protection under the law.

For the first 150 years following its adoption, the Bill of Rights was rarely invoked or the subject of judicial interpretation. But beginning in the 1920s, the Constitution's first ten amendments have played an increasingly active role in resolving difficult questions of public policy - from school prayer and mandatory drug testing laws, to birth control and capital punishment. And founding principles such as "justice" or "liberty" and constitutional precepts such as "due process" and "equal protection under the law" have been given new meaning by succeeding generations, reflecting changes in human sensibilities, values and ethos over the past two hundred years.

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights

I know that the above is a bit long, Shane...but that is why I put in different colors...to keep you entertain as you go thru the refresher course on US history . Oh, and the red writing are for emphasis

As I have said, the Bush adminstration has struck at the very foundations of our existance. From fear, they remove the very freedoms that cause this nation to be great...And further the cause of individual Irresponsiblity...Something of which I also deplore.

[Dr. Shane]

The Bill of Rights applies only to US citizens but I will give a B for effort. Terrorist captured abroad do not fall into that category.

Are we ready to talk about Wilson or FDR yet?

[Key Guy]

The US Constitution and BIll of Rights was NEVER meant to protect non-citizens, especially enemies of the state. The US Tax law was never originally meant for US citizens, either, and look where that twisted mess got us.

We simply need to put a direct, quick stop to our enemies or we continue to pay a very dear price for anything less than TOTAL victory.

A 'tortured' enemy beats a dead American any day. Of course, the definition of torture is so subjective (like anything else that can be politicized) that we'll never stop debating this issue.

I venture to guess that most in favor of coddling the enemy would have a more harsh veiwpoint once their family members or community was under direct assault. I pray that we don't ever see another attack on US soil.

[Neil D]

The Bill of Rights applies only to US citizens but I will give a B for effort. Terrorist captured abroad do not fall into that category.

Excuse me, but WHY did the founding fathers put those laws in the constitution???

Let's see, could it be that the English, at the time, was making accusations, against the colonists?

Why did the colonist dress up as indians and throw the tea into the Boston Harbor [aka "boston tea party"]? IOWs, who were the "terrrorists" that disrupted the english tea?

While I gave you the superficial history lesson, there is countless examples in which 'terrorists' who were american colonists fighting for a cause, who were accused, whether falsely or truthfully, but were not allowed to 1] face their accusors, 2] view the evidence against them, 3] were presumed innocent until proven guilty ect ect ect. Too many colonists saw these injustices carried out, and they made sure that these laws were placed into the constitution for a reason....They never wanted to see this type of 'justice' brought back to public awareness thru the cry of [English] 'security' and at a loss of [American]freedom and responsiblity.

As for FDR, it doesn't apply as a "foundation principle", as it was 200 years after the American revolution. No, the prinicples that the Bush adminstration strike at our very reason for existance. They have laid the axe at our very foundation of our goverment, in the hopes of tearing it apart. All for security....Someone once said, that if you give up freedom for security, you deserve neither. I am afraid that saying is true.

[Neil D]

Quote:

We simply need to put a direct, quick stop to our enemies or we continue to pay a very dear price for anything less than TOTAL victory.

Explain this in light of Russia and the cold war....

It was thru diplomacy and thru confrontation that the Berlin wall came down...not thru military might nor thru military war. It was thru the policy of the stick and the carrot that eventually brought down the Berlin wall....and a good deal of economics, politics and religion that helped. It was never direct, nor was it quick, as it lasted for many years.

That is why, the Arab countries need the "carrot and a stick " policys to bring them into the fold of economic development and give thier people some cash and wealth for hope and a future.

[bevin]

Quote:

A 'tortured' enemy beats a dead American any day.

A typical Bush administration/Rumsfeld mis-statement of the problem.

There are alternatives that do result in NEITHER a tortured enemy NOR a dead American.

Furthermore the Bush administration's approach is resulting in BOTH a tortured enemy AND a dead American.

/Bevin

[Taylor]

There are alternatives that result in no torture...I agree completely. However....you can't prevent the dead americans when many think that the only "good american" is a dead one. We MUST treat people with respect and care (and yes firmness and deciseveness minus the torture), humaneness EVEN when they don't deserve it...I completely agree..however we can't stop them from hating us despite how well we treat them.

Having said that, there ARE many out there who are of that region of the world, that religion who do NOT hate people simply because of race, religion, or country of origin. But unfortuntely there are many who have no regard for the sanctity of life and for letting others have differing opinions.

I am just glad I am not the president and much less would I ever want to be God. There are problems in this world that the ONLY solution is Jeus coming back.

[Dr. Shane]

One that views the American founders, those that fought for its freedom, wrote and ratified the US Constitution as a type of terrorist do not grasp the current conflict in the world.

Dumping a load of tea in the sea is not to be compared to killing 3,000 civilians in a day.

Minutemen fighting a uniformed army is not to be compared to realigious zealots beheading an unarmed reporter or contractor.

That one doesn't even get a "B" for effort.

[Neil D]

....Shane said thru the eyes of patriotism.

You need to look at the history of England and thier relationship to 'the colonies'....Thier view is very, very different from ours. And in case you don't know, George Washington and his band of revolutionary are viewed as a terrorist and torrist activities. And whose to say which perspective is correct, Shane? History and it's spoils go to the victors, but those who are defeated still have thier POV.

And if you think that we did not do attrocities during the American revolution to the British and thier supporting subjects, then the blinders are definately on, Shane. Human nature was the same for us and for them and it's human nature to demand a very violent, and very quick solution for perceived hurts.

[Key Guy]

Quote:

We simply need to put a direct, quick stop to our enemies or we continue to pay a very dear price for anything less than TOTAL victory.

Explain this in light of Russia and the cold war....

[Dr. Shane]

Ok, let's take a look at the comment that started our history lesson:

Quote:

undermine the very foundations of this nation's freedoms....

So Bush is undermining the terrorist foundation of this nation's freedoms? The freedoms that came about through acts of terrorism like guerilla war tactics not used in Europe at the time?

[Naomi]

Quote:

Human nature was the same for us and for them and it's human nature to demand a very violent, and very quick solution for perceived hurts.

Unfortunately, you are correct ... there is nothing new

[bevin]

Quote:

Yep, let's buy the friendship of the Muslim extremists.

Sigh.

There are extremist atheists, christians, muslims, hindus, and probably Wicca

The Bush administration has made the following two huge errors

• They have cast the Palestine, Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan politics as anti-American anti-Christian terrorism. Rubbish. It is not even a religious struggle. It is the struggle of moderate people trying to have enough stuff for their children.
• They have cast everyone who opposes their administration as extremists and terrorist. Rubbish. Their policies are screwing up the lives of moderate people, and those moderate people are trying to survive.

Quote:

What you'll end up with is a more wealthy enemy that still hates us and wants us dead.

There are a handful of wealthy people, and a lot of people who are dirt poor. And we are backing the wealthy and repressing the poor.

/Bevin