Sponsors

A Win for McCain? Email Print

The press is touting a compromise between John McCain and the White House on McCain's torture amendment as a great accomplishment. Let's take a look at this alleged compromise, shall we?

Under the emerging deal, the CIA and other civilian interrogators would be given the same legal rights as currently guaranteed members of the military who are accused of breaking interrogation guidelines, these officials added. Those rules say the accused can defend themselves by arguing it was reasonable for them to believe they were obeying a legal order.
So if torture DOES occur, civilians can now use the "I-was-just-following-what- I-thought-were-legal-orders " defense. And this is a good thing?
As passed by the Senate and endorsed by the House, McCain's amendment would prohibit "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" of anyone in U.S. government custody, regardless of where they are held. It also would require that service members follow procedures in the Army Field Manual during interrogations of prisoners in Defense Department facilities.
So what constitutes "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment?" Does the Army Field Manual get into specifics? Because what one person might consider "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" another might call "a means to an end."

Further, there's nothing in the legislation that prevents a U.S. agency from turning a detainee over to another country's custody, where the prisoner could then be tortured. Remember, "anyone in U.S. government custody" cannot be abused, but the amendment doesn't prohibit a short-term custodial transfer.

Officials say the language also now includes a specific statement that those who violate the standards will not be afforded immunity from civil or criminal lawsuits.

In recent weeks, the administration had sought to add language that would offer protection from prosecution for interrogators accused of violating the provision. But McCain rejected that, arguing it would undermine the ban by not giving interrogators reason to follow the law.

But now McCain has done, for all intents and purposes, an about face. Again, the "I was just following orders" defense can be used to mitigate civil and/or criminal charges, or even escape them if a trial takes place.

I don't know about you, but to me this stinks on ice. It seems like McCain has folded, and our human rights-violating image abroad is not going to be repaired by the Senator's watered-down amendment.


KEYWORDS: , , ,

Sign up for a Complimentary Member Account... Join the community! It's fast. And it'll allow you to take advantage of all this site's great features!

< Anti-Alito Brigade For Justice, Day 4! | Silly request >
 Display:
....never have.

Once again, the devil is in the details and your look shows this "compromise" up for what it is...and they both get to have their, "Arent' we doing the right thing?" moment.

NEVER TRUST ANYTHING A REPUBLICAN SAYS.

The Albany Project. The best damned blog about New York State politics.

by NYBri on 12/15/2005 08:51:47 PM EST

Manual.

From the NYT New Army Rules May Snarl Talks With McCain on Detainee Issue

All it takes to fly is to hurl yourself at the ground... and miss. (Douglas Adams)

by scoophound on 12/16/2005 07:27:29 AM EST

 Display: