PhotoDude.com

Mon. Nov 07, 2005

We Do Not Torture, We Exempt

A year ago, we’d just finished roasting John Kerry on roaring spit of “I voted for it before I voted against it.” Today in the White House, we appear to have a group of people so cocooned they do not see they are doing and saying the very same thing. But this time, it’s not about an $87 billion appropriation bill, it’s about torture.

On one hand, we have today’s statement by the President:

President Bush vigorously defended U.S. interrogation practices in the war on terror Monday and lobbied against a congressional drive to outlaw torture.

“There’s an enemy that lurks and plots and plans and wants to hurt America again,” Bush said. “So you bet we will aggressively pursue them but we will do so under the law.”

Over White House opposition, the Senate has passed legislation banning torture. With Vice President Dick Cheney as the point man, the administration is seeking an exemption for the CIA. It was recently disclosed that the spy agency maintains a network of prisons in eastern Europe and Asia, where it holds terrorist suspects.

“Our country is at war and our government has the obligation to protect the American people,” Bush said. “Any activity we conduct is within the law. We do not torture.”

CNN: Bush defends detainees policy

Let me repeat that boldly … “Any activity we conduct is within the law. We do not torture.” Then how exactly does the White House explain this:

Just last week, Cheney showed up at a Republican senatorial luncheon to lobby lawmakers for a CIA exemption to an amendment by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) that would ban torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners. The exemption would cover the CIA’s covert “black sites” in several Eastern European democracies and other countries where key al Qaeda captives are being kept.

Cheney spokesman Steve Schmidt declined to comment on the vice president’s interventions or to elaborate on his positions. “The vice president’s views are certainly reflected in the administration’s policy,” he said.

Washington Post: Cheney Fights for Detainee Policy

The administration’s policy, as stated today, is “Any activity we conduct is within the law. We do not torture.” The McCain Amendment, which passed 90-9 and which McCain has promised to tack on to every bill that comes out of the Senate until it gets signed, restates just that: that we obey existing laws, agreements, and public directives. If you look at the text of it, there’s two sections.

“No person in the custody or under the effective control of the Department of Defense or under detention in a Department of Defense facility shall be subject to any treatment or technique of interrogation not authorized by and listed in the United States Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation.”

This section obviously applies only to the military, and merely says “follow the manual.” But, to me, the implication is that the published guidelines in that manual are what is specifically authorized, and any subsequent “secret orders” from the Department of Defense (i.e., Rumsfeld) do not qualify.

The second section would apply to the CIA, and their rehab of former Soviet facilities in Eastern Europe:

“No individual in the custody or under the physical control of the United States Government, regardless of nationality or physical location, shall be subject to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.”

And it then specifies what that “treatment or punishment” is: “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.”

In other words, activities prohibited by long established law, and long held international agreements and obligations. On the surface, even CIA director Porter Goss echoes the President: “In March, Goss, the C.I.A.’s director, testified before Congress that ‘we don’t do torture,’ and the agency’s press office issued a release stating, ‘All approved interrogation techniques, both past and present, are lawful and do not constitute torture.’”

But that’s what we hear in public. The same article says there’s another side: “A March, 2003, classified memo was ‘breathtaking,’ the same source said. The document dismissed virtually all national and international laws regulating the treatment of prisoners, including war-crimes and assault statutes, and it was radical in its view that in wartime the President can fight enemies by whatever means he sees fit. According to the memo, Congress has no constitutional right to interfere with the President in his role as Commander-in-Chief, including making laws that limit the ways in which prisoners may be interrogated. Another classified Justice Department memo, issued in August, 2002, is said to authorize numerous ‘enhanced’ interrogation techniques for the C.I.A. These two memos sanction such extreme measures that, even if the agency wanted to discipline or prosecute agents who stray beyond its own comfort level, the legal tools to do so may no longer exist.”

So there you have it. This administration does not feel compelled to answer to Congress and allow them to “interfere with the President in his role as Commander-in-Chief,” or obey any laws they may pass on the matter of interrogations. They intend to proceed as they see fit, your elected representatives be damned.

Over the weekend, I read a poll that said a surprising (to me) 53% of Americans support impeachment if it is shown that the Bush administration mislead us about the evidence preceding the war in Iraq. However, this would certainly “interfere with the President in his role as Commander-in-Chief” ... so take a hike. And take your Constitution with you.

You haven’t heard much about those documents because even the members of Congress charged with oversight of the CIA have been refused access … with no reason given. Carl Levin, member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, says “The refusal to give us these documents is totally inexcusable … The Administration is getting away with just saying no. There’s no claim of executive privilege. There’s no claim of national security — we’ve offered to keep it classified. It’s just bullshit. They just don’t want us to know what they’re doing, or have done.”

And the “us” in that statement doesn’t just mean Congress. It means you and me. And it seems to me if they won’t crack open up this process even to security cleared members of Congress, it’s quite fair to pass an amendment that explicitly spells it out.

Despite our lack of knowledge about those documents, it’s been well known for some time that the administration has been using “rendition” and now these facilities in Eastern Europe to place prisoners outside US law. This amendment would stop that.

No longer would the President be able to say we’re following the law, while shipping prisoners elsewhere in order to skirt the very laws he says we’re following.

But when it comes down to him signing an amendment from Congress explicitly stating that we will follow the law, and we will not torture … he balks. They want an exemption.

These efforts are so very transparent. And I honestly don’t think there is anyone in the White House who has wondered “isn’t this going to sound sort of … Kerry-like? We say we don’t, but want an exemption so we can?” They just assume we sheep will be confused by it and either ignore it, or accept it with a shrug.

No shrugging here. I find it both infuriating and insulting. And a bit scary that they’ve gone off the rails so much they don’t even see the contradictory perceptions they are willfully creating in the public eye.

When, simultaneously, the President is saying “we do not torture, and Cheney is seeking an exemption on a law that states just that, Bush and Cheney end looking like shifty eyed used car salesmen trying to pull a con, talking out of both sides of their mouth. It’s embarrassing to watch an operation with such a glaring lack of self awareness, blind to the perceptions they are creating.

Say what you mean (“We do not torture”). Mean what you say. And back it up with your actions, not a smirk and a “trust me.” What’s so damn hard about that, Mr. President? Three things. One out of three does not cut it.

One out of three looks like willful deception. That 53% could grow quickly.