Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYT editorial: Rushing Off a Cliff (on torture)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-27-06 10:13 PM
Original message
NYT editorial: Rushing Off a Cliff (on torture)
Edited on Wed Sep-27-06 10:14 PM by ProSense
Editorial

Rushing Off a Cliff

Published: September 28, 2006

Here’s what happens when this irresponsible Congress railroads a profoundly important bill to serve the mindless politics of a midterm election: The Bush administration uses Republicans’ fear of losing their majority to push through ghastly ideas about antiterrorism that will make American troops less safe and do lasting damage to our 217-year-old nation of laws — while actually doing nothing to protect the nation from terrorists. Democrats betray their principles to avoid last-minute attack ads. Our democracy is the big loser.

Republicans say Congress must act right now to create procedures for charging and trying terrorists — because the men accused of plotting the 9/11 attacks are available for trial. That’s pure propaganda. Those men could have been tried and convicted long ago, but President Bush chose not to. He held them in illegal detention, had them questioned in ways that will make real trials very hard, and invented a transparently illegal system of kangaroo courts to convict them.

Snip...

These are some of the bill’s biggest flaws:

Enemy Combatants: A dangerously broad definition of “illegal enemy combatant” in the bill could subject legal residents of the United States, as well as foreign citizens living in their own countries, to summary arrest and indefinite detention with no hope of appeal. The president could give the power to apply this label to anyone he wanted.

The Geneva Conventions: The bill would repudiate a half-century of international precedent by allowing Mr. Bush to decide on his own what abusive interrogation methods he considered permissible. And his decision could stay secret — there’s no requirement that this list be published.

Habeas Corpus: Detainees in U.S. military prisons would lose the basic right to challenge their imprisonment. These cases do not clog the courts, nor coddle terrorists. They simply give wrongly imprisoned people a chance to prove their innocence.

Judicial Review: The courts would have no power to review any aspect of this new system, except verdicts by military tribunals. The bill would limit appeals and bar legal actions based on the Geneva Conventions, directly or indirectly. All Mr. Bush would have to do to lock anyone up forever is to declare him an illegal combatant and not have a trial.

Coerced Evidence: Coerced evidence would be permissible if a judge considered it reliable — already a contradiction in terms — and relevant. Coercion is defined in a way that exempts anything done before the passage of the 2005 Detainee Treatment Act, and anything else Mr. Bush chooses.

Secret Evidence: American standards of justice prohibit evidence and testimony that is kept secret from the defendant, whether the accused is a corporate executive or a mass murderer. But the bill as redrafted by Mr. Cheney seems to weaken protections against such evidence.

Offenses: The definition of torture is unacceptably narrow, a virtual reprise of the deeply cynical memos the administration produced after 9/11. Rape and sexual assault are defined in a retrograde way that covers only forced or coerced activity, and not other forms of nonconsensual sex. The bill would effectively eliminate the idea of rape as torture.

•There is not enough time to fix these bills, especially since the few Republicans who call themselves moderates have been whipped into line, and the Democratic leadership in the Senate seems to have misplaced its spine. If there was ever a moment for a filibuster, this was it.

We don’t blame the Democrats for being frightened. The Republicans have made it clear that they’ll use any opportunity to brand anyone who votes against this bill as a terrorist enabler. But Americans of the future won’t remember the pragmatic arguments for caving in to the administration.

They’ll know that in 2006, Congress passed a tyrannical law that will be ranked with the low points in American democracy, our generation’s version of the Alien and Sedition Acts.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/28/opinion/28thu1.html



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-27-06 10:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks for this post nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wisteria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-27-06 10:41 PM
Response to Original message
2. Can this be undone? No one seems to be able to answer that question.
This is absolutely awful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. Any law can be undone.
The fact that this is unconstitutional is the first place to look. After the SCOTUS blows this one a new legislature is in order.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 06:29 AM
Response to Original message
3. This bill says to the Americans and the world: instead of exposing
a U.S. President to war crimes, let's change the law to place him above exisiting law and give support to his torture policy:

David Wallechinsky
09.19.2006

Torture Fails Again

Snip...

Yesterday a Canadian commission of inquiry released a 1,204-page report relating to the case of Maher Arar, a Canadian wireless technology consultant, who was snatched by U.S. agents at John F. Kennedy Airport in New York City and transported to Syria, where, for ten months, he was kept in a six-foot by three-foot cell, before being transferred to a collective cell. Under torture, he confessed to being an Islamist extremist who attended a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. In reality, not only was Arar not an Islamist terrorist, but he had never even been to Afghanistan. He was ultimately released without charge and the Canadian commission affirmed that he was completely innocent.

more...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-wallechinsky/torture-fails-again_b_29757.html


But Rep. Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee, derided it for using "legal mumbo jumbo to obscure the fact that the CIA will continue to be allowed to use torture and will actually be insulated from legal liability for previous acts of torture."
Snip...

Levin complained that while the deal limits use of testimony obtained by coercion, "it inexplicably" allows such statements obtained before December 30, 2005.

A number of Democrats also object that the deal strips detainees' habeas corpus rights to challenge their detentions.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, said excluding habeas corpus rights was unconstitutional and set a hearing on the issue for Monday.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/09/22/us_democrats_wary_of_detainee_trials_compromise


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinkfoot Donating Member (23 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 06:49 AM
Response to Original message
4. They Buried the News Story
While this worthy commentary was the lead Editorial in the New York Times, the news story was buried on page twenty. Are Pirro's marital woes really more news worthy? Does poor internet service in northern Vermont really matter more? Why won't they realize how significant this is? Those who play this story down are guilty of complicity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 06:57 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Welcome! Thanks for your excellent comment! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chico Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. The Salmon fishing in Maine is obviously more worthy
It's a feel good story. Oh, the great fishermen of the Penobscot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 06:51 AM
Response to Original message
5. May be we should send that to Reid. I am still mad at him not to
Edited on Thu Sep-28-06 06:54 AM by Mass
filibuster this. Durbin, Obama, and Leahy all gave the arguments to do so, but nothing happened. Once again, they lost without fighting. (I am mad at all the Democrats as it only takes one to filibuster, but Reid is supposed to lead the Democrats in the Senate).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 07:14 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Good idea!
Done!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 07:22 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. I will remain mad at him. A true American Patriot would not worry
about his personal career and stand up for what is right.

Just goes to show, Papa's heroes have seemingly all crossed to the other side. Now what we are left with is greedy lawmakers who continue to give themselves raises and the wealthy, corporate welfare - while The Average American is left out in the cold. Take our tax money and give it to the War Profiteers. :cry:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pberq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-28-06 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
11. Senator Dodd on the floor now - recalling Nuremburg
What a great speech!

We must not abandon the rule of law!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 05:48 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC