EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'Beyond Orwellian': Outrage Follows Revelations of Vast Domestic Spying Program
- The Bill of Rights Exists: An Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein
- The World Economy Is a Ticking Time Bomb (and The Fuse is Burning)
- Major Loss to Organic Farmers as Court Rules in Favor of Monsanto
- Naomi Klein: 'Anti-Shock Doctrines' Show the Way to Resist
Popular content
Today's Top News
American Bar Association Criticizes Bush Terror Policies
SAN FRANCISCO - President Bush's recent order on CIA interrogations of terror suspects should be overturned because it still allows harsh treatment in violation of international treaties, two American Bar Association committees say.
The CIA should follow the same rigorous standards adopted by the military that are intended, in part, to ensure that captured U.S. soldiers are extended the same protections, according to a resolution the ABA is expected to adopt next week at its annual meeting here.
"The CIA should not be exempted from rules that guide even our armed forces," ABA president Karen Mathis said Friday.
The executive order that Bush issued July 20 bans torture, cruel and inhumane treatment, sexual abuse, acts intended to denigrate a religion or other degradation "beyond the bounds of human decency." It pledges that detainees will receive adequate food, water and medical care and be protected from extreme heat and cold.
But it leaves undefined what methods are acceptable. National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell has said revealing what techniques are allowed would help people who might be subjected to them. He said he would not want a U.S. citizen to go through the process, but he added that it was not torture.
The resolution is the latest in a series of disagreements between the nation's largest organization of lawyers and the administration over the investigation, apprehension and treatment of terrorism suspects.
The group also is taking aim at the administration's employment of a legal tactic - the state secrets privilege - to end lawsuits challenging aspects of the war on terrorism. Another ABA resolution expected to win approval urges federal judges not to be hasty in dismissing suits where the administration has said proceeding would lead to disclosure of state secrets.
The administration said the order allows the continuation of a program that has been vital in preventing terrorism and complies with Geneva Conventions' Common Article 3 protections for detainees.
"By providing these clear rules, the order has clarified vague terms in Common Article 3, and its interpretation is consistent with the decisions of international tribunals applying Common Article 3," said White House spokesman Tony Fratto.
CIA interrogations had been in limbo since a Supreme Court decision last year called their legal foundation into question.
The order contains ample exceptions to allow for especially tough treatment in some circumstances, the ABA said.
The lawyers' group echoes complaints raised by former Marine Commandant P.X. Kelley and University of Virginia professor Robert Turner. "As long as the intent of the abuse is to gather intelligence or to prevent future attacks, and the abuse is not 'done for the purpose of humiliating or degrading the individual' - even if that is an inevitable consequence - the president has given the CIA carte blanche to engage in 'willful and outrageous acts of personal abuse,'" they wrote in an essay published in the Washington Post.
Albert Harvey, a lawyer from Memphis, Tenn., who is chairman of the ABA's law and national security committee, said Kelley's objections carried great weight with his committee. "We felt that if we don't give that kind of protection to those who are apprehended, how can we expect that when our troops go into foreign countries that others will extend the same protection?" Harvey said.
The order was intended in part to protect CIA employees from legal troubles for taking part in the program and to quell international criticism of some of the CIA's most debated work.
In the past, CIA methods are believed to have included sleep deprivation and disorientation, exposing prisoners to uncomfortable cold or heat for long periods, stress positions and a simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding.
The program began in 2002 to extract information from high-value terror suspects that might foil other attacks. The administration decided that following the standards of the U.S. civilian or military justice systems would not elicit crucial information on a timely basis.
© 2007 The Associated Press
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
11 Comments so far
Show Alllike this is the first time that anyone has said anything
Torture has been proven not to provide accurate information. It is immoral except in cases of IMMEDIATE life threatening situations. For instance, if you know that the person has planted a bomb and you need to know where it is right now. These people who are being tortured have been in jail for months and years and therefore do not fall into the above mentioned category. This situation certainly needs to be rectified. We need to regain our moral standing in this world which has been stredded by this madman in the whitehouse.
"We felt that if we don't give that kind of protection to those who are apprehended, how can we expect that when our troops go into foreign countries that others will extend the same protection?" Harvey said.
This sounds like the Golden Rule to me . Throw out all the chaff of Homeland Secutity , fight 'em there... , war on terror and this is the nugget of wisdom that Americans are ultimately left with.
To a vast a number of MSM-sedated Americans , Geneva Contentions are like a Shriners'but somewhere in Europe .
If a whole company of soldiers or marines is captured and tortured for the whole world to see then there may be a negotiated exchange of prisoners and a change in torture policy ; until then as far as most Americans are concerned, it's business as usual just as it was in Nazi Germany.
As Americans we have no moral standing in the world. The only way to begin on the road to redemption is to impeach the Cheney/Bush administration. As long as the populace in this country tolerates and acquiesces to their excesses, we are condoning it. We own it by default.
We have always had moral standing in the world as the bastion of liberal though and action with the guiding principal of restraint of excess. That is way we had a stable democracy with peaceful transitions as compared to most other countries which go through spasms every time their country changed hands (ie France, Germany, Russia, China, Most African countries, Multiple times in the past in central and south america even before the US had any involvment there, etc.)
I do not own the actions which the Bush administration has commited. Do you? I didn't think so. Pleas don't compare my country to nazi Germany. Doing so only shows your concrete simplistic comparison/ contrast and categorical skills. Yes there have been times when this countries actions didn't always match its ideals, but it has always righted itself because there have always been good people who have acted according to their conscienses. If you can't attempt to constructively fix our country without resorting to demonizing it, perhaps you should live in Iran or some other place where that is a way of life. You might enjoy it there. Oh, but don't ask for help from us when your ass is chained to a basement for a year and a half.
Find out which candidate shares your views:
http://www.dehp.net/candidate/index.php
_________________________
It's the political equivalent of a "blind taste test" & has been taken by more than 100,000 people
Bush says the American Bar Association has nothing to do with him, since he stopped drinking.
Is comparing the U.S. with Nazi germany or Bush with Hitler fair or not fair ?
Every dictatorship is different, so it is not really the same. Sometimes it makes sense to compare the one system with the other, but you will also always find differences.
But the name you should use to describe the present American political system is fascism (Corporate rule, nationalistic frenzy, compliant media and opposition, torture and war). That is really not a matter of demonizing, it is just a matter of using the correct terminology. This is what fascism means, so why not use the word.
The suggestion that Adamslp makes that Ronald White (who always makes very sensible comments here on this forum) should move to Iran just because he does not think the same as Adamslp himself, seems to suggest that he himself is also very susceptible to fascist indoctrination. We have heard that argument so often from the Republican bullies and it just doesn't sound very 'democratic'. It is the sort of arguments you use when you cannot use rational thinking anymore ('If you don't agree, just shut up and move to another country' does not sound like you are very good in this thing political debate, which is the cornerstone of democracy).
By the way, I think Iran is really not much more 'fascist' than the U.S itself. Maybe a lot of American dissidents would feel exactly as if they were at home there.
Bush signed off on McCain sponsored torture legislation. It would be interesting to publish his signing statements. Those are the statements he has been arrogantly writing during the signing process proclaiming what things King George will follow through on and what things he will not follow through on.
PBS has been showing the interview with ex JAG Lawyer Charles Swift, the Navy defense lawyer that took a Guantanamo kangaroo court case on appeal all the way up to the Supreme Court and won. Then the Republican controlled Congress at that time reversed the ruling, something that still needs to get rammed back down Republican throats. It is a very interesting situation.
Iran is actually more open than the US is some aspects. Of course, it is much easier for the Iranian government to make opposition people disappear but George and Dick are working on that. Has the worm finally begun to turn in the US? Or are we just getting more lip service to provide cover for the Aristocracy while the continue to whiddle away the Constitution?
It isn't altogether useful to equate the US with Nazi Germany or apply loaded terms that end in "-ism". These things just stir people up and muddle the thinking.
The US, like all nations, is unique, with a mixture of qualities which right now is skewed to the dark side.
What is important is to keep thinking of how to make the nation better. Enough people are arguing and fussing about small details.
Bigger thinking is necessary. Facing fundamental questions is necessary. Govt cannot protect the nation. Govt is not helping its taxpaying citizens. Govt is destroying what little peace there was on earth. Govt is making life hard for many people and sowing the seed for future problems. Govt is acting against the interests even of itself.
What is serving the country all about? What should the role of the federal government become? How to reform the taxation structure and help solve the nation's problems in a fair way?
The US is a worthwhile experiment but some clever and creative thinking has to come to salvage the operation. There is more than enough wealth in the US to create anything we want. But the thinking has to be in the right direction or the thing will simply fall down and die.