McCain's Crock of It
Senator John McCain, fake from Arizona, introduced legislation "forbidding torture" which passed 90-9, with Bush threatening to veto. McCain's amendment would prohibit the "cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment of prisoners in the custody of America's defence department." (American inmates are exempt – your cruel and degrading treatment will continue.)
The amendment changes nothing that isn't already on the books, specifically the Army Field manual covers it but McCain is lookin' good while doing nothing other than talk, talk, talk, (politicians are fatted on empty words). McCain says : "The amendment I am offering would establish the Army Field Manual as the standard for interrogation of all detainees held in DOD custody." There the difference is – a prisoner or detainee. I guess it all depends on who the "is" is? There "is" no "torture" of "detainees." The field manual is like everything else the government prints – all you need is a good lawyer to interpret and get around it.
Those at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo were labeled "detainees" to legally sidestep the rules of the Army field manual, Geneva, Hague, etc. McCain's amendment will not change that and McCain knows it; and like 99% of politicians he was in on giving Bush the powers they gave him. Detainees are not subject to rules of war. Congress has not passed a formal declaration of war regarding Iraq. Bush never sought a formal declaration of war from Congress. He requested, and received, the authority to use armed forces "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" to defend American interests against "the continuing threat posed by Iraq." We don't have "wars" anymore, we have resolutions. Therefore, "interrogation" is more flexible with "detainees" in authorized "resolutions."
McCain is a lackey subtly painting the Boy King uglier than he already is as day by day it seems Junior is the designated crusader fall guy. The bonus for McCain is he looks reasonable yet still supporting the boss Bush. Torture is a hot topic. Like crime, abortion, gays, God, welfare, education, war on drugs - it's the newest knee-jerker fired up when of value to politicians. No one big is going down for torture folks. As with Riggs bank and Pinochet – lawyer up good, pay a few million in restitution to the victims, and/or keep it in court until the litigants are dead or demented. One good sex scandal would knock torture off the radar. (Isn't there one republican faithful willing to be caught in bed with his neighbor's underage twin teen sons and a donkey show?)
While there is no torture going on that the US hasn't always done, and Bush the Fall Guy may take the heat, he's unlikely to eat the nuremberger that goes with it. Afterall, you know the drill : it's a different world and he's a war president. The issue will disappear. It's almost enough to make me feel sorry for Bush; first they sobered him and convinced him he was sent by God and now they may kick him to the curb because he fell for it. Enough to make a man take up the bottle again and become a real liability.
McCain's amendment is tacked on to the $440 billion money bill for Bush's Iraq Resolution but senators were "confident that most of the language would survive." McCain says : "the war on terror is ultimately a battle of ideas, a battle we will win by spreading and standing firmly for the values of decency, democracy, and the rule of law." Ha! I said below our betters like to throw out that "rule of law" phrase. McCain says he stands with Bush in this commitment of spreading American values.
Maybe McCain is eyeballing the WH again, presenting a kinder gentler face to the constituents. Maybe folks are so fat, happy. and well-off that congressional ferrets have few domestic concerns, and too much time for spreading American values, with language I'm confident many folks won't survive.
10 comments:
Whilst it would be difficult for every Sgt Graner or Pvt. England to carry around their own Lee Bailey, your point about lawyerliness is taken - and is obviously rooted in a sound understanding of the true function of lawyers in the US system of Laura Norder.
McCain does have some experience of what he is talking about, and I think his aim is a bit higher than the grunts applying the cattle prods and taking happy snaps.
If this is truly a Crusade for freedom it would go down a whole lot better amongst the Coalitionn of the vaguely Willing if they didn't keep showing what a bunch of thugs are operating at the front line. We have tried suppressing it, that doesn't work .. perhaps we should stop it....?
To do that you start at the top, which is what McCain's amendment would do.
See my homepage for more.
I like your style and will link to you.
Thanks, I'll return with a link to your site.
A few years ago I would have voted for McCain. His bid for the 2000 GOP nomination was foiled by his own party, who portrayed McCain as unstable, with an uncontrollable temper, collaborating with the enemy as a POW, family mob connections, etc. He was the whipping boy as a Bush competitor back then and he still plays. His role now the "moderate voice" in a sea of rightwingnuts.
The word I would use for McCain is doormat.
Being a Goddam Limey and not having the vote I would plump for Pat B, but that would probably upset you.
He's flaky on religion but his analysis of the disembowelling of the West in an ultimate auto da fe is penetrating.
If McCain's amendment works I'll live with it, and so, probably, will a few more people.
Postman,
You're more optimistic than I. Too many have died and/or been tortured regardless how many conventions, resolutions, laws, manuals, our esteemed leaders pass or write. Historically, the affairs of war have not changed much, other than a polite public doesn't want to know it or see it or attend the event. Saying it isn't done or won't be done is a placebo for our conscience as the machine grinds on.
Actually, I agree with quite a bit of Pat B.'s writing but shhhhh.... don't tell anyone.
My grandfather would have said about Pat B. "even a blind hog finds an acorn eventually"
I admired McCain the first time he spoke up for some guidelines re detainee/prisoner treatment and am glad the Senate, at least, has passed the amendment this time, with his support. I don't think addressing the condition of convicts in U.S. prisons would normally go with a Defense spending bill? although god knows they attach anything they like to any bill. But then a few days later McCain backs Blackwell's governor bid (http://www.cleveland.com/ohio/plaindealer/index and elsewhere) This forcibly reminds me that no-one is going to be All Good or All Bad from my perspective. But dang! what is McCain thinking? Blackwell should be in jail, if, of course, there was justice in this world. Which there seldom is.
dus7
My great grandfather was a senator and his writings, papers mention that no decent man can stomach politics longer than one term. The system is beyond corrupt.
I mentioned the US prisons only to highlight that pols have little concern for their fellow Americans, hence difficult to believe they have real regard for prisoners in the ME. Pols do what they believe enhances their personal image, or as they're directed. They're the bananas in the republic.
Interesting analysis. I've linked to your post from my blog. McCain's language may mean nothing, but if Bush uses his first veto to block it, he'll be saying a great deal. I can't even imagine what Bush hopes to get out of it politically.
Gary,
Thanks for link. It almost appears Bush will take the fall for the neocons. Everyone will think our national pain was Bush's fault, get Bush, we've done something, taken care of the problem, etc., onward marches democracy, now things will be better. The geopolitical scheming continues but the public may briefly feel we're the good guys again.
Le Faineant Qui Voit
Thanks for those links, some interesting material.
I'm glad you mentioned the Keating Five. McCain's façade of "ethics" has cost taxpayers more than most folks remember. One issue he should stay on is "campaign finance reform" but that's only of use every 4 years.
Thanks again.
Post a Comment