The world is going to hell in a hand-basket. I want to point out another reason why I think is all ready to go. Not the first paragraph, below that.
I have said before, the closing of the borders has less to do with keeping others out and more to do with keeping "US" in. Remember, you heard it here first. I want to point out too that Washington State is having trouble harvesting it's strawberries. It seems there aren't enough "guest workers" to bend over in the hot sun all day and pick berries. Expect your strawberry short cake to cost a lot more this summer.
IN THE DAYS and weeks after Sept. 11, 2001, senior Bush administration officials decided that harsh interrogation methods were necessary to prevent devastating attacks on the country -- and that such methods could be carefully administered and limited to the most urgent cases.
This thinking proved disastrously flawed. Once the administration lifted the strict regulations that long had governed interrogations of foreign detainees, abusive practices spread quickly across the government. Confusion over rules led to the torture not just of senior al-Qaeda leaders but also of common detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq. The damage done to U.S. honor and prestige around the world, and to America's ability to mobilize support for the fight against Islamic extremism, far outweighed any intelligence gathered.
This is from the Washington Post this morning. The editorial goes on to say;
Congress last year passed the McCain amendment, which prohibits "cruel, inhuman, or degrading" treatment of all prisoners in U.S. custody. But it has become increasingly clear that the administration has not accepted that ban as the last word. It still has not renounced the right to subject some detainees to practices such as "water boarding," or simulated drowning, even though they violate the law.
The administration is also preparing a new directive on detention that would exclude compliance with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits torture and other cruelty, including "humiliating and degrading treatment." Finally, through a presidential signing statement and questionable legal opinions, the administration is reserving the right to continue using water boarding and other harsh techniques on prisoners held by the CIA. It argues that the president's power to make war allows him to override congressional restrictions and that water boarding in some circumstances does not violate the U.S. constitutional prohibition of cruel treatment.
What most people just don't get, is; When Cheney, Ashcroft, and Rumsfeld lowered the bar on torture, they lowered the bar for you and me as well.
Other governments have used torture on their own people. What makes you think it can't happen here? Who ever thought torture would be used on prisoners by The United States of America? Can the president over ride congressional restricions? This is a case where just because he did, dosen't mean he should have.
I have said before, the closing of the borders has less to do with keeping others out and more to do with keeping "US" in. Remember, you heard it here first. I want to point out too that Washington State is having trouble harvesting it's strawberries. It seems there aren't enough "guest workers" to bend over in the hot sun all day and pick berries. Expect your strawberry short cake to cost a lot more this summer.
IN THE DAYS and weeks after Sept. 11, 2001, senior Bush administration officials decided that harsh interrogation methods were necessary to prevent devastating attacks on the country -- and that such methods could be carefully administered and limited to the most urgent cases.
This thinking proved disastrously flawed. Once the administration lifted the strict regulations that long had governed interrogations of foreign detainees, abusive practices spread quickly across the government. Confusion over rules led to the torture not just of senior al-Qaeda leaders but also of common detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq. The damage done to U.S. honor and prestige around the world, and to America's ability to mobilize support for the fight against Islamic extremism, far outweighed any intelligence gathered.
This is from the Washington Post this morning. The editorial goes on to say;
Congress last year passed the McCain amendment, which prohibits "cruel, inhuman, or degrading" treatment of all prisoners in U.S. custody. But it has become increasingly clear that the administration has not accepted that ban as the last word. It still has not renounced the right to subject some detainees to practices such as "water boarding," or simulated drowning, even though they violate the law.
The administration is also preparing a new directive on detention that would exclude compliance with Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which prohibits torture and other cruelty, including "humiliating and degrading treatment." Finally, through a presidential signing statement and questionable legal opinions, the administration is reserving the right to continue using water boarding and other harsh techniques on prisoners held by the CIA. It argues that the president's power to make war allows him to override congressional restrictions and that water boarding in some circumstances does not violate the U.S. constitutional prohibition of cruel treatment.
What most people just don't get, is; When Cheney, Ashcroft, and Rumsfeld lowered the bar on torture, they lowered the bar for you and me as well.
Other governments have used torture on their own people. What makes you think it can't happen here? Who ever thought torture would be used on prisoners by The United States of America? Can the president over ride congressional restricions? This is a case where just because he did, dosen't mean he should have.
posted by Gem_with_faraway_eyes | 6:11 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
|<< Home