comments_image -

Updated twice: America legalizes torture; Dems get played badly

This could not possibly have worked out any worse …
September 21, 2006  |  
 
Advertisement
 

This afternoon, the White House announced that a tentative deal had been struck with the Senate GOP "rebels" -- McCain, Warner and Graham -- that will basically continue the status quo on prisoner detentions and "coercive" interrogations. McCain, it appears, set up the Dems and the media most deftly, and then turned around and sold out America's values for a few primary votes in 2008.

Another measure passed the House that would essentially authorize the administration's formerly illegal domestic surveillance program. Both bills are headed for the Senate -- the detention compromise would then need to go back to the House -- and both are likely to bite Democrats hard on the ass come November no matter which way they vote.

The details of the deal remain somewhat murky. Bush is pleased, saying: "this agreement preserves the single most potent tool we have in protecting America and foiling terrorist attacks." McCain wouldn't say exactly what the White House had conceded, but the AP reports that the administration dropped its attempts to "redefine" Common Article Three of the Geneva Conventions, which bars "humiliating treatment and outrages upon personal dignity." McCain said only that "there is no doubt that the integrity and letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions have been preserved."

The other sticking points were whether suspects would have access to classified evidence against them in "civilian status review commissions," and whether evidence gained through coercion -- including through the use of techniques long considered to be torture by human right groups --could be admitted. Graham said that there was a provision that would allow suspects access to classified evidence -- and what evidence won't be classified? -- if they are at risk of imprisonment or death, but an administration spokesman said they were interpreting that with a "high bar" and it wouldn't be automatic. Digby says a new JAG office will be formed to review classified evidence. I didn't see any mention about the use of evidence gained through "rough interrogation."

As I pointed out earlier this week, this is a compromise between two bad -- terribly bad and unnecessary -- bills. It was passed at gunpoint, with the administration threatening to discontinue coercive interrogations if they didn't get their way and nobody in the political class willing to call their bluff (remember, more than half of those being held are thought to be innocent and experts are pretty much in agreement that torture doesn't work anyway).

Joshua Holland is a staff writer at Alternet and a regular contributor to The Gadflyer.
submit to reddit

-
Email
Print
Share
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Advertisement
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading most read content ..
Advertisement
Pro-Coal Group Pays People to Wear Its Shirts at EPA Hearing

By Heather Moyer | Sierra Club

 
 
Kids Inundate NY Governor With Concerns About Fracking

By Seth Gladstone | Food and Water Watch

 
 
Shareholders, Top Doctors Demand McDonald's Assess its Health Impacts

By Sara Deon | Civil Eats

 
 
Republicans Block NY Minimum Wage Increase That Would Give 880,000 Workers a Raise

By Laura Clawson | Daily Kos

 
 
Why Don't TV Meteorologists Believe in Climate Change?

By Katherine Bagley, | Inside Climate News

 
 
New Book Says Teenage Obama Was a Huge Pot Head -- So Why Won't He Legalize It for the Rest of Us?!

By Kristen Gwynne | AlterNet

 
 
Pew Poll Finds Clean Energy Is A Political Wedge Issue for Republicans

By Stephen Lacey | Climate Progress

 
 
Mitt 'Not Concerned with the Very Poor' Romney Visits West Philly, Gets Lesson in Keeping it Real

By Kristen Gwynne | AlterNet

 
 
Corporate Media Stokes Racial Angst in Election Coverage

By Adele M. Stan | AlterNet

 
 
5 Things to Know About the Paycheck Fairness Act (The Next Big Legislative Battle for Women)

By Annie-Rose Strasser | Think Progress

 
 
 
 
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
 
[ page served from web 2 ]