Hen's teeth

Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. - Philip K. Dick

Sunday, December 10, 2006

Shelby, Sessions, and Bonner are in favor of torture

Actually only Senator Shelby is willing to admit to it. Senator Sessions and Representative Bonner can’t even trouble themselves to respond to my letters. It seems like a pretty safe assumption though.

It’s frustrating when all of your reps are hard-core Bush puppets, but I thought I found something that might get through to them about why torture is such a bad idea. I sent a copy of an article written by a reserve soldier who fought in the first Iraq War, entitled What We’ve Lost. He writes about all the American soldiers that didn’t die because we had a reputation for treating prisoners fairly.

http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/09/what_weve_lost.html

This is Senator Shelby’s response.

Thank you for contacting me about methods for interrogating and trying enemy combatants. I appreciate you views on this matter.

I do not support the use of cruel, inhumane or degrading punishment against those in United States custody. However, these are not ordinary times. It is important to keep in mind that we must be able to obtain critical information from terrorists. Such information is vital to the security of our nation. Tough interrogation of ruthless terrorists is a necessity. We must never forget that terrorists do not follow the rules of engagement or the rules of the Geneva Convention.

On June 29, 2006, the Supreme Court ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that President Bush had overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees. As a result, Congress has moved forward on legislation to define the treatment of detainees during interrogations and create military commissions to prosecute terrorist suspects.

In September 2006, Congress passed S. 3930, the “Military Commissions Act,” which authorizes trial by military commission for violations of the law of war. Pursuant to S. 3930, the War Crimes Act of 1996 criminalizes only those Common Article 3 violations labeled as “grave breaches.” Previously, any violation of Common Article 3 constituted a criminal offense under the War Crimes Act.

This agreement is an important step forward. It maintains our ability to obtain important intelligence from captured terrorists while being mindful that we are not engaged in a conventional war.

Thank you again for sharing your views. If I may be of future assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.

I especially noticed the paragraph that starts with him not supporting torture, and ends with him in favor of torture. The only way to fight the terrorists is to become them. How can anyone be so dense?

Labels: , , , ,

2 Comments:

At December 14, 2006 5:31 PM, Blogger dan said...

Cheryl, I noticed the same paragraph.

"...However, these are not ordinary times..."
Implied: Times justify people surrendering their basic human rights.

"...Tough interrogation of ruthless terrorists is a necessity..."
Implied: We're justified in torturing any suspect to determine if they are *ruthless terrorists*.

"...terrorists do not follow the rules of engagement or the rules of the Geneva Convention..."
Implied: We need to be ruthless and ignore civilized rules...after all these are not ordinary times.

I can remember reading "What We’ve Lost" and I felt certain that if people would only read it, they'd have to become enlightened. How could I be so dense?

 
At December 15, 2006 11:05 PM, Blogger Cheryl said...

When is it ever "ordinary times"? A while back, I sent a letter to the three of them, I forget which issue it was. I asked them if they were Americans first or Republicans first. Looks like one of them ansered my question.

I'm still hoping for enough people to come to their senses and vote these traitors out.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home