I'm confused about this torture thing

[wtmusic]

Geneva Conventions, Article 17:

"No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind."

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm

“We got what we wanted, and that is the preservation of the Geneva Conventions,” McCain, an Arizona Republican, said on NBC’s “Today” show.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14950788/from/RS.1

For example, both sides appear to believe that the agreement permits the CIA to continue to use sleep deprivation, cold rooms, and other such techniques. On the other hand, the status of the most notorious of those techniques, waterboarding, is not quite clear. When a reporter asked Hadley whether waterboarding constituted a grave breach under the new agreement, he answered, “We are not going to get into discussions of particular techniques.” A few seconds later, he added, “for purposes of complying with our international obligations under international law, that’s something that the president will clarify by executive order.”

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWY0NTJhOGVjMGRkNTBkZGY1NTZkYTg4MGViY2I1ZTE=

Maybe I'm stupid. Or they're stupid. Somebody's stupid. :shrug:

[snappyturtle]

1. What do they say about keeping prisoners imprisoned

indefinitely?

[wtmusic]

2. I can't find the text of the agreement anywhere

but I'm sure that issue has been resolved to the prisoners' satisfaction :sarcasm:

Personally, I would find cold rooms and sleep deprivation unpleasant, but maybe that kind of thing grows on you. McCain would be in a position to know.

[snappyturtle]

6. "I can't find the text of the agreement anywhere".....

they DO make it difficult, don't they, to bitch about the agreement when we can't even see it!
I'm sorry but I HATE them.

[napi21]

9. The Supreme Court already ruled on that, didn't they?

Isn't that decision what started all these discussions in Congress?

[snappyturtle]

12. I know...didn't they? But, of course the administration

didn't like the SCOTUS's decision.....being that they could be subject to investigation.....so the administration is turning everything inside out and upside down to get what they really want....a way around the SCOTUS decision??!!

[progressisvirtue]

3. its all a ploy

to be able to continue roughly interrogating prisoners to get information... since i oppose the entire war on terror to begin with i certainly dont like this

[Dhalgren]

24. I am only "nit-picking" a little with you, but we have to start being

very clear about what is going on. The Bush fascists are not "roughly interrogating" prisoners, they are torturing prisoners. We have to begin saying things very plainly - torture is torture.

And welcome to DU. :hi:

[progressisvirtue]

30. good point, and thanks

[pat_k]

4. The ONLY purpose of Bush's War Criminals Protection Act. . .

The ONLY purpose of Bush's War Criminals Protection Act is to protect the War Criminals in the Executive Branch from the punishment that their actions demand in any civilized society.

Any claim to any other purpose doesn't pass the smell test.

Every provision mades sense when viewed through the lens of their contemptable goal.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2190505">War Crimes Protection Act -- "opposition" IGNORES most destructive part

The bill itself is evidence of consciousness of guilt and malice aforethought. As they look for cover in their fascist fantasies, their words and actions make it crystal clear that they do not expect those fantasies to hold. In his memo, Alberto Mora (outgoing general counsel of the United States Navy) provides an excellent factual summary of the timeline and players in the Bush regime's War Crimes. Over and over their actions demonstrate a conspiracy to knowingly commit, and escape consequences of, their crimes. (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=503566&mesg_id=503566">summary of memo).

[grizmaster]

13. I agree 100%

the sole purpose is to keep the bush junta off the gallows they so richly deserve

[valerief]

16. Absotively. n/t

[TahitiNut]

17. Absolutely. Due to the criminal acts of this administration,

... done in our name, we're an outlaw nation - without honor and without integrity. All of us - a nation that claims to be a democracy. Unless and until we prosecute and imprison these war criminals we'll remain an outlaw nation. We get the government we deserve - the government we earn. Cowardice is not exoneration and superficial dissent is not innocence. As long as we pay taxes and "go along to get along," we're all complicit.

[pat_k]

21. Yes. We must put an end to their appeasement of fascists

It all goes back to their insane silence on Impeachment. . .

The ONLY way to fight war criminals is to tell the truth about them.

If the Dems tell the truth, they must Impeach.

They are silenced and trapped in denial and delusion, holding on to the screwed up belief that they have to deny any intention to Impeach. ("We need to focus on a positive agenda")

As long as they continue to say "Don't worry, we have no intention of Impeaching the man," they are silenced on ALL the crimes being committed by the Bush syndicate.

We MUST challenge them! Shame them. They sound like mealy-mounthed morons when they deny and tip toe around impeachment.

It is UTTERLY Mystifying. More of us need to have conversations with these people, or with members of their staffs, to find out what in heavens name they could be thinking.

What "positive agenda" do they think they can accomplish when the White House is occupied by a man that rules by signing statement? Winning the House or Senate is meaningless when the laws passed aren't worth the paper they are printed on. Impeachment IS Our Positive Agenda -- it is the only way we can redemm our national soul.

What are they afraid of? That the right will get riled because the Dems will impeach?

The right already IS riled because they believe the Dems will impeach -- they just think Dems are too weak and hypocritical to admit it (and they are right -- except that unless we push them, most Dems will still be too wimpy to impeach even if they win). If Dems stood up and demanded impeachment right now, they would probably get some of those folks on the right just for showing they have the spine to stand on principle!

Nancy Pelosi sounded like a crazy person last night on the Newshour -- blathering on about "bi-partisan" bullshit, civility. . . could she really have NO concept of the reality they face? It is physically painful to watch them shooting themselves in the head with their lunatic "strategery."

We can break through their rationalizations -- but the walls are thick. Demanding action is critical, but as long as they are allowed to hang onto their baseless rationalizations, our demands will roll off like water off a duck's back.

Face-to-face, back and forth dialog with staffers and members of Congress is absolutely essential if we are to elicit and challenge their screwed up beliefs.

We can, and must, kick some Democratic ass and keep chipping away at the wall of rationalization that is silencing them.

[TahitiNut]

22. As an independent, I find it puzzling.

Partisans on the far right have absolutely no hesitancy to attack any Republican who deviates from the headlong stampede into fascism - and it works. At the same time, partisans on the left continue to tell themselves it'll be OK even as their elected representatives "go along to get along" - despite every indication that the firmly-held ideological values of the base are further from the espoused ideologies of their 'leaders' than those 'leaders' are from the far right. Study after study and poll after poll indicates the most disenfranchised (unrepresented) group to be the liberal left in this country - with establishment politicians virtually indistingusihable from Goldwater/Eisenhower Republicans.

A primary reason I'm an independent is apparently because I'm just not "smart" enough to figure out how to support a politician who doesn't support me and agree with me and still benefit from that. I just can't figure out how to answer the question: "If I abandon my values and principles, then to whom can I complain when my nation abandons me?"

Who represents whom? Is it the job of the people to represent their 'leadership'? Is it the job of the party members to represent their party 'leadership'?




A full seventy percent or more of DUers have dearly-held values and positions that are 'southwest' of Cobb/Nader ... and repeatedly castigate them. (Maybe it's self-hatred? Closer targets? Cannibalism? Eating our own?)

[pat_k]

23. The problem is the massive disconnect between insiders vs. outsiders.

Only a tiny fraction are "insiders." The vast majority of us are "outsiders" -- outsiders ARE the mainstream. We CAN crash the gates.

The labels -- liberal, conservative, progressive, right, left -- have become so loaded they have lost all objective meaning.

We are not even dealing with a divide between left v. right positions on "issues."

We are dealing with fascists v. anti-fascists; insiders v. outsiders; weakness v. strength.

Insiders v. Outsiders

You may be too young to remember, but not very long ago, politics wasn't viewed as the exclusive purview of the "professionals." Countless communities had vital Democratic Clubs and other associations where Americans experienced "politics" first hand. It wasn't always pretty, but people socialized, chose leaders, made decisions, and took civic action.

Over the years, people have been pushed out of their own game. These days, the "professionals" run the show and they are VERY protective of their turf.

For the Al Froms of the world, we are game pieces that they -- the "professionals" -- manipulate. Heaven forbid any of us actually get involved! They may not even know WHY they feel so threatened when folks like Dean or Hackett inspire citizens to act, but their fear has absolutely nothing to do with the candidate's' positions on issues.

Weakness v. Strength

The BIGGEST problem members of the Democratic Party face is the perception that they are weak and unprincipled. We are as pissed off as we are because, instead of fulfilling their Congressional oath, and challenging their wimpy image, by standing up and demanding Impeachment, they are adding salt to the wound by "laying low" or appeasing the fascists by assuring them they have no intention of Impeaching Bush and Cheney.

But the beliefs that underlie their rationalizations have been hammered into them by those around them. Countless actions are unthinkable in their world, for reasons they don't even understand.

Today, it must be about Us -- Not the Party. Not our Leaders.

The bottom line is that the insiders are protecting their turf from us. They live in a world of Republican propaganda. Their fear of "backlash" has little to do with public reaction -- what they really fear is being ostracized from the DC social scene.

The complex system of rationalization and wrong-headed belief has been shaped over many years. Their silence and rationslized for that silence has become intolerable. As long as they remain trapped in some bizzarro world of denial and rationalization, our demands/requests slide off their system of screwed up beliefs like water off a duck's back.

More of us need to try to engage these people in a dialog -- some back and forth in which we can challenge chip away at their denial.We can, and must, insert some reality.

They are just people -- and ordinary people can enter their world as citizen lobbyists. We chipped away as we lobbied them to stand up on January 6th. We chipped away when we lobbied them to filibuster Alito. We can chip away as we lobby them to oppose Bush's War Criminals Protection Act.

When we prompt them to take action that gets them frowned on at Sally Quinn's next event, they may not like it, but we can offset that by rewarding them -- like we rewarded Barbara Boxer for standing up on January 6th with a surge of support, dollars, and respect.

Our immediate goals are clear: Impeach Bush and Cheney and reject the results of suspect elections. Actions large and small will make these goals a reality. As we move forward, we need to remember that, however they fail or anger us, we can't let it just be about them. Ultimately, it is about figuring out how to use our power to see that our will is done.

[TahitiNut]

25. I very much agree ... and regard it as an infection of authoritarianism.

Even the left, particularly on DU, seems to use every issue as merely a MEANS to have a trial and issue a judgment ... messenger-focused instead of message-focused. (We seem to be relegated to the cheap seats in the coliseum and are merely forming an audience for the thumbs-up-or-down decision.) Stated another way, it seems we're obsessed with 'leaders' instead of 'representatives.' We've apparently abandoned our personal responsibilities to interact and participate, instead comfortably occupying a shrinking seat in the grandstands and merely observing. We're not even on the sidelines! (That analogy works for me.) We've been indoctrinated in the mythology of the 'free market' and convinced that some 'natural law' makes our opinion determinative - that the 'producers' must always pay attention to us. Clearly, this is not so. More and more and more, the purveyors ignore the customers. (My telephone company doesn't even have a physical office where I can go and interact face-to-face with one of its representatives. Nor does my cable company.)

So, we complacently accept that shrinking seat and put our energy into yelling, whistling, applauding, or watching from afar (via TV) ... but rarely ever run out onto the field. We whine like children about how the game is being played but don't grow up and take our rightful place in the game itself.

It takes but one thing to kill a democracy - stop participating. We've done that.

We're merely holding on to our foster parents' (this year's set) apron strings and running from one to another - temporarily escaping child abuse, and some of us (reichbots) expressing satisfaction that the other kid's getting spanked, thinking that as long as we cheer it won't be us.

[pat_k]

27. My hope for the future grows when I run across people who "get it"

You may be interested in something I posted early this year on this subject

. . .
We are so conditioned to think in terms of issues that asserting "issues don't matter" undoubtedly sounds like heresy. I'll try to summarize the ideas that lead to this "heresy."

Issues are the name of the game when politics is a spectator sport
A vast majority of Americans -- including many who consider themselves to be involved -- view politics as a spectator sport. Most simply don't have anyone in their social sphere who provides a model for effective citizen action. Local associations have provided such models in the past, but such groups are few and far between these days. For the most part, Americans believe that "people like me just don’t do that" or they believe that voting or volunteering for candidates is the only way they can affect policy

When your only contribution is to pick leaders off a menu, the "ingredients of the dish" are of paramount importance.

When people connect with each other, they effectively represent their common interests
The way people talk about our government exposes the degree to which it is viewed as something "cooked up" by others, rather than something of our own creation. When the public institutions that enable our demands to become reality are so dysfunctional, it can be difficult to see how our power manifests itself -- but that does not mean we do not have power.

Our power to protect our interests is rooted in our connections with each other. If you doubt this, consider the American Legion, which is not exactly an organization that one would apply the label "progressive" to. Despite the "conservative" label, members of American Legion Posts across the nation were instrumental in designing and passing the most progressive legislation we have seen in decades: the GI Bill.

By contrast, consider the AARP, which is made up of lot's of people who got together based on status (being old together). Unlike the American Legion, members of AARP do not meet and connect with each other in local associations. It is basically a top down "strategic" organization in which the members are largely viewed as game pieces. Because member participation is limited, the AARP does things like support Bush's prescription drug horror.

The rewards of changing the "rules of the game" can be far greater than enacting a specific change
Regardless of the participants (elected officials, candidates, analysts, neighbors) most conversations about politics reflect the assumption that citizen participation is limited to electoral politics -- i.e., candidates market themselves and their solutions and we "buy" (help elect) the package we like best. In other words, we are seen consumers of a product we don't help to create.

In a democracy, it almost goes without saying that the chances of making progress toward “a more perfect union” increase with the number and diversity of the people engaged in the process. In other words, the quality of the "products" (solutions to our common problems) are directly related to the number of people involved in thier creation.

As increasing numbers of people transform their relationship to power and expand their participation beyond electoral politics, they create conditions that allow us to do a better job of shaping a responsive government that serves our common interests.

A leader who inspires people to stand up fight for their interests is a more powerful agent of change than a leader who is focused on enacting specific programs or policies. (akin to teaching someone to fish v. giving them a fish)

Attributes that inspire citizens to connect and participate are more important than positions on issues
I knew Howard Dean was "my guy" when, in answer to the standard "How will you get your <whatever> proposal enacted?" he said something like "If I'm elected, it will be because Americans stood up and proved they have the power to take back the country. It will be their efforts that make <whatever> happen"

It was the first time in years I heard a politician assert something that reflected a deeply-held belief that this game is really about us, not them. It was my first indication that when he said "You Have the Power," it was not empty rhetoric. He believed it. Nothing I have heard from him since has contradicted that. His belief in people-power inspired people to believe in themselves and to discover their power through action.

Although it may be impossible to identify the attributes that enable some leaders to wake people up to their own power, we can be sure of one thing: when such leaders emerge and gain support, they will face intense opposition from the beltway "insiders."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2463516&mesg_id=2464945

[Matariki]

5. I challenge any asshole who thinks sleep deprivation

being forced to stand for hours on end, blasted with VERY loud music, and kept naked in a 40 degree room - to spend a week at my house.

We'll have LOTS of fun. I'm sure I can get a signed confession out of said asshole admitting that such treatment counts as torture.

[Dhalgren]

7. No. No one is stupid (in relation to your question).

This is Fascism. This is how it feels, this is how it works. If you try to look at it in any way close to humane, it makes you feel stupid or that someone is. That's how Fascism works...

[OwnedByFerrets]

10. Thank you for saying whats the truth! nt

[Jacobin]

8. The congress of our country just codified the use of Torture

Its no longer just the neo-con cabal.

Our CONGRESS just codified the use of torture.

Yep. It did. And they want campaign contributions, too.

[wtmusic]

11. It still has to be voted on...this is our last chance to take action

My senators' phones will be ringing off the hook. This is...despicable.

[Jacobin]

14. They won't oppose it

because then the junta will call them 'weak' and it might upset them.

They wouldn't know how to respond intelligently to being called names by bullies.

We have fucking WANKERS for congresscritters.

[wtmusic]

15. IMO it's our duty to try anyway

you're probably right. But this is a major crossroads and once we let them cross this line... :grr:

[mmonk]

18. You're not, they are.

[democrat_patriot]

19. Can the SCOTUS still deem this unconstitutional?

Or kill it by other means?

[wtmusic]

20. a longshot

under USC Article IV, which makes all treaties the "law of the land", hence Geneva is law of the land and contravenes this bill anyway. It's 100% legally solid but probably unenforceable.

[Ksec]

26. From what I get Bush gets to choose what is and isnt torture

I read a report last night that said this gives him the authority to say what is or isnt torture. That gives me reason to panic.

[wtmusic]

28. Those executive orders and signing statements come in very handy

for circumventing just about every law on the books. He has crowned himself king.

[Generator]

29. Oh my fucking GOD

How fucking stupid do they have to be????????????? You don't give authority like that to ANYONE. It's all lies, then. Everything since the moment this horror plague came into office has been a lie. Is this a nightmare? It sure seems like a living one.