Well, the infamous Alberto Gonzales is at it again. The man who considers the Geneva Convention "quaint" now says that his actions "protect freedom":

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060918/...ress_terrorism

In a speech, Gonzales said CIA interrogators lack guidance on how to comply with the international Geneva Conventions, saying the provisions banning "humiliating and degrading treatment" and "outrages upon personal dignity" are too vague.

"Such phrases standing alone mean different things to Americans," he said at a conference on citizenship. "Think of the differences in interpretation that will exist between differing legal systems and cultures of the nations of the world."

(My editorial: If the whole thing is "quaint", why try to clarify it? It couldn't be that Gonzales want use vague wording to condone his own actions- no, it couldn't be that. )

(Later in the Article- Emphases Mine)

"Seeking this clarity is important to our efforts to continue gathering information about our enemies," Gonzales said. "In all that we do in the war on terror, we seek to promote the rule of law and protect freedom."

Trying to end a protest by dissident Senate Republicans, the White House says it's confident it can reach a compromise on proposed rules for interrogating terror suspects.

But neither side is saying how an agreement can be achieved on whether to allow highly controversial methods by the CIA, such as electric shock, forced nakedness and waterboarding, in which a subject is made to think he is drowning. The Bush administration says those techniques have foiled terror plots. Opponents say they verge on torture.

Can anyone seriously question whether such monstrous acts are torture? I don't care how unpopular it is to state this. I will state it anyway: If any other nation were committing actions like this the United States would be condemning it to no end, probably calling it evil. Well, in fighting evil, the United States has come very close to being a part of it. If I were reading about Medieval times, this wouldn't surprise me, but America... in the 21st century? Moreover, if this is the approach this administration takes, what problem did it have with Saddam Hussein? I really don't know what else to write. That America is doing this is horrible and surreal.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

he is right to ask for clarification, it is vague. And it can certainly be clarified while not allowing for torture such as electric shocks. However, some are saying loud music is torture and that is a load of crap. It's because of opinions like that that the convention should be clarified.

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

Loud music isn't torture unless it causes hearing damage. I know too much about Gonzales to believe that he really wants clarification, though. He doesn't support the Geneva Convention in theory or in practice. He's just trying to delay any action that might prevent him from using actual torture methods like making people believe they will drown or forcibly removing their clothing (the latter is known as sexual assault). I'm not opposed to tricky mind games and the basic "hot light treatment". There can't be any gray areas about death threats and sexual torture, though.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

covering the dubya bin lyin gang's butts. dubya, cheney, rummy and the various military/CIA players involved in the waterboarding and other obvious techniques of torture are looking for the congress to give them a free pass from possible war crime trials.

sure, he makes it sound like this is needed for our safety ... wrong. we signed the geneva conventions and article 3 provisions within that document are well understood. there is no need for further clarification. if we would be outraged if you did it to us then you should be rightfully outraged if we do it to you. if you are comfortable doing what you do to the detainees then you should feel comfortable defending those actions. clearly, that is not now possible, hence the need for legal cover.

wake up America!

__________________
i think sex is better than logic, but I can't prove it
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free and good men die like dogs every day.
And there's also a bad side."
-- Hunter S. Thompson

we feel comfortable playing loud music, but are getting flack for it violating Geneva. Nothing is as simple as you make it sound, which is exactly why laws and judges require clarification all the time. Vagueness and law are not compatible.

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

A big problem is Gonzoles and Bush's desire to use secret evidence kept from the defense and to use coerced and hearsay evidence. These are fundamental violation of all international standards of a fair trial.

Then there is the shielding of CIA operatives from prosecuction for violations of law. This is a completely transparent way to protect himself from war crime charges later.

I think that when this country shirks it's responsibility of being a leader in human rights, it is a disgrace. If we allow the CIA to redefine the Genevia convention, what is to keep all countries from having their secret police re-define what the geneva convention means to allow their own torture, electric shocks or other abuse.

The fact that this is even a debate shows what an evil man Bush is and what a COMPLETE JOKE his "morality" and "religious" political platforms are. This man is scum. Terrorists are about the only scum lower.

The trap into which Bush the Lame (actually, it's his handlers) wishes the anti-torture crowd fall is a simple one. By provoking liberal types to propose a series of specific tortures, his hooded goons can then safely apply any atrocity that was not mentioned.

is that they claim this is keeping us free. If this is the only thing keeping us free then we are in dire straights.

__________________
the memories of a man in his old age
are the deeds of a man in his prime

roger waters

They shouldn't have access to secret intel, just like they haven't in the past. Otherwise all an attorney has to do is threaten to use intel in court knowing that the US will have to drop the case because they can't have some information in the public. Additionally, if we catch someone in the battlefield they don't have the right to an attorney. If we put them in prison and threaten them and do everything short of torture (also known as coercion) then they most definitely should be able to use that evidence against others, just as they have in the past. Using your standard many of the people in Nuremberg would get off because the info obtained was coerced.

And you don't have to specifically list what is torture to be more specific than the vagueness in the current provisions where apparently loud music is now "torture."

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

You want to know what TORTURE is? Torture is being trapped at the top of a 110-story building, and the smoke and fire is so horrible you feel you must fly out the window, falling to your death in order to escape.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007