Search

Yesterday, the House approved legislation that gives our government the authority it needs to interrogate and prosecute terrorism detainees.

From the Associated (with Terrorists) Press

The legislation would establish a military court system to prosecute terror suspects, a response to the Supreme Court ruling in June that Congress’ blessing was necessary. While the bill would grant defendants more legal rights than they had under the administration’s old system, it nevertheless would eliminate rights usually granted in civilian and military courts.

The measure also provides extensive definitions of war crimes such as torture, rape and biological experiments — but gives Bush broad authority to decide which other techniques U.S. interrogators can legally use. The provisions are intended to protect
CIA interrogators from being prosecuted for war crimes.

This is a good thing. Because, let’s face it, we need to be interrogating and prosecuting captured terrorists.

Democrats are — predictably — pissing in their Cheerios over this bill because they see it as a victory for President Bush. And — if nothing else — the Democrats hate Bush victories, even if they’re for the sake of the safety of our nation.

House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Illinois) on the Democrats voting against this bill:

So the same terrorists who plan to harm innocent Americans and their freedom worldwide would be coddled, if we followed the Democrat plan.

Of course, the only thing that Democrats hate more than a Bush victory is to have their patriotism or desire to defeat terrorism questioned. So in response, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said:

Democrats feared the House-passed measure could endanger U.S. soldiers by encouraging other countries to limit the rights of captured American troops.

Riiiiiggghhtt.

How much more could our enemy possibly “limit” the rights of PFC. Kristian Menchaca and PFC. Thomas Tucker? In case you need a reminder, go watch the video for yourself. I don’t need to see the video to remember. I was at PFC Menchaca’s funeral, and I saw his mother, his young wife, and his brother wailing at his grave.

Right now, our Soldiers only rights when they are captured by our enemies are the right to be barbarically tortured, have their heads cut off, have their bodies dragged behind trucks through town while happy Muslims spit on their bodies and encourage their children to throw rocks at the mutilated bodies.

What Ms. Pelosi and her Democrat buddies just don’t understand is that there is nothing we can do to make our enemies treat our captured Soldiers any better. And they’ve already explored the pits of human depravity in how savagely they’ll be killed.

12 Responses to “House Approves Bill on Terror Detainees”

You were fortunate to serve in the US Army when it had the reputation of treating prisoners well. When our enemy feels that surrender is tantamount to torture or death the result will be increased American casualties.

If the terrorists hate us for our freedoms isn’t simply capitulation to give these freedoms up? In other instances you want to express your defiance against the terrorists by, say, staging an opera. I would suggest that the rights of habeas corpus are far more vital to who we are as a people than our right to see ‘controversial’ theater.

As I said in my previous post, they hate us because we are not them. I don’t believe for one minute that any humanity we would show to them means a darn thing. They believe they have a right to murder our children. I can’t remember where I read it, but their clerics have blessed the murder of millions of American children..they even have a specific number allocated. They’re sick people and you can’t appease or negotiate with sick people. Believe me if the life of one of my children was at stake because of these fanatics, I wouldn’t hesitate to do whatever it took to stop them.

From a historical perspective, I would expect the military feels as though they have one hand tied behind their backs compared to the military our forefathers knew.

From a historical perspective, I would expect the military feels as though they have one hand tied behind their backs compared to the military our forefathers knew.

If you can find me a quote from George Washington or Abraham Lincoln advocating torture I might reconsider my opinion that this bill will long be viewed as a stain on our national character.

I don’t believe for one minute that any humanity we would show to them means a darn thing.
You don’t think that the Nazi’s were bad? That the Viet Cong didn’t torture? Somehow we were able to fight previous wars without sacrificing our principles.

We don’t torture because A. that’s not who we are and B. it makes the job of our soldiers more difficult.

This bill is a concession of defeat in Iraq- we will never defeat the terrorists there if we are torturing Iraqis.

Preston — where you and almost all Liberals are wrong is that the techniques used by our interrorgators are not torture.

Just because you don’t like the thought of water boarding, sleep deprivation, shirt grabbbing, and loud Red Hot Chili Peppers music, doesn’t make it torture.

Bottom line is that our military does not use torture on detainees. Not now, and not in the future with the passage of this bill.

Just because you repeatedly echo the lie that we commit torture does not make it true. It remains what it is: a lie.

I’m not going to spend time looking for a quote from Lincoln or Washington. You know very well that Robbie is right. Speaking of torture, here’s a little bit of looking at the future of torture our soldiers or we might endure….
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060928/D8KDUES80.html

Unless of course you don’t consider being subjected to a nuclear bomb or biological weapon torture….

Robbie- if Americans were held under water made to believe that they were going to drown, would you consider that torture?

Dianne- The NIE report makes it clear that our methods in Iraq are increasing the threat of terrorism.

I have said before and believe today that we should get out of Iraq. I fear for the Kurds and people who will inevitably be killed, but I believe that we cannot instill our form of democracy in a country that bases its politics and practically everything else on Islam. I think many of them are fanatics..and the so-called moderate ones don’t speak out against terrorism..

Maybe I’d change my mind if I was actually there but from the only perspective I have, I say let them duke it out and live with the consequences.

Examples of Muslim democracies

I think the problem is as much related to the way that ‘democracy’ was brought to Iraq and the oil wealth that seemingly has the inevitible effect of undermining democracy.

Incidentally, Dianne, I’m in the same position. Though I did not support the invasion I until recently felt that the best chance of a stable Iraq was for the US to stay. This seems not to be the case so I would advocate a scheduled redeployment of American troops.

One question I have for you is if your reconsideration of this foreign policy decision has effected your opinion of the foreign policy strategies of this administration in general. Keep in mind that global terrorist attacks have increased from about 1000 a year from the years 1990 to 2000 up to 4000 a year in 2005.

Robbie- if Americans were held under water made to believe that they were going to drown, would you consider that torture?

Yes, I think waterboarding is an acceptable (and one of the very most effective) forms of interrogation. Just as long as you don’t actually go ahead and drown the detainee (or worse) once you have extracted any/all information.

Which is exactly where/how we maintain our moral high ground. We won’t actually kill or harm the detainee. Our Islamofascist counterparts? We all know the answer to that question.

Well, I’ll answer my own question. From Senator Clinton’s speech today:

During the Revolutionary War, between the signing of the Declaration of Independence, which set our founding ideals to paper, and the writing of our Constitution, which fortified those ideals under the rule of law, our values – our beliefs as Americans – were already being tested.

We were at war and victory was hardly assured, in fact the situation was closer to the opposite. New York City and Long Island had been captured. General George Washington and the Continental Army retreated across New Jersey to Pennsylvania, suffering tremendous casualties and a body blow to the cause of American Independence.

It was at this time, among these soldiers at this moment of defeat and despair, that Thomas Paine would write, “These are the times that try men’s souls.” Soon afterward, Washington lead his soldiers across the Delaware River and onto victory in the Battle of Trenton. There he captured nearly 1000 foreign mercenaries and he faced a crucial choice.

How would General Washington treat these prisoners? The British had already committed atrocities against Americans, including torture. As David Hackett Fischer describes in his Pulitzer Prize winning book, Washington’s Crossing, thousands of American prisoners of war were “treated with extreme cruelty by British captors.” There are accounts of injured soldiers who surrendered being murdered instead of quartered, countless Americans dying in prison hulks in New York harbor, starvation and other acts of inhumanity perpetrated against Americans confined to churches in New York City.

You can imagine, the light of our ideals shone dimly in those early dark days, years from an end to the conflict, years before our improbable triumph and the birth of our democracy. General Washington was not that far from where the Continental Congress had met and signed the Declaration of Independence. But it is easy to imagine how far that must have seemed. General Washington announced a decision unique in human history, sending the following order for handling prisoners:

Treat them with humanity, and Let them have no reason to Complain of our Copying the brutal example of the British army in their Treatment of our unfortunate brethren.

Therefore, George Washington, our commander-in-chief before he was our President, laid down the indelible marker of our nation’s values even as we were struggling as a nation – and his courageous act reminds us that America was born out of faith in certain basic principles. In fact, it is these principles that made and still make our country exceptional and allow us to serve as an example. We are not bound together as a nation by bloodlines. We are not bound by ancient history; our nation is a new nation. Above all, we are bound by our values.

Now these values – George Washington’s values, the values of our founding – are at stake. We are debating far-reaching legislation that would fundamentally alter our nation’s conduct in the world and the rights of Americans here at home. And we are debating it too hastily in a debate too steeped in electoral politics

Before George Washington crossed the Delaware, before he could achieve that long-needed victory, before the tide would turn, before he ordered that prisoners be treated humanely, he ordered that his soldiers read Thomas Paine’s writing. He ordered that they read about the ideals for which they would fight, the principles at stake, the importance of this American project.

Now we find ourselves at a moment when we feel threatened, when the world seems to have grown more dangerous, when our nation needs to ready itself for a long and difficult struggle against a new and dangerous enemy that means us great harm.

Just as Washington faced a hard choice, so do we. It’s up to us to decide how we wage this struggle and not up to the fear fostered by terrorists. We decide.

This is a moment where we need to remind ourselves of the confidence and bravery of George Washington. We cannot, we must not, subvert our ideals – we can and must use them to win.

Preston - In answer to your question of how I feel about this administration’s foreign policy in general ….

I am disgusted with much of the rest of the world. As you know, I believe the UN is corrupt. It is very difficult for me to keep my cool when I see things like Imadinnerjacket and Chavez spout their hatred of our country and Bush and I hear people there clapping when we are paying 20% of the bill. My inclination is to be isolationist but I know that won’t happen. See how they like it if they don’t have our money or our support for a change…that’s how I feel. Now that I’ve vented..

With regard to Bush, Rice et al, I guess I’m not too happy, but I would be less happy with ass kissers. I think they are both doing a terrible job of keeping us informed of how they are interacting with the ROW. I think if they kept us more informed, they would enjoy more support at home. I think there are areas that they could “give” a little on like global warming efforts to gain some respect from foreign countries (even though it is a matter of intense scientific debate. I don’t know really…I am having a difficult time with your question. I can’t seem to get over my anger.

Got something you want to say?

Quicktags:


Notes:

You have 10 minutes after you submit your comment to edit it. Simply click the E(dit) link above the countdown-counter at the bottom of your comment. You can only edit a comment from the same IP address from where the original comment was submitted.

If your comment does not appear immediately, it has been sent to the moderation queue for approval.

Your comment either contained more than 2 hyperlinks, or it used a word(s) that are on my Spam blacklist. Comments awaiting moderation will usually be approved within a day.

And, being that it's my blog and all...I reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.