|
||
Open Letter To Feinstein And Schumer
To Senators Dianne Feinstein and Charles Schumer;
When, in the future, you retire from the Senate and sit down to write your memoirs, I predict that this week's vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee in favor of Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey will not rank as one of "the votes I'm proudest of in the Senate" for either of you.
You both knew that voting for Mukasey was the wrong thing to do, and yet you did it anyway for reasons that can only be described as "political expediency." Not exactly a profile in courage for either one of you.
And yet, even now, there is one chance which remains for you both to redeem yourselves. The gauntlet has been thrown at your feet, and you need to boldly take up the challenge. At first it was just your own political cover (or spin) in getting Mukasey to agree that if Congress explicitly passed a law forbidding waterboarding that he would have no choice to uphold this law -- or resign, if told not to by the White House.
Senator Kennedy rightly derided this justification of your vote to confirm Mukasey as lowering the bar of acceptance for the highest law enforcement officer in the land to merely agreeing to follow the law -- which should be a prerequisite for the job. He's right.
So now you must do the only thing left to restore any shred of moral authority to the Judiciary Committee and to yourselves. You must immediately vote on Senator Kennedy's bill (S.1943) to, once and for all, define in crystal-clear terms the fact that waterboarding is torture and is illegal.
As recent as a decade ago, it would simply have been inconceivable that we were even discussing (let alone debating the merits of) whether the United States of America should torture people. Sadly, we are where we are now. We are not only discussing whether torture should be used in our name, it is actually a contentious issue.
This means you need to force every Senator and every Representative in the U.S. Congress to go on record voting whether we should allow the CIA to torture people. And this needs to happen before the Senate votes to confirm Mukasey as Attorney General.
From the text of S.1943:
(a) In General -- No individual in the custody or under the effective control of the United States Government or any agency or instrumentality thereof, regardless of nationality or physical location, shall be subject to any treatment or technique of interrogation not authorized by sections 5-50 through 5-99 of the United States Army Field Manual on Human Intelligence Collector Operations.
(b) Prohibited Actions -- The treatment or techniques of interrogation prohibited under subsection (a) include, but are not limited to, the following:
(1) Forcing an individual to be naked, perform sexual acts, or pose in a sexual manner.
(2) Placing a hood or sack over the head of an individual, or using or placing duct tape over the eyes of an individual.
(3) Applying a beating, electric shock, burns, or other forms of physical pain to an individual.
(4) Subjecting an individual to the procedure known as 'waterboarding'.
(5) Subjecting an individual to threats or attack from a military working dog.
(6) Inducing hypothermia or heat injury in an individual.
(7) Conducting a mock execution of an individual.
(8) Depriving an individual of necessary food, water, or medical care.
Some will call this law unnecessary. Some will call it a wasted effort, since President Bush can veto it or attach a signing statement to it. Some will argue that passing such a law will justify previous illegal torture performed by United States government personnel. And some (led by the White House) will fear-monger to anyone who will listen that "this will tie our hands in the war on terror."
None of these objections should be heeded. Because for every rationalization for not passing such a law, there is an overwhelming answer for why you need to pass such a law: because it is the only way to force this administration not to torture people. And America should never condone torture. Ever.
President Bush has proven time and time again that he will do exactly as he pleases unless Congress specifically prohibits him from doing so. Mukasey is now on record that if you pass such a law, he will enforce it. So there is just no excuse left for not doing so.
What's more, I know that both of you agree with me. How do I know this? Because both of you were among the first Senators to sign on to Kennedy's bill as co-sponsors Was this more political expediency, or do you truly believe in this bill? If you do believe in it, then it offers the two of you an avenue of redemption for the shame of approving Mukasey in committee. But the only way you will be able to redeem yourselves in the eyes of the public is to not just support this bill but actively champion it, every chance you get. You need to publicly come out for holding up Mukasey's confirmation on the floor of the Senate until this bill is on President Bush's desk.
Anything short of playing hardball on this issue will mean that you signed on to Kennedy's bill as political cover for your embarrassing votes in committee. You have this one chance left to convince the American public that confirming Mukasey is not the same as accepting torture. Confirm him only after you have explicitly defined "torture" for the President of the United States -- since he seems to have such a problem with publicly defining the word.
Senators, the country is waiting for your leadership on S.1943. Don't let us down. Because it's the only way you'll ever remember this time fondly when you sit down to write those memoirs. It's the only way you'll ever be able to tell yourself: "I did the right thing."
[If for some reason the links don't work, go to thomas.loc.gov and search for bill number S.1943 to see Kennedy's bill.]
Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Shame on both DiFi and Schumer. Nothing like setting a high bar with such an important position as AG..ie, the "this is the best (or only) nominee we are going to get" mentality.
Having said that, I think it's a moot point, to some extent.The debate on water-boarding and other torture as a means of getting relevant information is a clever distraction.."look over here, while over there"..we don't need S.1943. No, over there we have black-sites and rendition. PBS' Frontline World this week documented this practice; In July Bush signed an executive order approving the continuation of these practices in black-sites on foreign soil in places like Poland and Egypt, where much worse than water-boarding takes place. (after declaring the black-sites closed, stopping rendition to them)
Why should they or anyone else in the government care about Kennedy's legislation or whether Mukasey considers water-boarding torture?
Why should they care about what citizens think of this practice? Legislation or not, they can just always "disappear" terrorist suspects to one of those black-sites and do whatever they want.
Hopefully, CIA agents now on trial "in absentia" in Italy, will shine a bright light on these dark secrets and start the ball rolling on making BushCo accountable for the crimes they have committed. If our own Congress won't put impeachment back on the table (thanks, Speaker Pelosi) perhaps this trial will ultimately lead to the World Court finding them guilty of committing war crimes under the Geneva Conventions. Technically, the trial would not be an impeachment, but certainly Bush/Cheney would be impeached if found guilty of war crimes by the Hague.
Extraordinary Rendition
PBS Frontline World 11/6/07
The Black Sites
New Yorker/ August 2007
And, people wonder why "they" hate us? I wonder how can they NOT hate us for atrocities such as these?
"President Bush has proven time and time again that he will do exactly as he pleases unless Congress specifically prohibits him from doing so."
How are you so sure that Congress can prevent him from doing what he wants ??
Oh, but they will let us down.
Besides, what's the point? They're really just rearranging deck chairs with this anyway.
Waterboarding is already illegal. Torture is already illegal.
They can pass a zillion laws saying it over and over again.
But until they're willing to enforce a single one of them, what good does it do?
Want to stop torture? Impeach.
It's their duty. And they're failing at it. Miserably.
Et tu Brute?!?
Agape.
Chris, sometimes your posts are painful to read. The right thing? I guess you never give up. I have. These people are only slightly better than the Republicans and I have NOTHING good to say about the GOP. They are not listening. The Congress is indifferent to what the people want, and yet, it's all they ever seem to talk about. Our choices are "GOP", "GOP Lite", and "No chance of winning because the other two make the rules". Their partisan differences seem like nothing more than a charade, but I suppose that makes for good cable TV.
Mukasey - the second Jewish A-G in US history
Schumer - AIPAC stooge
Feinstein - AIPAC stooge
Is there a connect-the-dots interaction or is it just my AIPAC paranoia?
While the evidence is clear that torture not only is an ineffective intelligence collection method, but is actually counterproductive, the question remains: why are supposedly intelligent people who understand that torture is ineffective, still using and promoting the use of torture?
One little-explored aspect of torture is the degree to which it is invariably associated with the sexual gratification of its perpetrators.
The sexual component clearly depicted in the Abu Ghraib photographs is often decried, for example, but has yet to be the subject of any rigorous analysis.
It may be distasteful that sexual gratification for torturers -- including the vicarious pleasures for those in the torture chain of command -- may be an important incentive for those in the torture business. Nevertheless, the constancy of sexual associations with torture is a phenomenon too persistent to be ignored.
The possibility that such behavior may also be associated with some underlying psychiatric disorder might also be explored.
Having trouble figuring out which majority in California Feinstein imagines or pretends she is representing. I guess the answer is- her own household, at least as far as her voting record indicates. Disgusting.
" Can we recall this woman already?"- Here here!
Thanks for a(nother) great post Chris.
feinstein is the next liebermen
"Senators, the country is waiting for your leadership on S.1943. Don't let us down. Because it's the only way you'll ever remember this time fondly when you sit down to write those memoirs. It's the only way you'll ever be able to tell yourself: "I did the right thing.""
Failure to enforce the existing laws against torture and masking the crimes of the Bush Administration with redundant new anti-torture legislation is the way out for the scoundrels and cowards of both Congressional parties, Kennedy included.
It is sad to come to terms with the fact that Kucinich is far more deserving candidate for the JFK Profiles In Courage Award than the man who has carried on the Kennedy legacy. I have deeply admired Ted Kennedy struggles for this nation and himself. Now, with this escape hatch he has designed for Bush & Friends, I feel Senator Ted has the blood of the Constitution__that he swore for decades to uphold__on his own hands.
If Kennedy won't defend the Republic, we are truely lost.
Chris, I appreciate that you are so optimistic. However, reality does not suggest that your recommendation will be taken seriously. The democrats have lost my support, especially since they capitulated to take the dare of boehner and not even debate whether darth vader should be impeached. This is a sad sad time in our history. I am horrified. TZR
Lets list the high crimes of Dianne Feinstein:
10/1/2001 - Voted for Patriot Act
10/11/2002 - Voted to go to war in Iraq ("Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002,")
10/19/2007 - Voted for Intelligence Committee's FISA bill granting immunity to telephone companies
11/5/2007 - Votes to confirm Mukasey as Attorney General
12/19/2007 - Original Democratic cosponsor of a bill to extend the USA PATRIOT Act.
5/25/2007 - Voted for an Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill which continued to fund the Iraq occupation without firm timetables for withdrawal.("Senate Approves FY’07 Supplemental Appropriations Bill")
6/27/2006 - Main Democratic sponsor of the failed 2006 constitutional Flag Desecration Amendment
8/3/2007 - Voted with Republicans to modify the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by narrowing the scope of its protections to sharply alter the legal limits on the government's ability to monitor phone calls and email messages of American citizens.
-------------------------------
Between 2001 and 2006, Diane Feinstein served as the ranking member of the United States Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, also known as the "MILCON" subcommittee. Feinstein also served as chair of the MILCON subcommittee when the Democrats controlled the Senate in 2001 and 2002.
While on the MILCON subcommitte, Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions of dollars to firms owned by her husband, Richard C. Blum. This included millions of dollars in contracts awarded to Blum's Perini Corporation to provide goods and services in Iraq and Afghanistan.
---------------------
Can we recall this woman already?
I don't think the country is waiting for leadership from either Schumer or Feinstein, nor is redemption in the cards for either of them. They have their own agendas and the interests of the people of the U.S. are not relevant. After all, how could we possibly know what is best for us and for our country, when the powers that be have already decided?
They have made their beds. Now let them wallow.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
