Double Standard

All this talk of torture and Defense Department attempts to omit some inconvenient Geneva Convention provisions from an upcoming Army manual got me thinking about sisters: yours and mine.

I think other people's female siblings are great, especially if they're single and smart and funny and attractive. I do not, however, appreciate these qualities in my younger sister, to whom I've often touted the benefits of a Sinead O'Connor haircut and a life of service to the Lord.

Alas, she has never heeded the advice of her sage brother, instead insisting on the foolish pursuit of men. This poses a problem for me, because I know what men are like. Her boyfriend could be a high school chemistry teacher dedicated to shaping young minds, or a philanthropic heir dedicated to eradicating cancer, and it wouldn't change the fact that he is simply not worthy of getting naked with my sis. Of course, I hope you don't maintain the same stance in regards to your sister(s).

My double standard extends to how our siblings should live their lives. Your sister should be somewhat left of Jenna Jameson. My sister should be somewhat right of Mother Teresa. Your sister should have a Jacuzzi tub built for two. My sister should share a bathroom with two other convent residents.

I am quite comfortable with my hypocrisy; it's a trait I share with our Vice President. Here is a guy who so feared combat that he orchestrated five Vietnam draft deferments, yet today is quite cavalier with the standards by which enemy combatants are handled.

According to the LA Times, the most recent debate centers on the omission of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention from the upcoming Army Field Manual on interrogation. "That provision -- known as a "common" article because it is part of each of the four Geneva pacts approved in 1949 -- bans torture and cruel treatment. Unlike other Geneva provisions, Article 3 covers all detainees -- whether they are held as unlawful combatants or traditional prisoners of war. The protections for detainees in Article 3 go beyond the McCain amendment by specifically prohibiting humiliation, treatment that falls short of cruelty or torture."

"The move to restore U.S. adherence to Article 3 was opposed by officials from Vice President Dick Cheney's office and by the Pentagon's intelligence arm, government sources said. David S. Addington, Cheney's chief of staff, and Stephen A. Cambone, Defense undersecretary for intelligence, said it would restrict the United States' ability to question detainees."

It's not that I lack the desire to make like Jack Bauer and electrocute every captured terrorist with the exposed wires of a hotel lamp. I do. But my hesitance to abandon any provisions of the Geneva Convention is rooted in purely selfish logic; I would not have wanted to endure such things if the bad guys had ever captured me.

Not that I ever saw the enemy during my three years in the Army, which fell between the Gulf War and President Bush II's sashay into Iraq. My military career consisted of signing my name 200 times a day as a personnel officer. Despite the ever-present threat of paper cuts, I never found myself in harm's way. And aside from the incident when two large stacks of personnel files fell on top of me, I was never imprisoned against my will. Consequently, I've decided to defer to John McCain on all issues regarding torture. He is a man who knows of what he speaks, having spent one year in a Vietcong prison for each of Cheney's deferments.

If the senior Senator from Arizona thinks Common Article 3 belongs in the soon-to-be-published Army Field Manual on interrogation, then so do I.

Of course, if Mr. McCain had a single and smart and funny and attractive sister in her thirties, I'd probably find a way to avoid asking his opinion on her behavior.