Torture/detainee bill: Dems waving it through

For all the brave words from the lefty sphere (the spasm of which seems to have abated), HR 3901 seems to be making its way to the Senate exit without being greatly impeded.

According to this piece (from 1837 ET today),

Democrats do not seem inclined to go all-out to block passage of the detainee bill, but they are negotiating with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist on offering amendments to the bill.

That's typical of what I've read of the mood in the Senate on the bill.

And from the horse's mouth:

"We can't stop a vote on it this week," said Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid Tuesday. He said a Senate vote to curtail debate on the detainee bill would take place Wednesday morning and he added, "we can't stop that."

Durbin is quoted as opposed to the retrospective immunity provision in the compromise bill, but

Asked there were enough votes to stop the bill by means of a filibuster, Durbin said he had not done a whip count of Democratic senators.

Which you might be surprised to hear - given that Durbin's job is Minority Whip!

The latest legislative mechanics are that the meeting of Specter's Judiciary boys yesterday produced a text with its own amendment(s) - a PDF of the bill in the form they discussed (ie without Judiciary amendments) is available here.

Frist meanwhile has taken steps to tack (a version of) S 3901 onto the Mexican fence bill HR 6061.

I can't pretend to understand the precise mechanics of the shenanigan, but, in the Congressional Record dealing with the slew of amendments which were evidently spurious, but presumably a necessary part of the shenanigan, Uncle Harry was not quoted as fuming with outrage.

Quite the opposite.

I'd like to say that I'd leave open the possibility that this is all part of a cunning plan by the Dem honchos to lull the Video Doctor into a false sense of security before they unleash their secret weapon.

But I don't think I can.

Tags: geneva convention, Guantanamo, Harry Reid, HR 6054, HR 6061, Iraq, Military Commissions Act, S 3901, Secure Fence Act, Senate 2006, Unlawful Combatants (all tags)

Comments

4 Comments

Re: Torture/detainee bill: Dems waving it through

This is shaping up to be another instance where the Democratic Party is seeking to portray itself as the junior varsity GOP team.

by Sitkah 2006-09-26 07:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Torture/detainee bill: Dems waving it through

No one around here seems to care that Bush is about to get the legal authority to declare anyone, including us, enemies of the state and torture them -- and especially, as you have been pointing out, that DCDemocrats are stepping out of the way. Sad indeed.

by Sitkah 2006-09-26 09:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Torture/detainee bill: Dems waving it through

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/torture/255 46res20060511.html#ustries

U.S. TRIES TO HIDE KIDNAPPING AND TORTURE PRACTICES BEHIND "STATE SECRETS" LEGAL PRIVILEGE
On Friday, May 12, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia will hear testimony in the historic lawsuit El-Masri v. Tenet, in which Khaled El-Masri, an innocent German citizen victimized by the CIA's policy of "extraordinary rendition," challenges his abduction, detention and interrogation in a secret overseas prison at the hands of CIA operatives. The ACLU represents Mr. El-Masri.

El-Masri, a 42-year-old German citizen and father of five young children, was mistaken for another person and forcibly abducted while on holiday in Macedonia. He was detained incommunicado, beaten, drugged, and transported to a secret CIA prison in Afghanistan, where he was subjected to inhumane conditions and coercive interrogation. El-Masri was forbidden from contacting a lawyer or his family. After several months of confinement in squalid conditions, he was abandoned on a hill in Albania with no explanation, never having been charged with a crime.

 I had the privilege of hearing a first-hand account of a man whose parents survived the Holocaust. He said bullying started first with forcing Jews to clean the streets with a toothbrush, and when it wasn't "clean enough," they stripped and beat them. Another relevant thing he mentioned is how all the Jews were given arm bands with the Star of David on them to identify them as Jews. They had to work for free from 7 till 7, and there was a curfew (punishable by death) for Jews after 7:00 P.M. His father learned they were killing Jews by following the Nazis from a safe distance, what a horror that must have been. Seeing his people stripped, shot, and put in a hole.

These fundamentalist christians (in GOP + Bush) would side with pilot and torture Jesus now, literally. Democrats would just "deny him" how ever many times they haven't tried to stop torture bills. I'm not christian, but those who've claimed to be so publicly and condone these atrocities towards the human race should have that thrown in their face.

(Matthew 26:48): Now he that betrayer him gave them a sigh, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he: hold him fast.

(Matthew 26:51-52): And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.

"First They Came for the Jews"

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Pastor Martin Niemöller  

WASN'T JESUS A JEW? See what I mean?

Short Excerpts from: "Religion on the Frontier" by Bernard A Weisberger

The great revival in the West, or the Kentucky Revival of 1800, as it was sometimes called, was a landmark in American History... Which way would the West go?... No group asked this question more anxiously than eastern clergymen. For, in 1800, they saw that their particular pattern was being abandoned on the frontier....McGready began to preach to these congregations, and he did not deal with such recondite matters as the doctrines contained in Matthew...Instead he would "so describe Heaven" that his listeners would "see its glories and long to be there." Then he went on to "array hell and its horrors" so that the wicked would "tremble and quake, imagining a lake of fire and brimstone yawning to overwhelm them."

Evangelical fundamentalist christians must not be too afraid of eternal damnation to warrant and instigate this. Puritans didn't always believe it was "once saved, always saved." However, one true originator of their faith was
McGready. One true originator was NOT Jesus, since they don't follow his teachings. They only tell people they have "faith" to get votes. They need to be stripped of their false religious cover for this. No matter what they do, they will.The good people whose fight this is and who've had their faith hijacked, are going to reveal every lie they've told. Best of all, they don't do it like I'm trying to, they'll do & are doing it with class.

by Rabbit 2006-09-27 02:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Torture/detainee bill: Dems waving it through

Torture Victim Had No Terror Link, Canada Told U.S.

SCOTT SHANE / NY Times | September 26 2006

When the United States sent Maher Arar to Syria, where he was tortured for months, the deportation order stated unequivocally that Mr. Arar, a Canadian software engineer, was a member of Al Qaeda. But a few days earlier, Canadian investigators had told the F.B.I. that they had not been able to link him to the terrorist group.

ASSOCIATED PRESS:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14656812/
    "In the eight months ending last May, Justice attorneys declined to prosecute more than nine out of every 10 terrorism cases sent to them by the FBI, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal agencies. Nearly 4 in 10 of the rejected cases were scrapped because prosecutors found weak or insufficient evidence, no evidence of criminal intent or no evident federal crime."

(Condemn- To state that something or somebody is in some way wrong or unacceptable)

by Rabbit 2006-09-27 03:00AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------