Democrats pull provision on penalizing U.S. personnel that Torture

Congress approved an intelligence agency bill in late February after Democratic leaders hastily removed a provision that would have imposed prison sentences for personnel using “cruel, inhuman and degrading” interrogation techniques.

The provision would have subjected intelligence officers to up 15 years in prison for interrogations that violate existing anti-torture laws, including the use of extreme temperatures, acts causing sexual humiliation or depriving a prisoner of food, sleep or medical care.

Republicans strongly protested the measure when the bill came to the floor Thursday, forcing Democrats to pull the bill in order to avoid an unwanted debate on torture that could threaten passage of the legislation.

Robert L. Hanafin, Major, U.S. Air Force-Retired, VT NewsDemocrats pull provision on penalizing U.S. personnel for interrogation methods

The bill sets policy and classified funding levels for 16 federal intelligence agencies. The Senate passed its own version, and differences must be worked out.

The torture provision

Introduced by Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), defined cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of detainees and provided a penalty of up to 15 years in prison for using such techniques during an interrogation. It also said medical professionals who enable the use of improper treatment could face up to five years in prison.

President Obama last year extended the Army field manual’s guidelines on interrogation tactics and his amendment was intended to expand on the president’s order “to clearly define what constitutes a cruel, inhuman or degrading interrogation so that it is unmistakable what kinds of techniques are unacceptable.” But Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, the top Republican on the intelligence committee, countered that the “annual intelligence bill should be about protecting and defending our nation, not targeting those we ask to do that deed and giving greater protections to terrorists.”

House congressional intelligence committee chairman Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas) said that Republicans want “to take away our use of the criminal justice system to go after terrorists.”

Congressional Candidates for 2010 intend making Torture an Issue to challenge Incumbent Republicans and Democrats

Marcy Winograd who is running against establishment Democrat incumbent Jane Harman in California’s 36th District has this to say about Democrats and Torture. “Earlier this week, Reuters reported Jane Harman was briefed on the Bush administration’s torture program as far back as 2004. Yet, in typical [Democrat incumbent] fashion, her response to Bush and Cheney was compliance.   They told her it was a legal program and she took it at face value.”

How many other Democratic Party incumbents beside Jane Harman and Nancy Pelosi have been compliant in Torture?

Winograd went onto say that, “Anyone who knows anything about water boarding can  tell you it is torture and violates our signed treaties. You don’t need to be a sitting member of Congress to make that determination.
It is time to replace Jane Harman [and any other Republican or Democratic Party incumbent] with someone who isn’t willing to trade away or neglect human rights. The fact that torture occurred at all tarnishes our country’s reputation  Not only that, but the use of torture jeopardizes the safety of our troops, who in turn may be tortured. That a Democratic congress sat on its heels and failed to stop torture is an outrage.”

“Our elected leaders have an obligation to stand up for human rights, ” California Candidate Winograd said, “not just when it’s easy – but when it’s unpopular.  In the fever of war, that’s exactly when human rights matter most. Congresswoman Jane Harman [and other Democratic encumbents] has supported war profiteers and personally benefited from their profits. I would simply vote against perpetual war and for prosecution of anyone, even CIA officials, who violated our laws.”

Robert L. Hanafin

Readers are more than welcome to use the articles I’ve posted on Veterans Today, I’ve had to take a break from VT as Veterans Issues and Peace Activism Editor and staff writer due to personal medical reasons in our military family that take away too much time needed to properly express future stories or respond to readers in a timely manner.

My association with VT since its founding in 2004 has been a very rewarding experience for me.

Retired from both the Air Force and Civil Service. Went in the regular Army at 17 during Vietnam (1968), stayed in the Army Reserve to complete my eight year commitment in 1976. Served in Air Defense Artillery, and a Mechanized Infantry Division (4MID) at Fort Carson, Co. Used the GI Bill to go to college, worked full time at the VA, and non-scholarship Air Force 2-Year ROTC program for prior service military. Commissioned in the Air Force in 1977. Served as a Military Intelligence Officer from 1977 to 1994. Upon retirement I entered retail drugstore management training with Safeway Drugs Stores in California. Retail Sales Management was not my cup of tea, so I applied my former U.S. Civil Service status with the VA to get my foot in the door at the Justice Department, and later Department of the Navy retiring with disability from the Civil Service in 2000.

I’ve been with Veterans Today since the site originated. I’m now on the Editorial Board. I was also on the Editorial Board of Our Troops News Ladder another progressive leaning Veterans and Military Family news clearing house.

I remain married for over 45 years. I am both a Vietnam Era and Gulf War Veteran. I served on Okinawa and Fort Carson, Colorado during Vietnam and in the Office of the Air Force Inspector General at Norton AFB, CA during Desert Storm. I retired from the Air Force in 1994 having worked on the Air Staff and Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon.