Why I Am Watching John McCain Carefully On The Topic of Prisoners of Terror
The American public is conflicted on the issue of how to interrogate prisoners from the war on terror. Some feel that any method used to get information to prevent future terrorist attacks should be used; even methods that do not follow the Geneva conventions. Others feel that to not adhere to the Geneva Convention treaty on issues of prisoner treatment and interrogation are wrong and do not square with America's long-held values of freedom, innocent until proven guilty, and historical pro-humanitarian beliefs.
I for one am watching John McCain on this issue and so far he is in conflict with President Bush on the issue of adherence to the Geneva convention. President Bush wants to detail what techniques can be used to interrogate prisoners and to possible craft new methods of interrogation that may be in violation of the convention. Senator John McCain is for adhering to the current Geneva Convention treaty.
The reason that I am watching John McCain closely is that he himself was a prisoner of war during the Viet Nam war. He has first hand knowledge of what it is like to be a prisoner and therefore tremendous credibility in my eyes on this important topic. I am sure that he had been subjected to cruel and inhumane treatment while imprisoned during the war and who better to champion a cause for justice even for those who may not deserve it than one who has suffered the consequences of injustice himself. This is the American cause, justice in our country is for all, not just for those who we deem deserve it.
I have long felt uncomfortable with the issues that have surfaced from Iraqi prisons, the disclosure of CIA covert prisons, the aspect of rendition, and the issue of evidence held from defendants during a military tribunal. We Americans have to be very careful in trading away some of our liberties given to prisoners, as in the future, some of those same liberties may be taken from us as well.
However, extraordinary problems demand extraordinary solutions, but I do not believe that using cruelty and torture to get information is in order. The American Constitution and Bill of Rights are our code of conduct. If we start defining who we treat with these inalienable rights and who is not worthy of them, we become like the ancient Romans who had a code of justice in their empire that was different for Roman Citizens versus for other nationals.
Yes, we need information to prevent attacks, but do we need to torture to get the information? And if we torture to get it, can we really trust the information? Once we get the information, why are we continuing the mistreatment of these prisoners of war on an indefinite basis? We can not perpetually mistreat and degrade a person not matter how problematic their existence in the prisoner system is, that is truly inhumane and truly un-American.
I for one am watching John McCain on this issue and so far he is in conflict with President Bush on the issue of adherence to the Geneva convention. President Bush wants to detail what techniques can be used to interrogate prisoners and to possible craft new methods of interrogation that may be in violation of the convention. Senator John McCain is for adhering to the current Geneva Convention treaty.
The reason that I am watching John McCain closely is that he himself was a prisoner of war during the Viet Nam war. He has first hand knowledge of what it is like to be a prisoner and therefore tremendous credibility in my eyes on this important topic. I am sure that he had been subjected to cruel and inhumane treatment while imprisoned during the war and who better to champion a cause for justice even for those who may not deserve it than one who has suffered the consequences of injustice himself. This is the American cause, justice in our country is for all, not just for those who we deem deserve it.
I have long felt uncomfortable with the issues that have surfaced from Iraqi prisons, the disclosure of CIA covert prisons, the aspect of rendition, and the issue of evidence held from defendants during a military tribunal. We Americans have to be very careful in trading away some of our liberties given to prisoners, as in the future, some of those same liberties may be taken from us as well.
However, extraordinary problems demand extraordinary solutions, but I do not believe that using cruelty and torture to get information is in order. The American Constitution and Bill of Rights are our code of conduct. If we start defining who we treat with these inalienable rights and who is not worthy of them, we become like the ancient Romans who had a code of justice in their empire that was different for Roman Citizens versus for other nationals.
Yes, we need information to prevent attacks, but do we need to torture to get the information? And if we torture to get it, can we really trust the information? Once we get the information, why are we continuing the mistreatment of these prisoners of war on an indefinite basis? We can not perpetually mistreat and degrade a person not matter how problematic their existence in the prisoner system is, that is truly inhumane and truly un-American.
I agree with you that not obeying the Geneva convention is a problem. I cannot condone inhuman treatment of prisoners no matter how henious their crimes and what information they might have. It looks, however, like Bush will get his way and our people will be no better than Saddam's torturers. How can an American even think of inflicting torture and how can the American public condone it. What if that detainee is your son? Given the recent erosion of our citil rights, that person could even be you.
Posted by Anonymous | Sat Sep 23, 07:49:00 PM EDT