« Previous | Main | Next »

Ex-Cabinet Members Press Bush to Ban Torture

Share

June 25, 2008 1:08 PM

ABC News' Kirit Radia and Jennifer Parker Report: Turning up the volume on the heated debate over the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, a bipartisan group of former cabinet members, military leaders and religious leaders released a signed statement Wednesday calling on President Bush to ban torture.

"Though we come from a variety of backgrounds and walks of life, we agree that the use of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment against prisoners is immoral, unwise, and un-American," a coalition of over 200 high-profile leaders from every administration dating back to the Johnson era said in the statement released Wednesday.

They called on Bush to issue an executive order affirming principles including the rule of law, waterboarding, and end rendition -- a controversial practice where the US sends foreign nationals back to their home countries where they may face torture and interrogation.

"Our President must lead us by our core principles. We must be better than our enemies, and our treatment of prisoners captured in the battle against terrorism must reflect our character and values as Americans," the statement read.

The move comes two weeks after a deeply divided Supreme Court ruled that foreign detainees held for years at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba have the right to appeal to U.S. civilian courts to challenge their indefinite imprisonment without charges -- the third time the court has repudiated him on the detainees.

It was a stinging rebuke to President Bush's anti-terror policies, and Bush has said he strongly disagreed with the decision and suggested he might seek yet another law to keep terror suspects locked up at the prison camp.

"The allegation has been made that these practices have prevented attacks and made the country safer, I think the reality is actually contrary to that," Alberto Mora, former US Navy general counsel, told reporters on a conference call Wednesday, adding the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay has become a rallying point for people fighting US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

General Paul J. Kern (Ret.), the former Commanding General who led internal Army investigation of abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq told reporters the practice of torture ultimately endangers US troops on the front lines.

"[In] the investigations during the last year of my active duty, I could find no evidence that torture produces any answers that are credible and that are useful for the commanders to judge against other materials that they find in their intelligence collection," Kerns said.

Religious and evangelical leaders also signed the statement.

"It's time to say 'not in our name,' its time to ban torture," Rev. John Thomas, president of the United Church of Christ, told reporters.

The statement has been endorsed by 204 public and religious officials from both sides of the aisle, including six former secretaries of State or Defense, four former members of the Joint Chiefs, and included and Organizers hope to launch a grassroots campaign to garner support before presenting the statement to President Bush.

The group is prevented by law from lobbying the presidential candidates for their support because they are incorporated a non-profit organization, but said they would welcome the candidates' unsolicited endorsement.

High profile former administration officials signed onto the statement, including former secretaries of state George Shultz, Madeleine Albright, and Warren Christopher; former secretaries of defense Harold Brown, William Perry and William Cohen; Former Deputy Secretaries of State Richard Armitage; former national security advisors Zbigniew Brzezinski, Anthony Lake, and Samuel R. Berger; former Sens. Charles S. Robb, Chair of the Iraq Intelligence Commission, John Glenn, Sam Nunn, and Gary Hart; and former Gov. Thomas Kean, 9/11 Commission Chair.

White House press secretary Dana Perino told reporters Wednesday the Bush administration already has measures in place making clear torture is unacceptable.

"We feel like we have taken steps to address that issue. And I would also point out that we face a very different enemy today than America has ever faced before," Perino said, adding, "We face an enemy that respects no borders, respects no uniforms, and certainly has no regard for civilians, especially innocent women and children and the elderly."

June 25, 2008 in Vote 2008: Democrats | Permalink | User Comments (27)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

John McCain has been quoted as saying that we would have to reinstate the draft if we became involved in WWIII. He "joked" about bombing Iran to the tune of "Barbara Ann." If A=B and B=C does A=C? This man's mentality is downright frightening.

Posted by: counting crows | Jun 25, 2008 1:18:36 PM

McCain should have signed this letter to WBush, but since he became McSame, the presumptive nominee of the GOP for 2008 elections, he has abandoned his basic principles as POW. McSame rethink you positions, McFlip-Flop.

Posted by: BKMC | Jun 25, 2008 1:27:31 PM

please listen to what john mccain said about the draft i have two young sons 6 and 10 thank god they are still young i live in pa i will do everything in my power and pray to make sure john mccain does not win in nov that man is downright scary

Posted by: angie | Jun 25, 2008 1:35:25 PM

Welcome back to humanity, gentlemen. Better 6 years late than never, right?

Here's my question for this august assemblage of patriots:

Since "[In] the investigations during the last year of my active duty, I could find no evidence that torture produces any answers that are credible and that are useful", why the hell has the US military and CIA been TORTURING CONFESSIONS out of terrorism SUSPECTS?

Ask Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld that simple question for me, would you, gentlemen?

Posted by: neo | Jun 25, 2008 1:49:10 PM

Little late for them to try to put the brakes on this egomaniac now, isn't it? Whey didn't these so-called "do-gooders" speak up a long time ago when this madman, GWB, just started his reign of terror? Just like everyone else affiliated with GWB, no spine to do anything about it. They will follow him to hell and I hope they do.

Posted by: Ron | Jun 25, 2008 2:03:37 PM

How many reserve and national guard troops have been "drafted" to fight in Iraq, a country we invaded illegally? How many of these troops came home in a coffin or so terribly injured they will never be the same. None of these people enlisted to fight an illegal/immoral war.
We invaded and now call Iraq citizens trying to protect their own country, terrorist and lock them up forever.
--military vet's wife

Posted by: Mary | Jun 25, 2008 2:05:58 PM

im voting mccain because i think hillary lost unfairly

LOL

oh wait im not insane

Posted by: bhrandon | Jun 25, 2008 2:20:40 PM

Without collaborators Bush could do nothing. Same like Hitler collaborators carried his sick orders, so people
like Pelosi and many others in this
congress were voting with both hands
for Bush crimes.
And even now they continue to cover his crimes and commiting new ones.

Posted by: Nick | Jun 25, 2008 2:21:34 PM

• Senator McCain's tax cuts would primarily benefit those with very high incomes, almost all of whom would receive large tax cuts that would, on average, raise their aftertax incomes by more than twice the average for all households. Many fewer households at the bottom of the income distribution would get tax cuts, and those whose taxes fall would, on average, see their aftertax income rise much less.

• In marked contrast, Senator Obama offers much larger tax breaks to low- and middle-income taxpayers and would increase taxes on high-income taxpayers. The largest tax cuts, as a share of income, would go to those at the bottom of the distribution, while taxpayers with the highest income would see their taxes rise.

Posted by: bhrandon | Jun 25, 2008 2:22:33 PM

Bush is a war criminal pure and simple and should be delt with just like any war criminal from WW-2 or any other war. He is no better than Mugabe in South Africa.

Posted by: Buddy | Jun 25, 2008 2:22:42 PM

buddy

I agree that Bush and the rest need to be investigated as possible war criminals.

I know that sounds spiteful...but we need to make sure this never happens again.

and talk about an inexplicable flip flop...McCain wants to be President so bad that this POW hero...has flipped on much of his stances on torture...

all in the name of his father's lifelong family goal... for Mccain himself to be President.

How sad is it...that we don't hear much from Mccain on the rights of people and prisoners since he realized he had to get in bed with Bush's buddies (thank you Mr. Black) to win the presidency.


Posted by: dl | Jun 25, 2008 2:32:14 PM

WE need to kick Bush's behind out of this office now as he is completely unable to perform his duty to uphold the law of the land and chooses instead to purposefully ignore not only the law but many individuals who once held high office who are petitioning him to abide by our laws. He is a weasly littel scoundrel of a man. Kick his behind out of office!

Posted by: eyeonyou | Jun 25, 2008 2:36:07 PM

bhrandon: you are entitled to vote for whomever you choose. the fact that your reasoning is infantile doesn't take that right away. what a shame. if the country was left in the hands of people who think as you do we'd be in even worse shape than we already are. it speaks poorly of mccain that a large number of his supporters are hillary defectors who are voting out of anger and not people who actually support his policies.

Posted by: counting crows | Jun 25, 2008 2:38:37 PM

Those few public officials who did speak up against the Bush bullies, morons, and criminals were generally treated with derision or ignored outright by our useless and often complicit press. We must also be able to face the sad fact that "we the people" have dumbed down enough to elect an incoherent idiot twice and to look the other way as he and his cronies brought this country down into the dung pits.

Posted by: Mike R. | Jun 25, 2008 2:49:01 PM

This came from a USNA alumnus. It'll be interesting to see how the media handle this...
============ ========= =
Barack Obama is not a legal U.S. natural-born citizen according to the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between December 24, 1952, to November 13, 1986. Federal Law requires that the office of President requires a natural-born citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. Citizen parents. This is what exempts John McCain, though he was born in the US Panama Canal Zone.
US Law very clearly states: ". . . If only one parent is a U.S. Citizen at the time of one's birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for minimum ten years, five of which must be after the age of 16." Barack Obama's father was not a U.S. Citizen is a fact.
Obama's mother was only 18 when Obama was born. This means even though she had been a U.S. Citizen for 10 years, (or citizen of Hawaii being a territory), his mother fails the test for at-least-5-years- prior-to Barack Obama's birth, but-after-age- 16.
In essence, Mother alone is not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. Citizenship. At most, 2 years elapsed from his mother turning 16 to the time of Barack Obama's birth when she was 18. His mother would have needed to have been 16 + 5 = 21 years old at the time of Barack Obama's birth for him to be a natural-born citizen. Barack Obama was already 3 years old at the time his mother would have needed to be to allow him natural citizenship from his only U.S. Citizen parent. Obama should have been naturalized as a citizen . . . but that would disqualify him from holding the office.
The Constitution clearly declares: Naturalized citizens are ineligible to hold the office of President. Though Barack Obama was sent back to Hawaii at age 10, any other information does not matter because his mother is the one who must fulfill the requirement to be a U.S. Citizen for 10 years prior to his birth on August 4, 1961, with 5 of those years being after age 16.
Further, Obama may have had to have remained in the USA for some time frame to protect any citizenship he might have had, rather than living in Indonesia. This is very clear cut and a glaring violation of U.S. Election law. I think the Governor Schwarzenegger of California should be very interested in discovering if Obama is allowed to be elected President without being a natural-born U.S. Citizen, since this would set a precedent. Stay tuned to your TV sets because I suspect some of this information will be leaking through over the next several days.
(1:55 PM) Billy240z: This came from a USNA alumnus. It'll be interesting to see how the media handle this...
============ ========= =
Barack Obama is not a legal U.S. natural-born citizen according to the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between December 24, 1952, to November 13, 1986. Federal Law requires that the office of President requires a natural-born citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. Citizen parents. This is what exempts John McCain, though he was born in the US Panama Canal Zone.
US Law very clearly states: ". . . If only one parent is a U.S. Citizen at the time of one's birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for minimum ten years, five of which must be after the age of 16." Barack Obama's father was not a U.S. Citizen is a fact.
Obama's mother was only 18 when Obama was born. This means even though she had been a U.S. Citizen for 10 years, (or citizen of Hawaii being a territory), his mother fails the test for at-least-5-years- prior-to Barack Obama's birth, but-after-age- 16.
In essence, Mother alone is not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. Citizenship. At most, 2 years elapsed from his mother turning 16 to the time of Barack Obama's birth when she was 18. His mother would have needed to have been 16 + 5 = 21 years old at the time of Barack Obama's birth for him to be a natural-born citizen. Barack Obama was already 3 years old at the time his mother would have needed to be to allow him natural citizenship from his only U.S. Citizen parent. Obama should have been naturalized as a citizen . . . but that would disqualify him from holding the office.
The Constitution clearly declares: Naturalized citizens are ineligible to hold the office of President. Though Barack Obama was sent back to Hawaii at age 10, any other information does not matter because his mother is the one who must fulfill the requirement to be a U.S. Citizen for 10 years prior to his birth on August 4, 1961, with 5 of those years being after age 16.
Further, Obama may have had to have remained in the USA for some time frame to protect any citizenship he might have had, rather than living in Indonesia. This is very clear cut and a glaring violation of U.S. Election law. I think the Governor Schwarzenegger of California should be very interested in discovering if Obama is allowed to be elected President without being a natural-born U.S. Citizen, since this would set a precedent. Stay tuned to your TV sets because I suspect some of this information will be leaking through over the next several days.

Posted by: William E | Jun 25, 2008 3:29:35 PM

William E: You might be interested to know this ---> Hawaii became our 50th state on August 21, 1959. Sen. Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, therefore he is a natural born US citizen. His mother was born in 1942 in Kansas (which became a state in 1861) and was also a natural born US citizen. Your information is flawed, as well as ridiculous.

Posted by: Champ | Jun 25, 2008 4:03:24 PM

You know what's REALLY sad? I actually took the time to read William E.'s post (only the first part, not the duplication).

Posted by: Champ | Jun 25, 2008 4:06:38 PM

champ--------dont feel bad none of us have stormed washington with torches and rope either, our government has let us down and bush is the ring leader.

Posted by: tom | Jun 25, 2008 4:48:43 PM

It has been torture putting up with bushbaby and the cheeny packer, but nobody can stop it. Guess cheeny sent Leahy a box full of KY jelly for his birthday and got him through this collapsed and stupid regime...

Posted by: daddyblue | Jun 25, 2008 5:24:54 PM

A vote for John McCain is a vote for Bush IF he could serve a third term. Disabled Veterans will pay the rest of their lives for the lies, that Bush used to sell America and the world on going to war with Iraq. His policies resulted in:
180,000 Iraqi dead with over four million displaced civilians.
4,500+ service personnel dead
30,00 to 100,000+ wounded US service personnel.
50% of the wounded veterans suffer, brain, emotional and psychological damage.
The highest suicide rate of any past military conflict. CBS news reports: "Suicide
Epidemic Among Veterans." War Veterans are committing suicide after they leave the
battlefield and return home. McCain/Bush, refuse to extend benefits to these veterans.
Thousands of divorces, bankruptcies and interupted careers.
26% of the homeless are veterans with mental problems and destroyed lives.
Hundreds of vets have lost limbs, hearing, memory, sight and have disfiguring burns.
Time magazine 06/16/08 headlines: "The secret weapon of the Military is PROZAC" PROZAC is an anti depressant and it contributes to the suicide rate.

A bulletin in a VA Hospital reads: "Help Our Veterans TBI Screenings
Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) is the "signature injury" of the Iraq/Afghanistan Wars. 63-80% of hospitalized combat-injured veterans suffer brain injury."

A VA nurse told me that the VA was not prepared to handle such large numbers.

The Bush/McCain policies have:

Ruined our economy to the point where some experts predict a 1929 type DEPRESSION
Reversed many environmental protection gains.
Created hatred and disrespect of the United States in the eyes of the world.
Created failed economic policies resulting in a devalued dollar, and increased oil prices.
Afghanistan not Iraq was a terrorist haven before Bush's war. Afghanistan was
secured, then neglected. Now both Iraq and Afghanistan are terrorist havens.
Bush's weapons of mass destruction and mushroom cloud rhetoric deceived us into supporting him when we were emotionally charged up after the 9/11 tragedy. Bush had reliable intelligence that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. "Former Bush press secretary Scott McClellan published a political memoir entitled What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception. He suggested that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney discussed the CIA identity of Valerie Plame prior to leaks to the press as part of their efforts to discredit criticism of their administration by her husband, Joe Wilson, and to continue to mislead the American public about the necessity of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and that George Bush should have fired former White House strategist Karl Rove for Rove's own involvement in leaking Plame's identity." These facts are easily available.
McCain boasts "we will be in Iraq for one hundred years" and "I will never surrender in Iraq." The president of Iraq said. "In my opinion, at least from 40,000 to 50,000 American troops can be [withdrawn] by the end of this year." That assessment differs dramatically from those offered by Bush and US military commanders in Iraq.

Without the cover of the UN Mandate which ends in December of 2008, the continued presence of coalition troops in Iraq would become, in law as in fact, an armed occupation. Studies show that 92 percent of respondent Iraqis consider US forces to be occupiers rather than liberators or peace keepers. THE IRAQI PEOPLE WANT US OUT OF THEIR COUNTRY.

The war has cost tax payers over 528 BILLION DOLLARS, and is increasing daily by 341.4 million dollars and has cost every tax payer $4,681. Bush charged you $4,681 for his war and gave you back $300/$600, he borrowed from China. Future generations will pay for Bush's excesses.

Thomas Jefferson said that a democracy cannot survive unless the citizens are educated and well informed. Please take his advice. Mister Bill from West Virginia

Posted by: William C. walters | Jun 25, 2008 6:57:16 PM

Post a comment