Bush agrees to McCain torture ban

[rachmaninoff]

He didn't back down until the Senate was against him 10:1, well that's politics for you.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/15/p...en=9fa71e8f76960984&ei=5094&partner=homepage"

WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - The White House, after weeks of resistance, agreed today to Senator John McCain's call for a law specifically banning cruel or inhuman treatment of terror suspects anywhere in the world.

Interestingly enough, they let this clause in:

Under the agreement, interrogators for the Central Intelligence Agency would be granted the right - already extended to members of the military - to defend themselves from charges of abuse by saying that a reasonable person would believe that they were obeying a legal order. The protection of C.I.A. interrogators had been a key objective of Vice President Dick Cheney.

This seems vague and ambigious - if a CIA agent uses torture, and he says he "thought it was legal", that has merit?

I'm still uncertain as to what exactly this deal means.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Interestingly enough, they let this clause in:

A case of "The Devil's in the Details." They should get rid of that clause.

 

[Skyhunter]

He didn't back down until the Senate was against him 10:1, well that's politics for you.

Actually it was the House vote of 3:1 that finally convinced him.

Without Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff the stick and carrot, or Hammer and golf outings, the House Republicans are paying closer attention to their constituents. I think this is a good thing.