It is such a short post that I hope it remains within fair use to share it all. A cross-posting from Americablog....Joe Sudbay writing about Bush's threat to veto a ban on torture:
Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a ban on torture. Actually, per The Gavel, the House adopted the Army's rules prohibiting torture for other agencies. Seems the Army doesn't want to condone a practice that could be used on our soldiers. Not Bush, though. He will veto that ban:And just what "law" do these "lawful interrogations" fall under, you sadistic weasels?
The White House vowed to veto the measure. Limiting the CIA to interrogation techniques authorized by the Army Field Manual "would prevent the United States from conducting lawful interrogations of senior al Qaeda terrorists to obtain intelligence needed to protect Americans from attack," the Office of Management and Budget said in a statement.
Bush: Just because he says we don't torture, doesn't mean we don't torture.
It's a pity a frog didn't shove a firecracker up W's butt and return the favor when he was a kid. So many lives would have been spared.
Does your Representative know how you feel about this?
--the BB
2 comments:
Paul, back in the past, my representative, who is an acquaintance of ours, voted for a torture bill.
I had supported him with money and help in his campaign. I thought he was a good guy. I knew that he had to cast votes that I did not agree with, since he is a Democrat, representing a very conservative area. I expected that, but not that he would vote for turture. The bill he voted for was not getting much attention around here, and it would have cost him very little, if anything, to do the right thing. Besides, it is just plan wrong to vote for turture.
I wrote him a sharply-worded note, and I have not heard from him again. He has not requested campaign funds nor help from me since. He knows how I feel.
Way to go, Mimi! They need to hear from us all.
Post a Comment