Is
the president wavering on his opposition to "enhanced interrogation"?
Bush and Cheney escaped unscathed. The Senate has just released
an astonishing report detailing the depths of their
depravity, but neither is likely to end up before a judge.
Yet stunningly, there’s a new debate — this time within the Obama administration
— about whether anti-torture treaties apply to U.S. troops and intelligence
agents overseas.
Then, on his second day as president in 2009, Obama proudly
signed an executive order banning torture.
Well done.
But now, military and spy agency lawyers are pushing the
administration to embrace a loophole that Bush created after Congress passed
the McCain bill.
Goaded by his snarling, autocratic vice president, George W.
claimed that as commander in chief, he could override the torture ban if the
cruelty took place in detention camps and other “black site” facilities on
foreign soil.
Even though Obama’s 2009 executive order directly refuted the
Bush “overseas” loophole, hawkish forces now want the White House to refute its
own refutation, leaving wiggle room for torture in U.S. foreign policy.
Unfortunately, the Obamacans are wobbling, with some aides
calling this change a “technical” issue.
Hardly! A ban is a ban — not a matter of fleeting policy, but of
settled moral principle. It’s a statement to the world of who we Americans are.
Please call the White House comment line to tell Obama to stick
to moral principle over the imagined convenience of torture tactics. The number
is 202-456-1111.
OtherWords columnist Jim Hightower is a radio commentator,
writer, and public speaker. He’s also editor of the populist newsletter, The Hightower Lowdown. OtherWords.org.