[Marxism] The Bush Offensive-Defensive of 9/6/2006

[Brian Shannon <Brian_Shannon@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

The Bush Offensive-Defensive of 9/6/2006

A pundit noticed that although Bush is incoherent when he even  
attempts to speak on social issues, let alone compassionately, he  
finds his voice when he goes on the warpath. That was evident today  
as President George W. Bush tried to knot together the "war on  
terrorism," acknowledgement of secret CIA camps, the practice of  
torture, the transfer of CIA prisoners to Gunatanamo, a justification  
for Guantanamo, and an attack on the Supreme Court Decision in Hamdan  
with a bill for Military Commissions to undercut Hamdan. Behind  
today's speech lies the upcoming election as well as a new U.S. Army  
Field Manual, prepared independently, and probably being finessed by  
the Bush announcement.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/06/washington/06bush_transcript.html? 
_r=1&oref=login>
OR http://makeashorterlink.com/?O24C166BD

The claimed success of the CIA tortures in Bush's opening ties in  
nicely with an attempt to undercut the Hamdan decision, especially  
the historic right of defendants and the public to know the evidence  
behind the charges.

The world media, excepting some in underdeveloped nations, will treat  
us again to the horror of terrorism along with personal horror  
stories, saying nothing about the world domination of capital in all  
its forms from financial through massive military bases to full  
occupation.

Despite Bush's attempt to use this to his own purpose, much of this,  
however, is purely defensive. Both the military and the State  
Department have made it clear that they and the interests of U.S.  
imperialism have lost too much through the aggressive tactics of the  
Bush government. And it was clear that congress was not going to make  
the Hamdan decision go away. In other words, the natural law  
principles of the Bill of Rights, the U.S. Constitution (which  
included the right to habeas corpus even before the Bill of Rights  
was added), and international law cannot be overthrown so easily.  
Today's speech is an attempt to trim Hamdan as much as possible. In  
today's speech, the Bushites, neo-cons, and chicken-hawks who wish to  
impose the legal structure of fascism if not its content on the  
American people are shooting their strongest bolt.

I see the new Army Filed Manual as exceptionally important.

Behind this and other actions,* there has to be a well-organized and  
widespread campaign by the military branches to distinguish and  
maintain its own internal principles (voided often in practice, of  
course) and regain control of of officers and rank-and-file  
personnel. The Bush administration policy of torture that, like the  
old saw about fish rotting from its head, has been practiced,  
defended, and advocated from Cheney/Bush on down, goes well beyond  
national and international political embarrassment. It threatened  
lines of command the depth and breadth of the armed services.

Aside from consideration of the significance of the Hamdan decision  
and the McCain resolution, we have the views of the State Department,  
headed by Condoleezza Rice.

It started with outright murder in truck containers and at the Mazar- 
e Sharif fortress and known and unknown camps. It continues with the  
seizure of hundreds of "guilt by association" defenders of national  
independence and in the U.S., Great Britain, and elsewhere throughout  
the world. Suspicion alone, or perhaps pure and simple bureaucratism  
(who knows?) is sufficient to capture and indefinitely detain,  
without the universal right of habeas corpus or should trial come,  
the right to confront the evidence, which is always protected by  
"security concerns." This, of course, means that the evidence is  
laughable.

The great fear that lies behind the need to set forth new rules is  
that as in Vietnam, the military is threatened by deep erosion of its  
own chain of command.
<http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na- 
vietnam6aug06,0,6350517.story?coll=la-home-headlines>

It is too early to tell whether there is a split within the  
administration itself. I don't think so. It is an attempt to stem the  
tide running against it and to consolidate the Bushites own ranks.

Brian Shannon

________________________
* Pentagon GC's Bid for 4th Circuit Seat Threatened
Things aren't looking so good for Pentagon general counsel William  
Haynes II in his quest for a seat on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of  
Appeals. For more than a year he's drawn scattered attacks, mostly  
from Democrats, for his 2003 decision to sanction the use of  
aggressive methods in military interrogations. But in July, Haynes  
started taking fire from a new front. Twenty retired military leaders  
came out against his nomination, arguing that he ignored the views of  
other Pentagon lawyers in approving the interrogation procedures.
http://www.law.com/jsp/ihc/PubArticleIHC.jsp?id=1154595928211


=================

ARMY TO USE GENEVA RULES FOR DETAINEES

New manual eliminates secret tactics and separate standards for  
questioning captives.
By Julian E. Barnes, Los Angeles Times, September 6, 2006

WASHINGTON — Bowing to critics of its tough interrogation policies,  
the Pentagon is issuing a new Army field manual that provides Geneva  
Convention protections for all detainees and eliminates a secret list  
of interrogation tactics.

The manual, set for release today, also reverses an earlier decision  
to maintain two interrogation standards — one for traditional  
prisoners of war and another for "unlawful combatants" captured  
during a conflict but not affiliated with a nation's military force.  
It will ban the use of such controversial methods as forcing  
prisoners to endure long periods of solitary confinement, using  
military dogs to threaten prisoners, putting hoods over inmates'  
heads and strapping detainees to boards and dunking them in water to  
simulate drowning, defense officials said.

The manual and its related policy directives — the legal framework  
for interrogations — originally were to be released in the spring.  
But when State Department officials and Republican senators on the  
Armed Services Committee raised objections, they were pulled back.

The Pentagon's decision to drop the objectionable provisions appears  
to mark a victory for advocates of closer U.S. adherence to the  
protections of the Geneva Convention, an international agreement on  
the treatment of prisoners and others during wartime. Human rights  
groups said they planned to study the manual carefully to see what  
parts of the international treaty it included and what it left out.

"If the new field manual embraces the Geneva Convention, it is an  
important return to the rule of law," said Jumana Musa, an advocacy  
director for Amnesty International. "It is an important public  
statement."

The Army completed a version of the document over a year ago. But the  
manual grew in importance when Congress approved an amendment to a  
defense budget bill that banned torture and established the guide as  
the standard for treatment of detainees in all U.S. military  
facilities. The amendment was offered by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.),  
who was tortured while a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

Under the new guidelines, prisoners of war — defined as members of  
uniformed militaries captured on a battlefield — may receive certain  
extra considerations as mandated by the Geneva Convention, such as  
being allowed to retain their personal effects and to refuse to  
answer detailed questions. But ceding to congressional demands, the  
manual establishes a single baseline standard of care and treatment  
for all detainees, regardless of their status.

"All detainees will be treated consistent with Common Article 3 of  
the Geneva Convention," said a military official who was not allowed  
to discuss the manual before it was made public and spoke only on  
condition of anonymity.

Common Article 3 — found in each of the four Geneva pacts approved in  
1949 — prohibits torture and cruel treatment. Unlike other parts of  
the Geneva agreements, it covers all detainees, whether they are  
unlawful combatants or traditional prisoners of war.

After the abuse of detainees at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison came to  
light in 2004, some Defense Department lawyers pushed to incorporate  
the protections of Common Article 3 into the field manual. But senior  
political appointees argued that doing so would tie the hands of U.S.  
troops by outlawing long periods of confinement or allowing detainees  
to accuse the military of "humiliating or degrading treatment," which  
is banned by the provision.

Because of those objections, senior Pentagon officials decided that  
the manual and the accompanying policy directives would demand that  
detainees be treated humanely, but would avoid any direct mention of  
Geneva.

But in June, the Supreme Court ruled in Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld that the  
provisions of the Geneva Convention could be applied to an  
unconventional conflict, like the war on terrorism. The court said  
that Common Article 3 covered all individuals caught up in a  
conflict, whether part of a regular military force or not.

A little over a week later, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon R.  
England issued a memorandum saying that the U.S. military would  
adhere to the standards in Common Article 3.

The manual's guidelines will apply to all prisoners held in Defense  
Department facilities and to all interrogators working there. Under  
the McCain amendment, the protections also will apply to CIA  
prisoners held in Defense Department prisons or bases.

They will not apply to CIA interrogators working in prisons run by  
other countries, although under the McCain amendment, those prisoners  
must be treated humanely and cannot be tortured.

The Pentagon had intended to keep some of its interrogation  
techniques classified. Some military officials believe that releasing  
such tactics would make it easier for terrorists to learn how to  
resist questioning.

But when State Department officials saw a draft of the manual earlier  
this year, they raised reservations about the classified list. They  
expressed concern that even if the techniques were humane and lawful,  
some advocacy groups and other countries would assume the worst and  
insist that by maintaining a secret list, the United States must be  
allowing torture.

The revision of the Army manual began after an international outcry  
over the Abu Ghraib scandal, as well as questions over the treatment  
of hundreds of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The new language is  
plain and easily understood — "designed to be used by soldiers," the  
military official said.

Military officials say the new manual tries to address the lessons  
investigators have drawn from Abu Ghraib, including rebuilding the  
wall between soldiers assigned to interrogate detainees and those who  
run the prison. Some of the abuses at Abu Ghraib began after officers  
who had worked at Guantanamo were brought to Iraq and recommended  
using military police to "set the conditions" for interrogators.  
Musa, the lawyer for Amnesty International, said the Bush  
administration had created confusion in the military by establishing  
different standards of treatment for Guantanamo Bay, Afghanistan and  
Iraq.

"There was confusion," Musa said. "There needs to be a clear message  
to soldiers about what is acceptable and what is not."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na- 
torture6sep06,0,7581942.story?coll=la-home-headlines
OR http://makeashorterlink.com/?K2E5216BD



________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism