Congress is in the dark, intentionally, about the interrogation techniques used by the CIA and other government entities. So, for instance: “I don’t know what the CIA has been doing,  nor should I know,” said Senator Jeff Sessions. What an astounding attitude from a United States Senator.

Sullivan:

I’m amazed that, in the context of what we now know this president has authorized for the CIA, and wants to retain for use by the CIA, an obvious connection has not been made more forcefully. When you look at the photographs from Abu Ghraib, what do you see? You see exactly the “alternative methods” this administration is trying to preserve: long-time standing, nakedness, degradation, stress positions, sleep deprivation – and much worse as well that will now be clearly banned: rape and murder. (Worryingly, sexual abuse short of penetration seems
to be a gray area in the proposal.) It strains credibility to believe that these images were not related by clear signals from the very top that the “gloves were off” and that the president and defense secretary gave torture and abuse cover and approval.
…

“Doused with cold water” and “deprived of sleep for days at a time.” Sound familiar? One point we must repeat insistently is that the torture bill being unwisely rushed through the Senate may well legalize many of the abuses at Abu Ghaib, Bagram, Camp Cropper, Camp Nama, and
many in the dozens of sites of torture and abuse in this war for … democracy and human rights.

Remember how you felt when you first saw some of those photographs. Remember the shame. Now remember we may be about to legalize and endorse some of it as American policy. Should we not take the time to get it right?

Not only would the bill open the door to these abuses, but it would make it nearly impossible to hold the Bush administration to account for their approval of such techniques. Boggles the mind.

Please, call your Senators and representative today. Remind them that this is an affront to human dignity, as well as to Christian Ethics (if they are themselves people of the Christian faith).

I wrote Monday about how torture is incompatible with Christian Ethics. All Christians, everywhere, but particularly in the United States, of any political stripe or party, ought feel obligated by their faith to condemn the use of torture by our government.

The recently announced legislative compromise brought McCain, Warner, and Graham back to the fold. But it doesn’t prohibit torture. (There are other problems with the legislation, but few as outrageous as this).
Sure, on the face of it it does. But it doesn’t. At least, so argues Andrew Sullivan, who first links to analysis by Marty Lederman and then concludes:

So we “formally” leave Geneva alone, but grant the executive branch complete discretion in determining what “cruel” means; and the language of the bill certainly can be construed to allow waterboarding, hypothermia, sleep deprivation, stress positions, and long-time standing. It even allows for a person to be beaten, cut, or near-drowned.

Sullivan believes that McCain doesn’t see this to be the case, but, through an Orwellian use of language, these abuses remain viable. (More Sullivan on this issue here and here, and a link to the actual proposed legislation. (pdf)) I’d commend it all for your reading.

I’m no attorney. I’m a pastor and an ethicist I don’t know if Sullivan is correct without much more study. But granting that he might be: what will we do about it? Do we even care?

I’m mortified and sickened tonight by the thought of what this legislation will permit.

…Note analysis and news from:

• NY Times: Detainee Deal Comes with Contradictions
• Washington Post: On Rough Treatment, A Rough Accord
• And news about two dead after torture by US forces, LA Times: Secrets in the Mountains of Afghanistan