|
|
- NEWSLETTERS
- MOBILE APPS
-
ADD TIME NEWS
A Guide to the Terrorism Bills
Much of Bush's war on terrorism has been waged in the shadows. But with secret surveillance and detention programs now exposed, the Administration has been forced to reckon with the lights, and the law. The President has offered two bills to put his programs on a legal footing. So far, the strongest opposition has come from his own party.
SPYING
CONGRESSWOMAN HEATHER WILSON'S BILL would allow the targeting of individuals, not devices, but would require eavesdroppers to get a warrant within weeks of doing so. The bill would require that Congress be given written notification and justification for no-warrant wiretaps. Most Senate Republicans support Bush's plan, but leading House Republicans back Wilson, a New Mexico Republican, who chairs the subcommittee that oversees eavesdropping.
DEMOCRATIC BILLS in both chambers would strengthen the 1978 law and would try to make Bush comply with it.
QUESTIONING
BUSH'S BILL seeks to set the rules for future treatment of detainees in the war on terrorism. Arguing that some of the language of the Geneva Conventions regulating the treatment of prisoners of war is too vague--like the prohibition in Common Article 3 against "outrages upon personal dignity"--Bush would remove Geneva references from the U.S.'s 1996 War Crimes Act, which provides penalties up to death for abuse of detainees. Instead, he would identify nine violations: torture, cruel or inhuman treatment, performing biological experiments, murder, mutilation or maiming, intentionally causing great suffering or serious injury, rape, sexual assault or abuse and taking hostages. The bill states that these prohibitions "shall fully satisfy United States obligations" under Geneva. It would apply retroactively to all detentions after 9/11 to provide some legal protection to U.S. jailers and interrogators who dealt with detainees between then and the putative passage of the bill.
JOHN MCCAIN'S BILL would protect interrogators from civil suits, would punish them only for grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and would increase rights of appeal to the U.S. courts. It would preserve references to the Geneva Conventions in the War Crimes Act. The Arizona Senator and his co-sponsors, John Warner and Lindsey Graham, argue that if the U.S. interprets Geneva to its liking, other countries will too, endangering American troops if they are captured.
PROSECUTING
- 1
- 2
- NEXT PAGE »
Most Popular »
- How Christmas Is (Not) Celebrated in North Korea
- No Churchgoing Christmas for the First Family
- Is Running Bad for Your Knees? Maybe Not
- Israel vs. Hizballah: Drumbeats of War
- What Smoking Ban? The French Are Lighting Up in Public Again
- The Pentagon Prepares for a Missile Attack from 'Iran'
- Up in the Air: What Does 10 Million Miles Get You?
- Protecting the Pope: Keeping Him Safe But Open
- In Sri Lanka, Tsunami Anniversary Inspires Mixed Reactions
- Sherlock Holmes: Impressive Abs, Unmemorable Action
- Is Running Bad for Your Knees? Maybe Not
- How Christmas Is (Not) Celebrated in North Korea
- What Smoking Ban? The French Are Lighting Up in Public Again
- No Churchgoing Christmas for the First Family
- Up in the Air: What Does 10 Million Miles Get You?
- Pakistan's Turmoil Endangers Its Archaeological Treasures
- In Sri Lanka, Tsunami Anniversary Inspires Mixed Reactions
- China's Christmas Warning to Political Dissidents
- 2010 Financial Forecasts: A 50% Chance of Being Right
- Nine: Not a 10 and Certainly Not an 8-1/2






RSS