I said I would not use the New York Times as a source but this bears reapeating. I include it here though it technically might be a no-no.
Editorial
The Roots of Prisoner Abuse
This week, the White House blocked a Senate vote on a
measure sponsored by a half-dozen Republicans, including Senator John
McCain, that would prohibit cruel, degrading or inhumane treatment of
prisoners. Besides being outrageous on its face, that action served as
a reminder of how the Bush administration ducks for cover behind the
men and women in uniform when challenged on military policy, but
ignores their advice when it seems inconvenient.
Senator Lindsey Graham, a
Republican who has shown real political courage on this issue, recently
released documents showing that the military's top lawyers had warned a
year before the Abu Ghraib nightmare came to light that detainee
policies imposed by the White House and Secretary of Defense Donald
Rumsfeld violated American and international law and undermined the
standards of civilized treatment embedded in the American military
tradition.
In February 2003, Maj. Gen. Jack Rives, the deputy
judge advocate general of the Air Force, reminded his civilian bosses
that American rules on the treatment of prisoners had grown out of
Vietnam, where captured Americans, like Mr. McCain, were tortured. "We
have taken the legal and moral 'high road' in the conduct of our
military operations regardless of how others may operate," he wrote.
Abandoning those rules, he said, endangered every American soldier.
General
Rives and the other military lawyers argued strongly against declaring
that Mr. Bush was above the law when it came to antiterrorism
operations. But the president's team ignored them, offering up a
pretzel logic that General Rives and the other military experts warned
would not fool anyone. Rear Adm. Michael Lohr, the Navy's judge
advocate general, said that the situation at the American prison at
Guantánamo Bay in Cuba might be so legalistically unique that the
Geneva Conventions and even the Constitution did not necessarily apply.
But he asked, "Will the American people find we have missed the forest
for the trees by condoning practices that, while technically legal, are
inconsistent with our most fundamental values?"
General Rives
said that if the White House permitted abusive interrogations at
Guantánamo Bay, it would not be able to restrict them to that single
prison. He argued that soldiers elsewhere would conclude that their
commanders were condoning illegal behavior. And that is precisely what
happened at Abu Ghraib after the general who organized the abuse of
prisoners at Guantánamo went to Iraq to toughen up the interrogation of
prisoners there.
The White House ignored these military lawyers'
advice two years ago. Now it is trying to kill the measure that would
define the term "illegal combatants," set rules for interrogations and
prohibit cruel and inhumane treatment of prisoners. The president
considers this an undue restriction of his powers. It's not only due;
it's way overdue.