What lurks in the shadows

LeanLeft has an item linked from Obsidian Wings which it thinks is important enough to be spread around - and so do I, so I'm doing my little bit of a spread here.

The Republican leadership in the House of Representatives is trying to sneak through an amendment to current law that would in effect legalize the practice of deporting - "rendering" is the term used - an alien who is a terrorism suspect to a country that we know will torture them, generally on our behalf. That way we gain the "benefits" of torture while our own lily-white hands remain (supposedly) unstained.

The best known case, and one that helped bring the evil practice of rendition into the light, is that of Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen who was detained at JFK Airport in New York City, questioned, and deported to Syria, where he was tortured and held in solitary confinement until the complaints of the Canadian government finally won his release. It's that sort of treatment that the GOPpers and their Dummycrat allies want to legitimize in the eyes of the law.

At issue are Sections 3032 and 3033 of HR10, the bill that is intended, or so we're told, to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. Those sections amend Section 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. If you want to get into the nitty-gritty, you can find the text of Sections 3032-3033 by going to Thomas, entering HR10 in the search box, then scrolling way down to the link for Section 3032. (Section 3033 will come up along with it.) The text of Section 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act can be found here.

But if you don't want to delve that deeply, this is what the bill does, in a nutshell:

Sec. 241(b)(3)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act says an alien can't be deported to a country where their "life or freedom" would be at risk due to their "race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion." However, Sec. 241(b)(3)(B) lists several exceptions to that rule.

But - the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment, to which the US is a signatory, would still bar sending them to a country where they'd be tortured. In fact, in ratifying the Convention, the Senate declared

That the United States understands the phrase, "where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture," as used in article 3 of the Convention, to mean "if it is more likely than not that he would be tortured."

HR10 would strip away the Convention's protection from any deportee excepted under Sec. 241(b)(3)(B) and change the rules for the rest, ignoring the US's own declared position, by demanding that they show "by clear and convincing evidence" that they would be tortured in the country where the US proposes to send them. Otherwise, the protections of the Convention don't apply. It also limits judicial oversight, pretty much guaranteeing that the same people who are trying to deport the person are the ones determining if they have presented "clear and compelling" evidence.

(Ironically, the US signed the Convention on April 18, 1988 - during the Reagan administration. Senate approval, however, did not come until October 1994.)

Approving rendition was not, it should hardly be necessary to say, one of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations. Burying this foul attempt at legitimizing being accessories to torture in a massive bill is the most cowardly form of legislating, one, as now, often reserved for actions whose stench would sicken were they not carefully hidden away.

But this time someone did notice: Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) intends to offer an amendment to strip the offending language out of the bill in addition to pressing his own legislation to specifically outlaw rendition. He deserves to win on both counts.

Please take a moment to spread the word and to contact your Congressional representatives and give them an earful. This can be stopped if they know we're watching.