Congressional Record, Volume 151 Issue 80 (Thursday, June 16, 2005)

[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 80 (Thursday, June 16, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6712-S6716]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

GUANTANAMO

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, yesterday, apparently, on the floor of the
Senate and elsewhere, certain statements were made with regard to the
American service personnel serving in Guantanamo. I am now paraphrasing
what was reported in the Washington Times of June 16, when it is
alleged that in this article on the floor of the Senate, this statement
was made:

If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an
FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in
their control, you would most certainly believe this must
have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad
regime--Pol Pot or others--that had no concern for human
beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of
Americans in the treatment of prisoners.

Mr. President, as you can see by this shock of gray hair, I have
lived now these 78-plus years, and I remember these periods of history
that were cited on the floor of the Senate yesterday very well.
I see the leader standing. Does he wish to be recognized?
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I say to my friend from Virginia, I was
inclined to ask the Senator a question, if it will not interrupt his
train of thought.
Mr. WARNER. Not at all.
Mr. McCONNELL. I was listening carefully to my friend from Virginia,
and I gather one of our colleagues equated what happened in Guantanamo
to Pol Pot or some equivalent of that. My recollection--I just ask the
Senator from Virginia if his recollection is similar to mine--Pol Pot
murdered 1 to 2 million of his fellow countrymen.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the Senator is correct. In World War II,
with which I was going to commence my remarks in that context, I served
at the very end. As a 17- or 18-year-old sailor, I was simply in a
training command, but I remember that period of history very vividly.
All through my early years, prior to going into the Navy, late in the
fall of 1944 and starting active service in 1945, the whole of this
country was consumed with that frightful conflict in which, at the
hands of Nazis, some 9 million people perished, 6 million of whom were
of the Jewish faith. It is just extraordinary.
I was deeply disturbed by these comments to try to draw any analogy
whatsoever to that period of history.
Then, following the Soviet gulags, I served as Secretary of the Navy
during the height of the Cold War for some 5 years in the Pentagon and
actually had a great deal of work with the Soviet Union at that period
of time in the context of that threatening situation of the Cold War.
There is just no relationship to this. I was astonished. I did not
want to let the Sun go down on this day without conveying to the Senate
my own historical perspective and the danger that loose comments such
as that--comparisons which have no basis in history--could do harm to
the men and women serving wherever they are in the world today in this
war on terrorism because this is the type of thing that is picked up
and utilized by press antithetical to the interests of the United
States and distorted in their own way.
It has to be addressed. I was prepared to do that.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, may I ask the Senator one other
question?
Mr. WARNER. Yes.
Mr. McCONNELL. The Senator from Virginia mentioned the gulags in the
Soviet period. It is my recollection--correct me if I am wrong--that up
to 20 million people were murdered during that period from 1930 to
1950.
Mr. WARNER. Yes. I do not have the accurate figures. I know Stalin
had purged part of his country for no other reason than he just wanted
to get rid of the people by the millions. The gulags came into focus
primarily during the latter chapter of the Soviet Union when people
disappeared by the tens of thousands into these encampments, never to
be heard from again. It is not a chapter which Russia today looks back
on with any pride at all.
I feel every day that I get up, and I hear of the casualties of our
brave men and women, be they in Afghanistan, Iraq or occasionally in
other areas of the world--I say what is it that we can do in this
Chamber, what is it that we, as citizens, can do to bring them home
safely? They are making enormous sacrifices together with their family
to go into harm's way to protect us here at home from the threat of
terrorism.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I thank my friend from Virginia for
clearing up any notion anyone might have that anything the United
States is involved in, in incarcerating prisoners, would be in any way
related to experiences such as those carried out by the Nazis or by the
Russians during the Stalin period.
Mr. WARNER. I feel very strongly about that. I really feel so
strongly, I say to the distinguished leader of our party, that I feel
apologies are in order to the men and women of the Armed Forces. I do
not ask it for myself. But I feel these young men and women, all of
whom are volunteers, all of whom have gone into harm's way and who are
bearing the brunt of the present conflict, that these allegations have
absolutely no basis in fact with history. I regret they occurred.
I yield the floor to anybody who wishes to question me or I will
continue.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
Mr. DURBIN addressed the Chair.
Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. President, I wish to ask the Senator from Virginia
a question relating to this.
I also was troubled by the comments. I was troubled by the fact that
there seems to be no proportionality between the abuse of the civilian
population in a systematic way versus the detention of combatants in a
very different sense, in a different way.
I think the proportionality is important to be kept in mind. I had
earlier last week made some comments of my concerns about Guantanamo in
which I wondered if it was serving our public diplomacy, our long-term
interests. However, I do know that the treatment, having been there, is
appropriate as to the detainees.
I used to be mayor of Orange County, and I know the conditions under
which the prisoners in the Orange County jail, which was terribly
overcrowded, at times would be sleeping on mattresses on the floor, and
situations such as that.
Having visited both facilities, the detainees at Guantanamo seem to
have a much better day-to-day living situation, and certainly I saw no
evidence of any systematic abuse.
So while I had raised some questions about the long-term advisability
of our public diplomacy interests, I do want to make clear I do not in
any way believe there is mistreatment of our detainees, that the
detainees must continue to be detained given the threat they present to
our U.S. citizens, and I most of all want to make clear that what I saw
from our Armed Forces personnel who are looking after these detainees
was tremendous dedication and caring. I believe their sacrifice, in a
place far away from their homes, dealing on a daily basis with very
difficult and unsavory people who are not related to an armed force,
people not connected with a military that has been trained or fights
under a given flag, and they have been labeled as enemy combatants, is
a far different situation than that which can be portrayed by any
suggestion of systematic abuse or even the loss of life, as would be
associated with Pol Pot.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I say in response to the Senator's
question that yesterday afternoon the Secretary of Defense, Mr.
Rumsfeld, came over to my office--we frequently visit each other in our
offices. We spent over an hour and a half on a variety of subjects, and
we addressed this issue. We discussed his coming up, which he is quite
willing to do, for a hearing in the Armed Services Committee.
We are continuing to look into this matter. But let me point out, we
are talking about millions of people, as the distinguished Senator from
Kentucky said, in the period of World War II,

[[Page S6713]]

which I remember very well as a young man and as Secretary of the Navy
during the period of the Vietnam era and Pol Pot. There is no
comparison. Not one incarcerated individual at Guantanamo has lost his
or her life. Not one.
In sharp contrast to those mentioned about facts elsewhere in the
history of this world, our Nation should look with pride as to how the
Department of Defense has specifically addressed each of the
grievances. They have allowed any number of us to come down there. It
is in the hundreds who have come down.
There are courts-martial being considered for some at this point in
time. In other words, when wrongs are done, we carefully, methodically
address them, giving due process to those who are under suspicion for
having committed offenses.
Given time, this entire situation at Guantanamo will be spelled out
fully to the public. If there are individuals who have done wrong, they
will be held accountable.
I come back to the central theme that I have is these young men and
women serving all over the world in uniform today and, indeed, members
of our diplomatic corps, members of other Government agencies serving
in harm's way, we have to think of them when issues are raised such as
they were raised yesterday.
I understand the Senator wishes to address a question to the Senator
from Virginia.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator from Virginia has
expired.
Mr. WARNER. I ask unanimous consent that my time may be continued
without limitation at this time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, if I understand the rules of the Senate, I
am supposed to address the Senator in the form of a question, and that
makes it impossible for me to make a statement at this point.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I do not wish to create a parliamentary
situation that precludes the Senator from expressing himself in any way
that he wishes. I understood the Senator was about to ask a question. I
will withdraw that. I will finish my statement, if I may, and then I
will yield the floor.
To equate actions of the men and women in the Armed Forces, proudly
serving in uniform and thereby representing this Government of the
United States with regard to their services down there in Guantanamo
maintaining the detainees, to the genocidal acts of murder and
repression of the Nazis or Soviet gulags or Pol Pot is insulting to our
men and women in uniform who are fighting for the safety of all of us
at home and, indeed, our friends and allies abroad. To the contrary,
completely unlike the repressive regimes of the Nazis--and I was moved
to come down here because I think there are only a few of us around who
lived during that period of time and were able to fully absorb the
frightful consequences of that worldwide conflict. We had 16 million
men and women of the U.S. military in uniform at that time. I just
think that there is absolutely no comparison to what that chapter of
history brought upon mankind by means of death to this situation we
have, which is under investigation.
I was assured by the Secretary of Defense--I did not need the
assurance because I knew it would be the case--that we will account for
any wrongs that have been done under the due process of our system. The
Department of Defense and others have investigated this situation and
made known a series of facts at this time.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, my staff contacted me to alert me that
several of my colleagues had come to the Senate floor to address
statements that I made on the floor on June 14, 2005. Those statements
related to the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo. The statement I
made involved an FBI report, a report which has been uncontroverted and
one which I read into the Record in its entirety. I said at the
beginning when I read it into the Record that I did so with some
hesitation because it was so graphic in its nature, but I felt that in
fairness, so that the record would be complete, I had to read it.
Because there have been allusions made to statements made by me, I
believe it is appropriate to read it again so that my colleagues who
may not have reflected on it will have a chance to do so. Let me read
this report from an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation about
the treatment of a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay. I hope my colleagues
from Kentucky, Virginia, and other States who are following this debate
will listen to this and then listen to what I said in the Record
afterwards so they understand the context of my remark. It has been
nothing short of amazing what some elements of media have done with
this remark and what some of my colleagues have drawn from this remark
today. So I want to read it in its entirety, if my colleagues have not,
and I want them to hear it in its entirety before they reach
conclusions as to what was intended.
I quote from the Record of June 14, 2005, page S6594 of the
Congressional Record:

When you read some of the graphic descriptions of what has
occurred here--I almost hesitate to put them in the
Record, and yet they have to be added to this debate. Let
me read to you what one FBI agent saw. And I quote from
his report.

This is a quote:

On a couple of occasions--

Let me underline that, on a couple of occasions--

I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand
and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair,
food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on
themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more.
On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so
far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the
barefooted detainee was shaking with cold. . . . On another
occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making
the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100
degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor,
with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been
literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On
another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably
hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the
room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee
chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile
floor.

And then I said:

I have heard my colleagues and others in the press suggest that I
have said our soldiers could be compared to Nazis. I would say to the
chairman of the Armed Services Committee, I do not even know whether
the interrogator involved was an American soldier. I did not say that
at any point. To suggest that I am criticizing American servicemen--I
am not. I do not know who was responsible for this, but the FBI agent
made this report. To suggest that I was attributing all of the sins and
all the horrors and barbarism of Nazi Germany or the Soviet Republic or
Pol Pot to Americans is totally unfair. I was attributing this form of
interrogation to repressive regimes such as those that I noted.
I honestly believe that the Senator from Virginia, whom I respect
very much, would have to say, if this, indeed, occurred, it does not
represent American values. It does not represent what our country
stands for. It is not the sort of conduct we would ever condone. I
would hope the Senator from Virginia would agree with that. That was
the point I was making.
Now, sadly, we have a situation where some in the rightwing media
have said that I have been insulting men and women in uniform. Nothing
could be further from the truth. I respect our men and women in
uniform. I have spent many hours, as I am sure the Senator from
Virginia has, at funerals of the servicemen who have been returned from
Iraq and Afghanistan, writing notes to their families, and calling them
personally. It breaks my heart every day to pick up the newspaper and
hear of another death. The total this morning is 1,710. To suggest that
this is somehow an insult to the men and women serving in uniform--
nothing could be further from the truth.

[[Page S6714]]

It is no credit to them or to our Nation for this sort of conduct to
occur or for us to ignore it or in any way, shape, or form to condone
it. And understand why we are in this situation. We had a rule of law.
We had agreed to the Geneva Conventions. We had agreed to policies
relative to torture of prisoners. They were the law of the land. The
Bush administration came in after 9/11 and said: We are going to
rewrite the rules.
Secretary Rumsfeld, to whom the Senator referred, who visits his
office, was party to that conversation about how we were going to treat
prisoners differently. When the suggestion was made to this
administration to change the rules on interrogation of prisoners, the
strongest and loudest dissenter was the Secretary of State Colin
Powell, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who came to this
administration and said: This is a mistake, to change the rules of
interrogation.
Why? Because, he said, when you torture a prisoner you will not get
good information. They will say anything to stop the torture. And,
second, he said, if we change the rules at this point in our history,
sadly it is going to just give solace to our enemy, give them
encouragement that somehow the United States is backing away from its
traditional values.
Those are not my words. They are a characterization of the words of
one of the highest ranking members of the Bush Cabinet, former
Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Unfortunately, he was right. That decision by the Bush
administration, with the support of Secretary Rumsfeld, led us down a
road. I hope that that road does not include any more incidents than
the one that has been described here. But to say that the interrogation
techniques here are the kind you would expect from a repressive regime,
I do not believe is an exaggeration. They certainly do not represent
the values of America. They do not represent what you risked your life
for, Senator, when you put the uniform on and served our country or
when you served as Secretary of the Navy or in your service in the
Senate. That doesn't represent the values that you stood for or that
any of us should stand for.
That was the point I was making. To say that by drawing any kind of
comparison to this outrageous interrogation technique and using the
words ``Nazi'' or ``Soviets'' is to demean or diminish all of the
horrors created by those regimes is just plain wrong.
I have seen firsthand, as you have too, people who survived that
Holocaust. I have visited Yad Vashem, the tribute to the people who
died in the Holocaust. I understand that the millions of innocent
people killed there far exceed the horror that occurred in Guantanamo.
But when you talk about repressive regimes doing things that in history
look so bad, I am afraid that this that I described to you falls closer
to that category.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield.
Mr. DURBIN. I will be happy to yield for a question.
Mr. WARNER. You are reading from a report of one of our investigative
agencies. There is no verification of the accuracy of that report. You
take it at face value. I pointed out--and I discussed it with Secretary
Rumsfeld--this allegation of the FBI agent, together with a lot of
other facts, is now being carefully scrutinized under our established
judicial process.
I trained as a lawyer and many years as a prosecutor and dealt with
the Bureau. I have the highest respect for them. But I do not accept at
face value everything they put down on paper until I make certain it
can be corroborated and substantiated.
For you to have come to the floor with just that fragment of a report
and then unleash the words ``the Nazis,'' unleash the word ``gulag,''
unleash ``Pol Pot''--I don't know how many remember that chapter--it
seems to me that was the greatest error in judgment, and it leaves open
to the press of the world to take those three extraordinary chapters in
world history and try and intertwine it with what has taken place
allegedly at Guantanamo.
I am perfectly willing to be a part of as much of an investigation as
the Senate should perform and will in my committee. But I am not going
to come to the floor with just one report in hand and begin to impugn
the actions of those in charge, namely, the uniformed personnel, at
this time. We should allow matters of this type to be very carefully
examined before we jump to a conclusion.
Mr. DURBIN. If I can respond to the Senator from Virginia, I do not
have a copy with me--perhaps my staff can give it to me--of the memo
from the FBI.
Mr. WARNER. Could we inquire of the Senator as to the use of this
memo on the floor? Is that consistent with the practices of this body
as regards--
Mr. DURBIN. I would say this memorandum was not obtained from any
classified sources.
Mr. WARNER. I do not know how it came into your possession.
Mr. DURBIN. May I say to the Senator from Virginia what we are
dealing with, in terms of these interrogation techniques, was disclosed
in a letter, as I understand it--let me make certain I am clear--to
General Ryder, on July 14, 2004, almost a year ago--almost a year ago.
I have not heard a single person from this administration say this is
in any way false or inaccurate. Certainly, if it were, we would have
heard that, would we not, long ago?
Mr. WARNER. I ask the Senator, is it to be treated as a public
document or is it part of an investigative process which--ordinarily
the materials used in the course of an investigation are accorded
certain privileges.
Mr. DURBIN. I say to the Senator from Virginia, I was informed by my
staff this was released by a Freedom of Information Act disclosure by
our Government.
Mr. WARNER. I thank the Senator.
Mr. DURBIN. So I don't believe there is any question about its
authenticity in terms of it being a document in the position of our
Government. In terms of the content of the document, almost a year has
passed since this was written, and if it were clearly wrong, inaccurate
on its face, would the Senator from Virginia not expect the
administration to have made that clear by now?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, my understanding is it is currently under
investigation and being carefully scrutinized in the context of another
series of documents. Until the administration has had the opportunity
to complete the investigation and make their own assessment of the
allegations, it seems to me premature to render judgment.
Mr. DURBIN. I would say to the chairman of the Armed Services
Committee, whom I respect very much, what I described was the
interrogation techniques approved by this administration, in the
extreme. There was nothing in this description here, from the agent of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which was different than the
interrogation rules of engagement which had already been spelled out--
already spelled out.
So here is what we have. A letter sent to General Ryder almost a year
ago, released under the Freedom of Information Act, with specifics
related to the interrogation of prisoners which are consistent with the
very rules of interrogation which Secretary Rumsfeld had approved in a
memo.
So I do not believe that coming to the floor and disclosing this
information is an element of surprise. The administration has known it
for almost a year. I do not believe there is any question of
falsification. The document was presented under the Freedom of
Information Act. And it certainly is not, sadly, beyond the realm of
possibility because the very techniques that were described in here
were the techniques approved by the administration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Murkowski). The time of the Senator has
expired.
Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent for 5 additional minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is
so ordered.
Mr. McCONNELL. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. DURBIN. I will be happy to yield to the Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. My concern was not the words of the FBI agent, but the
words of the Senator from Illinois. I believe I heard the Senator
repeat today--let me ask the Senator if in fact this is what he meant
to say--because it was the quote I had from the Senator, not from the
FBI agent, earlier yesterday or the day before, which I believe the
Senator repeated today. I

[[Page S6715]]

was curious if the Senator does stand by his own words, not the words
of the FBI agent, which I believe were:

If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was a
FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in
their control, you would almost certainly believe that this
must have been done by the Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or
some mad regime, Pol Pot or others, that had no concern for
human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the
action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

So my question of the Senator is not the words of the FBI agent but
the words of the Senator from Illinois. Does the Senator from Illinois
stand by these words, comparing the action of Americans in the
treatment of their prisoners to the Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or
Pol Pot or others?
Mr. DURBIN. I would say, in response to the Senator from Kentucky, in
this particular incident that I read, from an FBI agent describing in
detail the methods that were used on prisoners, was I trying to say:
Isn't this the kind of thing that we see from repressive regimes?
Yes, this is the type of thing we expect from a repressive regime. We
do not expect it from the United States. I hope the Senator from
Kentucky would not expect that.
Mr. McCONNELL. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. DURBIN. Yes.
Mr. McCONNELL. Is the Senator aware that Pol Pot murdered 1 to 2
million of his fellow countrymen, the Nazis murdered from 6 to 9
million men, women, and children, mainly Jews, and the Soviets, in
their gulags, murdered some estimated 20 million people over a 20-year
period between 1930 and 1950?
My observation, obviously, is this a fair comparison?
Mr. DURBIN. The comparison related to interrogation techniques. It is
clear, and I will state it for the record, that the horrors visited on
humanity by those regimes were far greater than these interrogation
techniques. But the point I was trying to make was, what do we
visualize when we hear of this kind of interrogation technique?
I say to the Senator from Kentucky, I visualize regimes like those
described. Did they do more? Did they do worse? Of course they did. The
point I was trying to make is, this is not what America should expect.
This is not what we should believe reflects our values.
Mr. McCONNELL. So the Senator thinks this is a fair comparison?
Mr. DURBIN. It is a comparison in the form of interrogation that a
repressive regime goes too far, that a democracy never reaches that
extreme. But to say that I am in any way diminishing the other horrors
brought on by these regimes is plain wrong. Those are different
elements completely.
Mr. WARNER. If the Senator will yield, again, I go back on my own
recollections, those three examples the Senator used. I don't know what
interrogation took place. Perhaps if we go into the sinews of history
there were some, but what the world recognized from those three
examples the Senator used, they were death camps--I repeat, death
camps--where, as my colleague from Kentucky very accurately said,
millions of people perished. It is doubtful they were ever often asked
their names.
To say that the allegations of a single FBI agent mentioned in an
unconfirmed, uncorroborated report give rise to coming to the Senate
and raising the allegation that whatever persons of the uniformed
military, as referred to in that report--albeit, uncorroborated,
unsubstantiated report--are to be equated with those three chapters in
world history is just a most grievous misjudgment on the Senator's
part, and one I think is deserving of apologizing to the men and women
in uniform.
Mr. DURBIN. Let me say this to the Senator in response. I have said
clearly in the Senate, and obviously the Senator does not accept it,
but I will say it again: There were horrors beyond interrogation
techniques committed by those three regimes. That is clear.
But I want to ask the Senator from Virginia, does he even accept the
premise or possibility that this happened at Guantanamo?
Mr. WARNER. I would say, Madam President, I served as assistant U.S.
attorney for 5 years and dealt with the FBI all the time. I have very
high regard for that service. But the Senator knows full well that is
just an investigative report by one agent. It is under investigation by
the Bureau and by the Department of Defense at this time in the context
of many other pieces of evidence.
One cannot come to this great forum, which is viewed the world over
as one which is known for trying to assert the rights of this country
as taking its place in the world, as following due process and
principles of our Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights--
and comment to the Senate about some young uniformed person who
probably is the subject of that FBI report--until such time as that
person in uniform is adjudicated in a proper forum as to having done
what is alleged in that report, or not done, it seems to me we
shouldn't be discussing it in the Senate.
Mr. DURBIN. I might say in response to the Senator from Virginia, I
don't know if it is a uniformed person reported in this interrogation.
The FBI did not say that. For those suggesting this reflects on our men
and women in uniform, I don't know if that is a fact. I don't know if
it was, in fact, a member of our armed services. I cannot say that. Nor
did I, in my earlier statement, make any reference to the men and women
in uniform.
But I will say this: When this type of serious allegation has been in
the public forum for as long as this has been, without any denial by
the administration, it raises some question as to the fact that the
Senator raised, whether it should be taken as truthful or not. And I
think it can be.
Now, if facts come out later on and it turns out this is not the
case, so be it. I will be the first to concede that in the Senate.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, the damage has been done. The Senator
should have taken the precautionary steps prior to----
Mr. DURBIN. Let me say to the Senator from Virginia, the damage was
done when we changed our interrogation policy which allowed for some of
the conduct we used to hold to be unacceptable by American standards.
That is when the damage was done. That is when Secretary of State Colin
Powell said we were crossing a line we should not cross. And we have
crossed that line.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent for 5 additional minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DURBIN. In a hearing yesterday before the Senate Judiciary
Committee we heard there is a real controversy within this
administration as to whether the people being held in Guantanamo have
any rights to due process. The Senator mentioned due process earlier.
That is an issue which is being litigated as high as the Supreme Court.
The court came to the conclusion that the administration was wrong in
the way it is treating prisoners at Guantanamo. They have not accorded
them due process as they should have. Many of those aspects are still
on appeal and still being debated.
I say to the Senator that to raise these issues in this forum is,
frankly, the only place that one can raise them. If we do not raise
questions about those interrogation techniques and whether they violate
the most basic standards which we have stood by as a Nation, then I
don't believe we are responsible in our duties. I don't believe we
showed good judgment in ignoring what is happening, what happened at
Abu Ghraib, what may be happening, based on this FBI memo, at
Guantanamo Bay.
That is part of our responsibility, as difficult as it may be for the
administration to accept.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, the use of the words ``due process'' by
the Senator from Virginia was restricted to due process that is taking
place with regard to allegations in that report and others according to
the actions of either uniformed or civilian personnel under the clear
supervision and jurisdiction of the Department of Defense at
Guantanamo. That was my use of due process.
It is a separate issue as to the due process of the detainees, the
Senator is correct. That is a matter that should be openly discussed,
is being discussed, and will be reviewed by this Chamber.

[[Page S6716]]

I come back again, and I just conclude--I see there are other Senators
waiting to speak--we have to be extraordinarily careful in our remarks
in the Senate as they relate to the safety of our people because this
series of statements the Senator has made, factual references to
chapters of history, can be manipulated by other people throughout the
world to their advantage. That is my deep concern.
Mr. McCONNELL. I have just one final question, very briefly.
Mr. DURBIN. I am happy to yield.
Mr. McCONNELL. I want to make sure I understand this correctly: Is it
my understanding that my good friend from Illinois stands by his own
words, because he read them again today, and it is his view that even
if this allegation from this one FBI agent were true--and as the
Senator from Virginia has pointed out is being investigated--even
assuming this allegation from this one FBI agent were true, the Senator
from Illinois still believes that could be correctly equated to the
treatment by the Nazis, by the Soviets in the gulags, and by the Pol
Pot regime?
Is that an accurate description of that, even assuming this one
allegation is proven to be true?
Mr. DURBIN. What I have said is, if you were asked, without being
told where this might have occurred, as I said here directly in the
Record, you might conclude that it was done by one of those repressive
regimes because that was the kind of heavy-handed tactic they used, the
kind of inhumane treatment in which they engaged. You would be
surprised to learn that according to the FBI, it was something that
occurred at Guantanamo in a facility under the control of the United
States of America.
Madam President, let me conclude by saying that I know there is some
sensitivity on this issue relating to Guantanamo. I could tell it in
the hearing yesterday. I can tell it from the response today. But I
continue to believe the United States should hold itself to the highest
standards when it comes to the interrogation of prisoners, that we
should never countenance in any way, shape, or form, the torture of
prisoners we have seen in other countries by other governments in
history.
That was the point I was trying to make, and it is a point I still
stand by. Secretary of State Colin Powell was right when he criticized
the change of the interrogation techniques by this administration and
said it does not reflect well on the United States, torture does not
produce good information, and that we would pay a price, sadly, in
terms of public and moral opinion if we engaged in that kind of
conduct. His premonition or his prophecy has turned out to be accurate.
That was the point I made.
Madam President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader.
Mr. REID. It is amazing to me, Madam President, the more the
popularity of the President plummets, the more the people downtown try
to play this game ``I gotcha.'' Families are attacked, reputations are
impugned, bogus, baseless statements are made. The attacks by the very
noisy noise machine of the far right never stops, and it has gotten so
much more in operation in the last few weeks with the numbers on the
President dealing with Social Security, the unpopularity of the efforts
made to spend 2 months on judges, five people, basically.
This is all a distraction by the White House. Why? Because this
country is in trouble for lots of reasons, only one of which is Iraq.
In the last 48 hours, 11 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq.
Scores of Iraqis have been killed in the same period of time. I do not
know--I do not know if anyone knows--the death and destruction that is
taking place in Iraq as we speak. We focus on the dead. The dead
American soldiers are on page A26 of the newspapers now. Sometimes they
do not even make the front section. We do not know because we are not
focusing on the blind, the maimed from that war.
But that is only one of our problems we are not focusing on. Health
care: 45 million Americans are without health care. Have we spent 5
minutes this year talking about health care? No. No. We have been
spending time on five judges.
Have we spent any time about what is happening in our public school
systems around this country? No, not a single minute. The average age
of a public school in America is approaching 50 years. The Leave No
Child Behind Act is leaving kids behind in Nevada and all over this
country.
The environment is something we do not even talk about anymore
because global warming does not exist in the minds of the people at the
White House.
Do we spend any time here talking about the devastating deficit that
is affecting people in my little town of Searchlight and all over the
country? No. This administration took over with a surplus in the
trillions. We now have approached a $7 trillion debt in this country.
So this is all an attempt to distract us from the issues before us.
Rather than spending time on my friend, the distinguished Senator from
Illinois, whom I have known for going on 23 years, who has dedicated
his life to public service--do we have a problem in this country with
the issues he is discussing? Yes. Focus on them, not anything he said.
Let's focus on the issues before us.
I would hope it would be worth a little bit of our time here to see
what we could do about the Defense authorization bill. Five weeks it
has been out of committee--5 weeks. We have our Guard and Reserve that
are overwhelmed with responsibilities in that war. We have men and
women who are there on duty station as we speak. But we do not have a
Defense authorization bill. Why? We always did them in years past. Why?
Because we may get an amendment on that bill dealing with what is going
on with the subject about which my friend speaks. There may be other
amendments that may not be in keeping with the mindset of the White
House.
I want the record to reflect I have great affection for the chairman
of the Armed Services Committee. He is my friend. He is truly a
Southern gentleman, and I care for him a great deal. I am sure he must
be frustrated by the fact that the Defense authorization bill is not
before us.
But I also have great affection, loyalty, and deep friendship that
will be with me for the eternities for my friend from Illinois, who has
been such a good friend over all these many years. He is a person who
loves to talk about issues, whether it is an issue dealing with energy,
as we have talked about here for a few days--the first real substantive
issue we have dealt with, really, in a long time on this Senate floor--
or whether it is any of the other issues I have spoken about here: the
deficit, education, the environment, health care.
Nothing is being talked about. But he cares about those issues
deeply. I would hope we can turn down the noise machine downtown a
little bit and understand the American people want to focus on issues,
issues important to them. They are tired of this ``gotcha'' game
because they don't get you; it is just an attempt to divert attention
from the issues before this country.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.

____________________