Detainee Treatment Act of 2005

In a recent discussion with friends I raised the issue of U.S. treatment of detainees, which broke open after the scandalous abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.  I along with many others were cautiously relieved when John McCain's Anti-Torture Amendment was signed into law.  But it seems our caution was justified when President Bush signed the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005.  Mr. Nat Hentoff, nationally renowned authority on the first Amendment and the Bill of Rights states this law strips prisoners at Guantanamo Bay of habeas corpus rights which leaves them with no recourse to our courts.

Various points of view were brought out in our discussion such as the dastardly deeds of the terrorists, and how else can we deal with them except as an eye for and eye.  Others related how in every war from the beginning of history terrible abuses and atrocities have always occurred.  However valid some of these points are, my question is why doesn't our government leadership instead of stonewalling and pointing fingers at low ranking military personnel simply say, “This is how war is and we intend to abuse and torture and deprive detainees of their rights because we are confident the American people will be with us?”

I'm sure Alberto Gonzales, U.S. Attorney General, reflected those views when he labeled rules of The Geneva Convention as "quaint".  However, has it not been obvious that a large percentage of the American people do not agree with the torture philosophy irregardless of their position on Iraq?  What is most troubling to me is that many of these detainees are held on suspicion, not charged, and have no recourse to the courts.  I have written to Senators Voinovich and DeWine regarding their glowing appraisal of the McCain Amendment and now ask their response to the affects of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005.