I would like to explain briefly the reasons I think we should vote against that reauthorization. There are two primary reasons. First has to do with the additional provision that was passed neither by the House nor by the Senate but was dropped into the conference report without Republican involvement; that is, the provision that Senator Feinstein authored that would substitute for the authority that agencies of the United States currently have--agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency--to interrogate foreign terrorists. It would substitute for the current rules under which they operate the U.S. Army Field Manual. The U.S. Army Field Manual is a document that is prepared for use for all of our military Armed Forces, to provide rules of the road for them in interrogating enemy prisoners of war. So when they capture someone on the battlefield, in order to ensure that the Geneva Conventions are adhered to, there is a set of guidelines set out in the Army Field Manual that very explicitly explain to our soldiers exactly how they need to treat these prisoners and what kind of interrogation in which they can engage.
On the recordFebruary 13, 2008
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Opposing the reauthorization of the Intelligence Authorization Act during Senate floor debate.
Share
More from Jon Kyl
Dec 18, 2018
I thank the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee for engaging in this brief colloquy and for specifically calling for a hearing a couple of weeks ago at which the two cochairmen of the National Defense Strategy Commission…
Nov 14, 2023
we would not be recommending that the United States start a new arms race, that is not something this commission would do
Dec 18, 2018
the chairman of the Armed Services Committee is exactly correct. You could illustrate the same things with charts relating to our Air Force, to our Army, to our Marine Corps--all elements of our services. It is not just in the number of…





