TASSC'S RESPONSE TO THE LETTER 
FROM PRESIDENT CLINTON

        
Today in the United States alone, it is estimated that there are 400,000 torture 
survivors.  Millions more live in other nations around the world.  They are 
survivors of what is called the plague of the twentieth century.  Last 
December, the U.N. General Assembly, aware of the continuing horrors of the 
torture experienced by so many, sought to bring this crime against humanity 
into the forefront of the worldıs consciousness; and thereby declared June 26, 
the International Day in Support of Torture Victims/Survivors.

In Washington, human rights organizations and survivors of political 
violence came together under the name,  Torture Abolition and Survivors 
Support Committee (TASSC) to plan for this special day.  Among the first 
decisions we made were that we would stress the international aspect of 
torture, and that survivors would speak for themselves.

A number of events have been planned for the next few days.  Unfortunately, 
one for which we held high hoped will not take place.  Given the importance 
of the day, we believed that a presidential proclamation was in order.  We 
also believed in the mutual benefit that would be derived from a meeting 
between survivors and President Clinton.

For this reason, on May 20th, we issued an invitation to the President to meet 
with torture survivors.  We were aware that he would be in China on the 
26th and, thus, we indicated flexibility in scheduling the meeting.  Twenty-
four senators and sixty-five members of the House of Representatives signed 
letter urging the President to accept our invitation.  One hundred and forty-
one non-governmental organizations signed a similar letter.

On the afternoon of June 23rd, we received a (faxed) letter from Mr. Clinton.  
Much to our disappointment, the letter we received made absolutely no 
mention of our invitation. 

We asked the President to issue a proclamation recognizing a day being 
commemorated in cities around the world.  We asked him to meet with a 
group of survivors to hear what they had to say and then to respond.  We 
even proposed that this be a private meeting.  Our invitation was neither 
complicated nor sinister.

We believe that Mr. Clinton should have responded to out invitation, either 
positively or negatively.  We are at a loss to explain why he did not.