June 23, 2004

We Don't Need No Stinkin' Geneva Conventions

from - smijer


When Atrios said that there is more than a "whiff of bullshit" about the recent Bush document relsease on interrogation techniques, I'm sure he is right.

Nevertheless, Bush's selectively released documents still finger himself and Rumsfeld. Reckon what's in the part they buried?

Rumsfeld's Nov. 27, 2002, memo approved several methods which apparently would violate Geneva Convention rules, including:

Putting detainees in "stress positions," such as standing, for up to four hours.

Removing prisoners' clothes.

Intimidating detainees with dogs.

Interrogating prisoners for 20 hours at a time.

Forcing prisoners to wear hoods during interrogations and transportation.

Shaving detainees' heads and beards.

Using "mild, non-injurious physical contact," such as poking.

Prisoners at Abu Ghraib were interrogated for as long as 20 hours at a time, kept hooded and naked, intimidated with dogs and forcibly shaved. Bush and other administration officials have said other treatment at the Iraqi prison, such as forcing prisoners to perform sex acts, beating them and piling them in a naked human pyramid, were unquestionably illegal.

Less than two months later, on Jan. 15, 2003, Rumsfeld rescinded approval for those methods without saying why. He appointed a Pentagon panel to recommend proper interrogation methods.

That panel reported to Rumsfeld in April 2003, and its recommendations included prohibiting the removal of clothes, which it said could be considered inhumane treatment under international law. Rumsfeld issued a new set of approved interrogation methods later that month, disallowing nakedness and requiring approval for four techniques: use of rewards or removal of privileges; verbally attacking or insulting the ego of a detainee; alternating friendly and unfriendly interrogators in a "good cop, bad cop" method; and isolation.

Bush had agreed in February 2002 that al-Qaida and Taliban prisoners at Guantanamo Bay were not protected by the Geneva Conventions on prisoners of war because they violated the laws of war themselves.

Bush's previously secret Feb. 7, 2002, order also agrees with Justice and Pentagon lawyers that a president can ignore U.S. law and treaties.

"I accept the legal conclusion of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice that I have the authority to suspend Geneva (conventions) as between the United States and Afghanistan," Bush wrote. "I reserve the right to exercise this authority in this or future conflicts."

Source: ABC News
Photo source: The Olympian


Posted by smijer at June 23, 2004 01:45 PM

I agree.

We should pay more respect to the enemy that is hijacking planes with innocent civilians in them and crashing them into the nearest building which is occuppied with the most innocent victims...that way, ...it will make the news and God, oops, I mean Allah will appreciate it more..

...Gee, if I do that then I will have 72 virgins waiting for me once I am done....

Hey, that sounds much simpler...instead of going to college to learn how to support a family, dealing with responsibilities of raising mature children, ....instead of taking the damn time to make myself somewhat worthwhile to my family and the world around me....I will just obliterate the innocents...in the name of God...I mean Allah. Then I will have everything I have ever wanted.

Yes, this is the psyche's we are dealing with....and I agree with you smidje....maybe we shouldnt be so rough with them, like having dogs around them...or, ...like covering their heads in a shroud....damn, thats damning!!!

Instead, we should give them a warm cup of English tea, ..(I would suggest a pint of warm beer but, you know, ...these guys that blow up children in Pizza parlors have their morals...)

We could allow them to listen to the most classical of music, ...that would soothe the brain...and then, only then in our utmost strategic self gratification, would they unleash all of their secrets....and we would stand a chance of saving a few "infidels",

A little advice.

There is a great place where sand is unlimited.

There may be holes in the great unlimited place in which may be called, ...in the infidel toungue...a desert.

...take your head out of the hole....and take a look around.

I looked at your list of so-called attrocities commited by our government....sir, did you see any of the innocent heads being displayed over the internet?? Did it disturb you?? True, lives end on both sides...but do we cut off the heads of innocents, tape it, and then send it to the family??

Dude, this world is polarized to the point of no return....your back scratching is not going to do anything more than to em-power the enemy...if, in fact, you do consider them your enemy.

univar.jpg Posted by Was Once Banned / May Yet Be Once More... on June 23, 2004 11:01 PM
Link to comment

Wow, I love that logic. I especially love how the world is so neatly divided between "us" (the sky-scraper dwelling pink people) and "them" the desert dwelling browns). I like how when "they" blow up our sky-scraper, then "we" are no longer held to any moral or legal standards.

Unfortunately, it was the pink, sky-scraper-dwelling Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols that blew up our Oklahoma City skyscraper. I suppose I will go torture your pink brother or cousin now. Toodles.

univar.jpg Posted by smijer on June 24, 2004 07:42 AM
Link to comment

Nope, you are doing well but just try and take your head a little bit further out of the sand and maybe you will see....

I care not from the land of which a murderer is born, only that my nation realizes that, in fact, that he is a murderer and that we should take any precaution necessary to protect our innocent children...hell...our innocent grandmothers from needless anhialation, ...we must take every precatution previously used, nay, more precaution than at any time in our history...because honor is not a hurdle anymore, ...for the enemy.

How to protect thee from a dishonorable adversary?

univar.jpg Posted by Was Once Banned / May Yet Be Once More... on June 24, 2004 11:03 PM
Link to comment

If we have to descend into savagery because of the savagery of our enemy, then we are no better than them.

In fact Al Qaeda is savage. In fact, they didn't invent savagery in warfare. It isn't something new. And it doesn't excuse us from descent into the same.

After the Battle of Long Island, Hessian and Highland troops bayonetted unresisting rebel troops. After the Battle of Princeton, American officers watched as their wounded troops were murdered by British infantry.

Despite this, General George Washington gave these orders to the officer placed in charge of the 211 prisoners taken at Princeton:

"...treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to Complain of our Copying the brutal example of the British army in their Treatment of our unfortunate brethren."

- source: Darrel Plant
univar.jpg Posted by smijer on June 25, 2004 07:41 AM
Link to comment

My friend, you may have completely taken this out of context.

GW is credited with incorporating guerrila warefare into the battle scene. Guns of August?

Wars change, methods of wars change, technologys of warfare change, and the bloke that sticks his head in the sand and only studies warfare of past armies??...well, I dont want him leading my troops into battle. , ...yes, the soldier can fight with honor, but (and this is what is plainly obvious about your willingness to accept only what you want to hear) he will "die" with honor.

Too often you try and paint a pretty picture, ...when you should accept reality and then make pracical decisions, ...if those are not the decisions you feel comfortable in making then fine, maybe you are better off blogging instead of being the poor soul that actualy makes these decisions.

...but criticism from a hypocrit wins few arguments.....

...and I love it when you throw in the Rush Limbaugh comparisons because I know.....that YOU know that I "hate him"...I just think you lean on the mean stuff when the opposite side makes an argument that makes sense to yours...cant really stand that now can you??

Luv you bro! ;)

univar.jpg Posted by Was Once Banned / May Yet Be Once More... on June 26, 2004 07:11 PM
Link to comment

Starting at the end of your comment and working backward:

1) I don't know why you bring up Rush Limbaugh. I certainly didn't mention him. If you did, I didn't recognize the reference.

2) If you think that POW torture is a legitimate "tactic of warfare", then your moral position is alien to me. Whatever you suspect a person of doing, once they are in your custody, unable to harm you, helpless, and at your mercy, violating their humanity through torture is not an option for the good guys.

3) If you know of the context that reverses Washington's views on the matter, feel free to provide it. Certainly the founding fathers weren't saints. Jefferson kept slaves. Historical perspective is a good thing because it helps keep us from losing our heads. It reminds us that we have suffered crises before, and that we can win our way through them without sacrificing our humanity for the cause. It reminds us that it is our humanity that makes the fight worthwhile.

univar.jpg Posted by smijer on June 27, 2004 10:28 AM
Link to comment

Just a quick comment and question:

Comment: What you fail to mention is that the Al Qaeda prisoners are not "POW's". They don't wear a uniform, are not recognized by any government, and for sure are not following the Geneva Convention when they "capture" our soldiers (unless you count sawing off a head as coming under the Geneva convention).

Question: If you knew that there was a 100% guarantee that a terrorist attack would take place within days and your information was 100% accurate in that the prisoner you held had the information in him to prevent the attack thus saving the lives of 1,000's, 10,000's, or 100,000's of lives, would you still not condone some form of torture to gain that information? And throw in the mix that your entire family would be included in the list of the dead. Just curious.....

univar.jpg Posted by tickletickle on July 2, 2004 01:46 PM
Link to comment
Comments for this entry are closed. Please leave your notes on a more recent comment thread.