The Case Against Gitmo

[Batman Jr.]

Background Paper on Geneva Conventions and Persons Held by U.S. Forces from Human Rights Watch

The above paper explains, among other things, why even "unlawful combatants" are granted certain protections under the Geneva Conventions, why Article 5 of the Third Geneva Convention is not being honored as it is intended to be, and how U.S. detention practices are infringements on other areas of international humanitarian law such as the Convention Against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

 

[Batman Jr.]

Doesn't Grammatron or any others who claimed that Guantanamo Bay has absolutely nothing to do with the Conventions have anything to say about this?

 

[demon]

It`s pretty obvious that there are some who will not accept any evidence of any serious wrong doing on the part of the coalition as far as Guantanamo Bay and other prisons and detention centers are concerned but are quite willing to believe anything that the leaders of the coaliton say, even in the face of extensive and mounting proof of the dissembling of these leaders and it extends to all spheres of the invasion and utterly chaotic occupation (an occupation against the clear wishes of the people) of Iraq.

To put it another way:

All Iraqis/Afghanis/released prisoners/middle eastern types in general, lie about atrocities committed by the Coalition.
They make stuff up; they're totally unreliable apart from when they're talking about the atrocities committed by Saddam, then they're 100% reliable and accurate.
Similarly, members of the former regime are the biggest criminals and liars on the planet apart from when they offer evidence against George Galloway, or kept the myth about the non-existent WMD alive, then they become sober and reliable citizens whose word is gospel.

War is peace.
Slavery is freedom.

 

[Grammatron]

Doesn't Grammatron or any others who claimed that Guantanamo Bay has absolutely nothing to do with the Conventions have anything to say about this?

Yup.

How about as my full response I start another thread?

 

[Batman Jr.]

Yup.

How about as my full response I start another thread?

Whatever you want. I just want to hear your input since you had been especially adamant before about the Conventions not applying to detainees.

 

[Grammatron]

Whatever you want. I just want to hear your input since you had been especially adamant before about the Conventions not applying to detainees.

No problem here you go. Although I recommend posts by Cylinder since he seems to be very knowladgable on the subject.

 

[Batman Jr.]

No problem here you go. Although I recommend posts by Cylinder since he seems to be very knowladgable on the subject.

Citing that thread is pretty much a non-sequitur. Did you even read the Human Rights Watch article? They explain why just about every anti-Convention conviction on the issue of Guantanamo Bay you discussed in the thread is wrong. I was hoping you can tell me why the arguments HRW gives don't vitiate your, Cylinder's, Ziggurat's, and others' stances.

 

[Grammatron]

Citing that thread is pretty much a non-sequitur. Did you even read the Human Rights Watch article? They explain why just about every anti-Convention conviction on the issue of Guantanamo Bay you discussed in the thread is wrong. I was hoping you can tell me why the arguments HRW gives don't vitiate your, Cylinder's, Ziggurat's, and others' stances.

It's 3 years old and does not seem to take into account recent rulings mentioned by Cylinder.

 

[Batman Jr.]

It's 3 years old and does not seem to take into account recent rulings mentioned by Cylinder.

It doesn't matter. It's still very relevant. In fact, there is kind of an indirect commentary which presages the questionable legitimacy of the tribunals so far allowed to hear the cases of detainees:

From http://hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/pow-bck.htm
Regulations issued by the four branches of the U.S. military in 1997 set out detailed procedures for tribunals consisting of three commissioned officers to make determinations of status where doubts arise in accordance with the Third Geneva Convention. Under the 1997 U.S. military regulations, persons whose status is to be determined shall: be advised of their rights at the beginning of their hearings; be allowed to attend all open sessions and will be provided with an interpreter if necessary; be allowed to call witnesses if reasonably available, and to question those witnesses called by the tribunal; have a right to testify or otherwise address the Tribunal; and not be compelled to testify before the Tribunal. According to the regulations, following the hearing of testimony and the review of documents and other evidence, the Tribunal shall determine the status of the subject of the proceeding in closed session by majority vote. Preponderance of evidence shall be the standard used in reaching this determination, and a written report of the tribunal decision is to be completed in each case.

Detainees have thus far not been permitted to call witnesses, cross-examine tribunal witnesses and haven't even received so much as a translating dictionary. This is in obvious disrespect of the military regulations concerning tribunals adopted in 1997.

It also has to be pointed out that no one has received POW status. Given what information is disclosed to us by the government—specifically that a part of that body unfairly generalized as "unlawful combatants" is made up of Taliban members which the report explains would meet the requirements of 4a1 in the Third Convention—and putting it in the context of this fact shows blatant apathy to the Conventions. Furthermore, "unlawful combatants" still remain in a pocket of legality wholly outside the Conventions if you solicit the administration for a description of the situation. HRW shows this to be dishonest and repugnantly seditious in respect to long-acknowledged humanitarian mores.

But please don't dismiss this just because it hadn't the opportunity to review some of the more recent rulings. Read it. Glean from it what you can.

Here's another article from just a couple of days ago showing how fairly the process is working with the new rulings enacted.