Rogue terror state violates Geneva Convention

[mattd]

US violates the Geneva Convention 
(english)
by Idiot/Savant
3:35am Sun Jan 13 '02 (Modified on 4:34am Sun Jan 13 '02)
Some of the ways in which the US is violating the Geneva Convention at 
Guantanamo.
The US is a signatory to the Geneva Convention, which specifies the 
conditions under which such prisoners are to be treated.  The Convention 
covers irregular forces such as al-Qaeda as well as regular armed forces, 
and a quick skim suggests that the US are violating it in several ways.
Interrogation: the US has publicly stated they will interrogate the 
prisoners; however this is specificly forbidden by the convention.  No 
prisoner is bound to give anything more than the infamnous "name, rank and 
serial number" (or equivalent); coercion to gain more information is 
expressly forbidden "No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of 
coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them 
information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may 
not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or 
disadvantageous treatment of any kind." (Article 17)

Housing: the US are housing the POWs in wire-mesh cages.  Unless US troops 
are quartered in similar conditions, this is a violation: "Prisoners of war 
shall be quartered under conditions as favourable as those for the forces 
of the Detaining Power who are billeted in the same area. The said 
conditions shall make allowance for the habits and customs of the prisoners 
and shall in no case be prejudicial to their health. The foregoing 
provisions shall apply in particular to the dormitories of prisoners of war 
as regards both total surface and minimum cubic space, and the general 
installations, bedding and blankets. " (Article 25).

Trial and punishment: POWs are considered to be subject to the same laws 
and regulations as soldiers of the detaining power; they may be tried only 
by military courts (except where jurisdiction would normally belong to 
civil courts), and sentances must be the same as for soldiers of the 
detaining power commiting similar acts.  POWs tried for acts commited prior 
to capture retain the benefits of the Convention even if convicted.
Prisoners must be tried according to the same standards as soldiers of the 
detaining power, must be granted access to adequete and independent counsel 
of their own choosing, and may not be tried in courts which do not offer 
"essential guarantees of independence and impartiality as generally 
recognized".  (Articles 82 - 107) In other words, Bush's kangaroo military 
tribunals are out.
There's other questions relating to provision of clothing, not holding POWs 
in confinement and the conditions under which they were transferred to Cuba 
(shackled, chained to their seats for the whole flight, and (according to 
the news) unable to move even to relieve themselves), but I'm sticking to 
things which can be clearly proved rather than venturing into murky territory.
If US prisoners were treated in this manner, the US would be kicking and 
screaming.  Is this another case of US moral exceptionalism?
Idiot/Savant
add your own comments
Good stuff 
(english)
by anon
4:02am Sun Jan 13 '02
I'm pleased to see any of this type of stuff appear on Indymedia. If we are 
thinking, then maybe others will start to think also (I'm an optimist 
occasionally).
My familiarity is with the Hague Convention that preceded the Geneva 
Conventions. What I see here is 'the worst' of the breaches in the POW 
rules that I studied from the WWI era. The US hasn't the right to pick and 
chose which things it obeys - but where the heck are the people with the 
clout to stop them? I am convinced that the UN is a waste of space.
I totally agree that the US would be screaming if someone did something 
like this to US troops. In WWI, stuff like the US was largely 'controlled' 
(a.k.a. carefully hidden) out of fear of what 'the enemy' would do to the 
captor country's troops if 'the enemy' caught any. Thus the US is seemingly 
setting up its own troops for horrible deaths.
Of course, maybe there is truth to the many hundreds of US deaths that have 
been claimed by the Taliban and supposedly hidden by US authorities????????
WE have the clout to stop them 
(english)
by proffr1 at etc
4:27am Sun Jan 13 '02
Its all laid out in assassination politics,like arnie Swarvztnegger reading 
from a cue card.(especially p 10)
Soft drill a few safely and the last empire will crumble into dust.Crypto 
anarchy is here folks.We ARE ALL FREE.
When cryptography is outlawed V? PS+++ PE Y+ PGP- t* 5+++ X R* tv b+ DI+ 
D++ G++>+++ e>++ h-- r++ y+
Spread the great news!
Extraordinary Combatants 
(english)
by Archimedes
4:34am Sun Jan 13 '02
The Bush Administration is taking the position that the detainees 
transported to Cuba are not prisoners of war, but extralegal combatants, 
i.e., they are not members of the duly constituted military force of a 
recognized government.
With regard to the al Qaeda forces, this is correct; they should be handled 
as criminal defendants, not as captured soldiers. A propos of the Taliban 
forces, however, this is puzzling since the US formerly and recently 
recognized and interacted with the Taliban as the legitimate government of 
Afghanistan. One is also left to wonder why, if none of the combatants are 
state representatives, the US feels justified invading and devastating a 
sovreign nation to pursue criminal suspects. There seems to be some 
confused thinking amongst our best and brightest on these points.