Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:15:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: US Violates Afghan Prisoners Rights to Life...and Justice


--0-355653220-1048698923=:95668


 
 John Foster <borealis-AT-mercuryspeed.com> wrote:
Hi Bob,

The Geneva Convention on War states that every POW must be
treated with dignity. However Afghan Taliban POW's are not
being treated like POW's by the US. Many of the Afghan
soldiers will not be tried in a legal court, but many
certainly will be executed by the US. 

The bizarre latter portion of this statement notwithstanding ("executed?"), you do bring up a good point about those detained in Guantanamo.  They're still at Camp Xray, right?  The way the U.S. has avoided possible interpretations of international law on this is to name the Afghans "illegal combatants" and not "prisoners of war."  Therefore they may be detained without representation or the due process laws of either nation (though what sort of due process laws the Taliban had might also make for interesting disussion).  So the wording moots your point--they're not being treated like POWs (though conditions are hardly wretched) because they are not, technically, POWs.  Therefore the Geneva rules do not apply.  Besides, the U.S. has worked so hard to dilute the power of the ICC that their possible action on this is likely to be of no consequence.  

This is strictly
against the Geneva Conventions pertaining to POW's. Even the
Nazi leaders were tried in a legal court where rules were
applied. The US is quilty of war crimes....

I don't think the trials of Nazi leaders and possible legal enquiries into U.S. actions are comparable here--I don't even think the concept of international law is vaguely the same at this point.  And "quilt" generally requires proof.  

JS 



!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------!

 "...even if he recopied them later, as I suspect he sometimes did, he marked his card or cards not with the date of his final adjustments, but with that of his Corrected Draft or first Fair Copy. I mean, he preserved the date of actual creation rather than that of second or third thoughts. There is a very loud amusement park right in front of my present lodgings."



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
--0-355653220-1048698923=:95668

HTML VERSION:

 John Foster <borealis-AT-mercuryspeed.com> wrote:

Hi Bob,

The Geneva Convention on War states that every POW must be
treated with dignity. However Afghan Taliban POW's are not
being treated like POW's by the US. Many of the Afghan
soldiers will not be tried in a legal court, but many
certainly will be executed by the US.

The bizarre latter portion of this statement notwithstanding ("executed?"), you do bring up a good point about those detained in Guantanamo.  They're still at Camp Xray, right?  The way the U.S. has avoided possible interpretations of international law on this is to name the Afghans "illegal combatants" and not "prisoners of war."  Therefore they may be detained without representation or the due process laws of either nation (though what sort of due process laws the Taliban had might also make for interesting disussion).  So the wording moots your point--they're not being treated like POWs (though conditions are hardly wretched) because they are not, technically, POWs.  Therefore the Geneva rules do not apply.  Besides, the U.S. has worked so hard to dilute the power of the ICC that their possible action on this is likely to be of no consequence. 

This is strictly
against the Geneva Conventions pertaining to POW's. Even the
Nazi leaders were tried in a legal court where rules were
applied. The US is quilty of war crimes....

I don't think the trials of Nazi leaders and possible legal enquiries into U.S. actions are comparable here--I don't even think the concept of international law is vaguely the same at this point.  And "quilt" generally requires proof. 

JS

!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------!

 "...even if he recopied them later, as I suspect he sometimes did, he marked his card or cards not with the date of his final adjustments, but with that of his Corrected Draft or first Fair Copy. I mean, he preserved the date of actual creation rather than that of second or third thoughts. There is a very loud amusement park right in front of my present lodgings."