ted wrote:Its an island in the Kattegat strait between Denmark and Sweden.Splint wrote:by the way, where's Old Zealand?
No, they are not trained soldiers, nor have they taken an oath to follow the chain of command. In an instance such as this, the perps should be arrested and tried by a military style counsel, but serve their sentence in a regular jail. They cannot be tried by a regular court, because it is not setup to handle international law. It can be held in military court because they do handle international law, but you cannot court martial a civilian - duh - so the next best thing would be to convict them of a war crime and then translate that into an appropriate civil sentence.When civilians participate willingly in military affairs should they be defacto militants, and subject to military law ?
I wonder if Rumsfield is going to resign.WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Pentagon has declassified and will release as soon as Tuesday memos signed by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that critics argue authorized torture of detainees at the U.S. prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
But Pentagon officials strongly disputed the contention that the aggressive techniques, including the use of dogs to induce fear, constituted torture.
Among the memos, Pentagon officials said, is a directive signed by Rumsfeld in October 2002 authorizing a technique called "water boarding," in which a prisoner is strapped down, immersed in water, and made to feel as if he is going to drown.
But officials insisted the technique was never used and that the authorization for it was rescinded in January 2003 following an internal review of interrogation techniques and objections from military lawyers who said the practice would violate the Geneva Conventions.
The "water boarding" was requested for one particular prisoner, a high-level al Qaeda detainee who was believed to have information about a possible terrorist strike, as well as details about the attacks of September 11, 2001.
Other U.S. officials identified the detainee as Mohamed al-Kahtani, a Saudi believed by some to be the intended "20th hijacker."
The memo signed by Rumsfeld did not specify that the "water boarding" would be used on only one person, but it did require further notification and authorization before the technique could be used.
Pentagon officials said that instead of applying the technique, investigators subjected the prisoner to an interrogation session of up to 20 hours, forcibly shaved his head, and fed him military rations instead of his normal diet.
Last week, Rumsfeld complained that people were defining torture in a way that -- in his words -- "doesn't fit a dictionary definition of the word that one would normally accept."
"There is no wiggle room in the president's mind or my mind about torture," he told reporters at the Pentagon after a meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
"That is not something that's permitted under the Geneva Convention or the laws of the United States. That is not to say that somebody else couldn't characterize something in a way that would fit what I described."
Sources said another memo signed by Rumsfeld authorizes forcing detainees to stand for up to four hours at a time.
"I stand for eight hours a day," scribbled Rumsfeld at the bottom of the page according to a source. Rumsfeld, who does not like to sit, works at a stand-up desk in his Pentagon office.
The question of whether Rumsfeld or President Bush authorized interrogation techniques in the war on terrorism that would violate U.S. or international laws has become an issue in the wake of the revelations of abuse at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
According to a classified report prepared for Rumsfeld last year, the United States was not bound by prohibitions against torture in the Geneva Conventions in detaining al Qaeda and Taliban members.
The report, a copy of which was obtained by CNN, was dated March 6, 2003, and based on an advisory opinion from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. (Full story)
Bush was asked about the report during a June 10 news conference at the G-8 summit in Georgia.
"The authorization I issued was that anything we did would conform to U.S. law and would be consistent with international treaty obligations," Bush told reporters.
Bush said he could not remember whether he saw the report but reiterated he had instructed that the treatment of terror suspects stay within U.S. and international laws.
Bush was asked, "If you knew a person was in U.S. custody and had specific information about an imminent terrorist attack that could kill hundreds or even thousands of Americans, would you authorize the use of any means necessary to get that information and to save those lives?"
"What I've authorized is that we stay within U.S. law," Bush responded.
Leading up to the Iraq war, Bush said Iraqi prisoners would be treated in accordance with the Geneva Conventions. Rumsfeld said last month that Bush had made that instruction clear.
Under heavy questioning from Democratic senators at a hearing two weeks ago, Attorney General John Ashcroft refused to say what legal advice his department might have given others in the executive branch regarding the possible use of torture against terror suspects. (Full story)
But he insisted Bush did not authorize illegal techniques during interrogations
Nathan is half right, among other things you have to have some sort of distinctive clothing or sign that can identify you from reasonable distance, to be considered a prisoner of war.Jeremy wrote:The Geneva convention applies to all prisoners of war, regardless of what they are wearing, their political beliefs, hair colour, or love of footbag.
Oh, if they don't love footbag, then we cut their arms off so they have to play footbag.The Geneva convention applies to all prisoners of war, regardless of what they are wearing, their political beliefs, hair colour, or love of footbag.
