Red Cross: Torture at Gitmo

[Dry]

My question would be about the accuracy of the info get by such means.
What kind of info can the US get now (3 years after the facts) from the prisoners?

Confessions?
Wouldn't someone under such conditions admit having take part in JFK, A. Lincoln and even J. Cesar assassination?
So, validity of confession: zero!

Info about OBL?
Yeah, sure the guy - if he is still alive - hasn't change his habits, contact people,...
Too late guys, info had to be abtained much earlier, within the first weeks.
Validity of info: zero!

So, what is the #$%*ing use of all these?

(I mean besides the vote of rightwing redneck for the FEELING of security/fight against terrorism).

[DinoDoc]

Dry: Well obviously some of them still seem to have valid contacts: http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/10/18/det...acksliders.ap/

[Dry]

I was not talking about holding people in jail, I was talking about interrogation.
The article speaks about going back to terror.

Now about the contacts: no need to remember old contacts. If any young green muslim is able to find a way, I'm sure some old Guantanamo 'hero' will receive great 'help' to come back to business.

[Patroklos]

It seems that there is a direct contridiction between the Hague/Geneva Convention and the mumbo jumbo never heard of and ignored psuedo law you dug up.

TKO, fight goes to Geneva convention.

And under the Geneva convention the best definition for most of the detainees is SPY, so be glad they are not being executed as is out legal right to do

[Moral Hazard]

I hardly believe those British AlQ detainees but ICRC carries some weight in my mind. I don't want to believe it but I need some examples of ICRC misrepresentation.

BTW why don't we allow observers? We as in American citizens should definitely know whats happening in Gitmo.

[DinoDoc]

Why? Given that they aren't covered under the Geneva Conventions, I'm kind of curious why they aren't executed in the field.

[Ramo]

18 USC Sec. 2340A
01/05/99



TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 113C - TORTURE



HEADING

Sec. 2340A. Torture



STATUTE

(a) Offense. - Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.
(b) Jurisdiction. - There is jurisdiction over the activity prohibited in subsection (a) if -

(1) the alleged offender is a national of the United States; or
(2) the alleged offender is present in the United States,
irrespective of the nationality of the victim or alleged
offender.

http://www.capdefnet.org/fdprc/contents/fed_cap_off/18_usc_2340A.htm

What the DoJ argued in a SCOTUS brief:

[T]he Guantanamo detainees . . . are being held by the U.S. military outside the sovereign territory of the United States. It is "undisputed" that Guantanamo is not part of the sovereign United States . . . and that conclusion is compelled by the express terms of the Lease Agreements between the United States and Cuba and the Executive Branch's definitive construction of those agreements. Accordingly, U.S. courts lack jurisdiction to consider claims filed on behalf of aliens held at Guantanamo.

http://www.usdoj.gov/osg/briefs/2003/3mer/2mer/2003-0334.mer.aa.html

[Ramo]

McCain on the ICRC:

Rather than placing blame on the ICRC or other humanitarian groups, we must instead fix our gaze on those individuals who perpetrated abuses at Abu Ghraib. Had American officials paid heed earlier to ICRC reports of these abuses at Abu Ghraib, we could have limited the damage these individuals have done to America's international standing. Only by prosecuting these individuals, in the letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions, can we remove the stain on those 2.3 million men and women in the U.S. armed forces who consider such behavior entirely un-American.

http://newdelhi.usembassy.gov/wwwhpr6304j.html

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Oerdin
After all the GC says in its text that it is the supreme law of war so as I see it in war time we go according to the internationally agreed standards of war time conduct.

As DD suggests executive considers these not covered by the rules of war as these are not lawful combatants. As such, they are not covered by the Geneva convention. That being said Geneva convention offers protection only for lawful combatants. Spies etc. were routinely executed in times past. Our tender mercies for these nonlawful spy-like combatants should be applauded not derided.

[Ramo]

See my post. It's illegal according to the US code.

And calling kids we pick up in Afghanistan "spies" is totally absurd.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Ramo
See my post. It's illegal according to the US code.

And calling kids we pick up in Afghanistan "spies" is totally absurd.

So you advocate taking them back to Afghanistan and having them executed there.

[Ramo]

Yes, that's exactly what I wrote in that post.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It seems that there is a direct contridiction between the Hague/Geneva Convention and the mumbo jumbo never heard of and ignored psuedo law you dug up.

How is the Convention on Torture, signed and ratified by the US, 'psuedo law'? It is every bit of law as the Geneva Conventions.

[DinoDoc]

Well it would save a lot of headaches especially since only the high level opperatives are likely to have much in the way of actionable intel.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Well it would save a lot of headaches especially since only the high level opperatives are likely to have much in the way of actionable intel.

We're waaaay toooo merciful to actually be law abiding.