Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rummy and Bush SAID they would be scraping Geneva Rules

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Ksec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-04 11:36 PM
Original message
Rummy and Bush SAID they would be scraping Geneva Rules
Its right here in the Post article

Quote; "His Pentagon ruled that the United States would no longer be bound by the Geneva Conventions; that Army regulations on the interrogation of prisoners would not be observed"

How much more clear should we spell it out for Crissakes. Bush OKed this policy or it wouldnt have been happening.

Now why isnt this being brought out? My God, its clear as the nose on your face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MSgt213 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-04 11:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. where's the article?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WFF Donating Member (277 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-04 11:37 PM
Response to Original message
2. Link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
keithyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-04 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
3. Been saying this all along. We need a link to the statements of Bush
and Rummy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ksec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-04 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. Hold on. Its in the WP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ksec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-04 11:42 PM
Response to Original message
5. here ya go
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WFF Donating Member (277 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-04 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. That doesn't make the U.S. look too good, does it?
The rest of the world most really hate our arogance. The next president will have a lot of work to do to heal wounds with our allies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ladyhawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-08-04 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. Gotta register. Don't wanna.
Can you post the pertinent quote? I'd like to add it to my very angry new e-mail signature.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ksec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-08-04 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Here it is - not all of it though , gotta watch the copyrights rules

Mr. Rumsfeld's Responsibility

Thursday, May 6, 2004; Page A34


THE HORRIFIC abuses by American interrogators and guards at the Abu Ghraib prison and at other facilities maintained by the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan can be traced, in part, to policy decisions and public statements of Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld. Beginning more than two years ago, Mr. Rumsfeld decided to overturn decades of previous practice by the U.S. military in its handling of detainees in foreign countries. His Pentagon ruled that the United States would no longer be bound by the Geneva Conventions; that Army regulations on the interrogation of prisoners would not be observed; and that many detainees would be held incommunicado and without any independent mechanism of review. Abuses will take place in any prison system. But Mr. Rumsfeld's decisions helped create a lawless regime in which prisoners in both Iraq and Afghanistan have been humiliated, beaten, tortured and murdered -- and in which, until recently, no one has been held accountable.



The lawlessness began in January 2002 when Mr. Rumsfeld publicly declared that hundreds of people detained by U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan "do not have any rights" under the Geneva Conventions. That was not the case: At a minimum, all those arrested in the war zone were entitled under the conventions to a formal hearing to determine whether they were prisoners of war or unlawful combatants. No such hearings were held, but then Mr. Rumsfeld made clear that U.S. observance of the convention was now optional. Prisoners, he said, would be treated "for the most part" in "a manner that is reasonably consistent" with the conventions -- which, the secretary breezily suggested, was outdated.

In one important respect, Mr. Rumsfeld was correct: Not only could captured al Qaeda members be legitimately deprived of Geneva Convention guarantees (once the required hearing was held) but such treatment was in many cases necessary to obtain vital intelligence and prevent terrorists from communicating with confederates abroad. But if the United States was to resort to that exceptional practice, Mr. Rumsfeld should have established procedures to ensure that it did so without violating international conventions against torture and that only suspects who truly needed such extraordinary handling were treated that way. Outside controls or independent reviews could have provided such safeguards. Instead, Mr. Rumsfeld allowed detainees to be indiscriminately designated as beyond the law -- and made humane treatment dependent on the goodwill of U.S. personnel.

Much of what has happened at the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay is shrouded in secrecy. But according to an official Army report, a system was established at the camp under which military guards were expected to "set the conditions" for intelligence investigations. The report by Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba says the system was later introduced at military facilities at Bagram airbase in Afghanistan and the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, even though it violates Army regulations forbidding guards to participate in interrogations.

The Taguba report and others by human rights groups reveal that the detention system Mr. Rumsfeld oversees has become so grossly distorted that military police have abused or tortured prisoners under the direction of civilian contractors and intelligence officers outside the military chain of command -- not in "exceptional" cases, as Mr. Rumsfeld said Tuesday, but systematically. Army guards have held "ghost" prisoners detained by the CIA and even hidden these prisoners from the International Red Cross. Meanwhile, Mr. Rumsfeld's contempt for the Geneva Conventions has trickled down: The Taguba report says that guards at Abu Ghraib had not been instructed on them and that no copies were posted in the facility.

The abuses that have done so much harm to the U.S. mission in Iraq might have been prevented had Mr. Rumsfeld been responsive to earlier reports of violations. Instead, he publicly dismissed or minimized such accounts. He and his staff ignored detailed reports by respected human rights groups about criminal activity at U.S.-run prisons in Afghanistan, and they refused to provide access to facilities or respond to most questions. In December 2002, two Afghan detainees died in events that were ruled homicides by medical officials; only when the New York Times obtained the story did the Pentagon confirm that an investigation was underway, and no results have yet been announced. Not until other media obtained the photos from Abu Ghraib did Mr. Rumsfeld fully acknowledge what had happened, and not until Tuesday did his department disclose that 25 prisoners have died in U.S. custody in Iraq and Afghanistan. Accountability for those deaths has been virtually nonexistent: One soldier was punished with a dishonorable discharge.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-08-04 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. Page A 34! Say it Loud and Proud! (not)
oh well, it's a beginning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemBones DemBones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-04 11:56 PM
Response to Original message
7. Hillary Clinton nailed Rummy on this in the hearings.

No one else mentioned it, as best I remember.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-08-04 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Rummy also knew
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chaska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-08-04 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
9. Talk it up. Keep kicked. Let's make it an issue. Excellent point, BTW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ksec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-08-04 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. would this not be considered war crimes?
I mean he just scraped a agreement made by the entire world. How much more do we need here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-08-04 12:54 AM
Response to Original message
13. been saying it for three four days now
Edited on Sat May-08-04 12:55 AM by seabeyond
and all their action shows it to be true.

doing it at gitmo, sending them out in afghanistan, and contractors in iraq

dont stop at rumsfield...........rumsfield just didnt know about those damn digital cameras
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProdigalProfligate Donating Member (8 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-08-04 01:04 AM
Response to Original message
14. Here's an article from Feb 2002
Let's you judge whether Rumpot's attitude had anything to do with the mess in the Iraqi prison.


http://iws.ccccd.edu/lckeith/The%20Prisoner%20Question.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 08:41 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC