yo yo yo search it!

Showing posts with label common article 3. Show all posts
Showing posts with label common article 3. Show all posts

Sunday, April 27, 2008

THE three MOST absurd words in the entire universe are:

"Bush administration's interpretation "


ha

ha

ha

Administration Says Particulars May Trump Geneva Protections

Washington Post Staff Writer

The Geneva Conventions' ban on "outrages against personal dignity" does not automatically apply to terrorism suspects in the custody of U.S. intelligence agencies, the Justice Department has suggested to Congress in recent letters that lay out the Bush administration's interpretation of the international treaty.

Lawyers for the department, offering insight into the legal basis for the CIA's controversial interrogation program, reasserted in the letters the Bush administration's long-held view that it has considerable leeway in deciding how the conventions' rules apply to the harsh questioning of combatants in the war on terrorism.

While the United States is legally bound by the conventions' Common Article 3 and its requirement to treat detainees humanely, the definition of humane treatment can vary, depending on the detainee's identity and the importance of the information he possesses, a Justice Department official wrote last September and this March to a Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee..........



Thursday, July 26, 2007

even these two

my polar opposites think king george and his court are wreaking havoc on america. now and for YEARS to come. sure it's only on one issue, but like the previous posting, it's a start. are we brutes and savages? i ask you that

War Crimes and the White House
The Dishonor in a Tortured New 'Interpretation' of the Geneva Conventions


By P.X. Kelley and Robert F. Turner

One of us was appointed commandant of the Marine Corps by President Ronald Reagan; the other served as a lawyer in the Reagan White House and has vigorously defended the constitutionality of warrantless National Security Agency wiretaps, presidential signing statements and many other controversial aspects of the war on terrorism. But we cannot in good conscience defend a decision that we believe has compromised our national honor and that may well promote the commission of war crimes by Americans and place at risk the welfare of captured American military forces for generations to come.
The Supreme Court
held in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld last summer that all detainees captured in the war on terrorism are protected by Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which prescribes minimum standards of treatment for all persons who are no longer taking an active part in an armed conflict not of an international character. It provides that "in all circumstances" detainees are to be "treated humanely."............