What treaty does the use of torture in the war on terror violate?
I seem to recall that there is a specific treaty that the U.S violated with the use of torture in the war on terror. What treaty is it?
The Geneva Convention. But a 2004 Memo by the administration says: It permits the CIA to take Iraqis out of the country to be interrogated for a “brief but not indefinite period.” It also says the CIA can permanently remove persons deemed to be “illegal aliens” under “local immigration law.” Most specialists in international law say the memo violates one of the most basic rights of the Geneva Convention. During the war in Afghanistan, the administration ruled that al Qaeda fighters were not considered “protected persons” under the convention. Many of them were transferred out of the country to the naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere for interrogations. By contrast, the U.S. government deems former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party and military, as well as insurgents and other civilians in Iraq, to be protected by the Geneva Conventions. Most legal experts are disturbed by the violations of the Geneva conventions. The former administration had a policy of ignoring laws they found inconvenient.
Some people feel the Geneva Convention does not apply because the combatants were not wearing uniforms. I honestly do not understand that argument. Who cares what they are wearing? We still have an obligation to give all people basic human rights. I don’t care what crimes they committed. We still need to have a higher standard.
Filed in: war on terror
The Geneva Convention.
References :
Hapeus Corpus and the Geneva Convention. I also want to take this time to promise if I go on a Columbine style massacre I wont shoot myself after Im finished killing all those people.
References :
not treaty, i think it is in our bill of rights or constitution or something not to use
"CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT" Torture is that.
References :
You know what cracks me up, the idea by liberals that somehow "torture" is specific to this war. If any of you would bother to read history you would see that this sort of thing was happening in every war fought, including the ones we wage.
When are the Liberals in this Country going to start condemning the real torture inflicted on innocent civilians by terrorists, Oh I forgot, you guys are on their side, aren't you?
Oh the Geneva convention is a set of rules meant to protect the uniformed soldiers of a recognized power. Historically terrorists were tried by Court Martial and if found guilty executed.
References :
The Geneva Convention. Also Chivalric Ideas around in Medievael Ages. 1700's Agreement on treatment of prisoners and non combatants. Dutch Agreement . Also The International Agreement On Human Rights. The U.N. Charter Of Human Rights, The International Criminal Court, The Ten Commandments if death deliberate after . Last is not an international agreement but still works in cases of deliberate killing of prisoners. Thou Shall Not Kill, Thou Shall Not Murder is correct usage according to some.
References :
suggestions.
First of all, the USA is a long standing signed member of the Geneva Convention binding agreement regarding military conduct.
Here is a direct quote form the
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
General Provisions
Part II
Article 13
Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.
Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.
Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited.
References :
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm
During a time of war, the Geneva Convention applies. The United States went astray when it invaded Afghanistan and rounded up all Afghans who fought back, calling them "illegal enemy combatants," when they were actually POWs.
References :
The Geneva Convention.
But a 2004 Memo by the administration says:
It permits the CIA to take Iraqis out of the country to be interrogated for a "brief but not indefinite period." It also says the CIA can permanently remove persons deemed to be "illegal aliens" under "local immigration law."
Most specialists in international law say the memo violates one of the most basic rights of the Geneva Convention.
During the war in Afghanistan, the administration ruled that al Qaeda fighters were not considered "protected persons" under the convention.
Many of them were transferred out of the country to the naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere for interrogations. By contrast, the U.S. government deems former members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party and military, as well as insurgents and other civilians in Iraq, to be protected by the Geneva Conventions.
Most legal experts are disturbed by the violations of the Geneva conventions but as usual Cowboy George could give a sh*t. This administration has a usual policy of ignoring laws they find inconvenient.
How nice that the person below me feels the Geneva Convention does not apply because the combatants were not wearing uniforms. I honestly do not understand that argument. Who cares what they are wearing? We still have an obligation to give all people basic human rights. I don`t care what crimes they committed. We still need to have a higher standard.
References :
I have been keeping track of GWB`s cavalier indifference to the Constitution and other laws he finds inconvenient.
To answer you….NONE ….the one your hinting about is the Geneva Convention…it gives protection to UNIFORMED combatants from a recognized COUNTRY that act in war on MILITARY personnel and emplacements…….It does NOT give protection to TERRORISTS or spys…nor insurgents….so as usual the LIBS and their TERRORIST SUPPORTING WAYS ARE PROVEN >>>>WRONG
References :