portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting global

human & civil rights | imperialism & war

US applying Geneva 'exceptions' in Iraq

The Bush administration has concluded for the first time that some non-Iraqi prisoners captured by American forces in Iraq are not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention, the New York Times has reported.
The Bush administration has concluded for the first time that some non-Iraqi prisoners captured by American forces in Iraq are not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention, the New York Times has reported.

According to unnamed administration officials who spoke with the newspaper, the opinion reached in recent months holds that there are exceptions to prior assertions that the Geneva Convention applies to all prisoners taken in the Iraq war.

The report follows another story in Sunday's Washington Post, which said US intelligence officials were transferring detainees out of Iraq for interrogation.

In those cases, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) invoked a confidential Justice Department memo to justify its actions, the Post said.

The report in NYT said that the legal opinion would allow the military and the CIA to treat at least a small number of non-Iraqi prisoners captured in Iraq in the same way as members of Al Qaeda and the Taliban captured in Afghanistan, Pakistan or elsewhere.

In such cases, the United States has said, the Geneva Convention does not apply.

According to the NYT, the new opinion represented a consensus reached by lawyers from the Departments of State and Justice, as well as other agencies such as the Pentagon and the National Security Council.

A Government official told the newspaper that the opinion had been sought by the CIA to establish the legality of its secret transfers of non-Iraqi prisoners, beginning in April 2003, for interrogation outside Iraq.

Government officials told the NYT that the new ruling could open the way for additional transfers on a broader scale, because the status of prisoners being held in Iraq is reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

The administration takes the view that exceptions from the Geneva Convention would include suspected Al Qaeda members and other terror suspects, as well as foreigners who travelled to Iraq to join the insurgency or engage in acts of terrorism, the paper said.


homepage: homepage: http://www.orbstandard.com/

... 26.Oct.2004 16:30

this thing here

'After visibly urinating on the Geneva Conventions and the Bill of Rights, a senior Justice Department official was asked if he could name a single individual successfully prosecuted on the charge of terrorism so far in the 3 years since 9-11. Laughing, the senior official said he "couldn't think of a single one."'

How do like your war? 26.Oct.2004 16:45

Medium or well done!

Who is the sick one!

The policys of the right wing have been shown for years, by the poison they spill in the world.

just musing, nothing heavy. 26.Oct.2004 19:01


This is the crap that gets Osama his recruits. He tried to get followers by ranting about US troops in Saudi. But that didn't get him very many people willing to commit to sacrificing thier lives in suicide attacks, just those who hated the US troops in Saudi and those who hate us for no fucking reason, and are just haters of freedom. He quickly learned that to get followers willing to die for his cause (he could hate the US for no fucking reason, or because there were US troops in Saudi, who can know for sure), that he would need real causes. He then started using the sanctions against iraq killing Iraqi kids, and democraps and republitrash reloading Zionist guns as fast as they could unload them into Palestinians in his rant. It must have worked, because the people who joined him, not too many seeing as how he needed to change his rant to get followers, because the Americans are in Saudi, already joined him, even if just in spirit, and if a chance to hook up presented itself, they might choose to take the action to join up. All the muslims who would have joined because they hate our freedoms would also have joined before Osama chose to rant about sanctions on Iraq and Palestinians. Why would they need any more convincing to join? Americans being stationed in Saudi would be enough reason for someone who hates the US because we are free to join Osama. RIGHT? Now, Osama has Americans torturing Muslims.

I think the Saudi royals are just as worried about the missing explosives in Iraq. Fuck, the whole place was a grab bag for 5000 year old works of art. How hard could it have been for Osama, and the others who hate us because we are rich and free, to see the potential grab bag for arms. FREE OF CHARGE, shipping expenses, or holes dug, the only expense. One guy watching the chaos of the early days says, "Damn (he probably would NOT say "damn", since he would be skinned alive, but anyway), why are they taking chairs? I would be taking weapons." And the guy next to him says, "Well, why the hell AREN"T WE taking those weapons???" And the rest becomes history. A loud history, with body parts smacking you in the face.

Shit, maybe it was Mossad who took the explosives. Or even the CIA, to create false flag operations. They both were there doing who knows what AND both were torturing Iraqis at Abu Graib. How hard is it to believe that either would also spend a few days taking tons of explosives. Wouldn't people who torture people aso be the kind of people who steal large quantitis of explosives. Iran contra? Shiot, the CIA could have stolen the shit and sold it to Mossad agents in iraq, or to south american drug dealers. Shit, iraqis aren;t the only ones who would try to profit from the chaos Bush's war created.

yes, i been drinking. Show of hands. Do you like? And it must be that time of year. All my highschool buds are talking about thier buds!

That's strange 26.Oct.2004 23:05


This "new ruling" was roundly criticised, when it was discovered, more a year ago, by everybody outside the PNAC and the American "free press".