Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WSJ: Will Old Rulings Play a Role In Terror Cases?
Wall Street Journal ^ | April 7, 2005 | JESS BRAVIN

Posted on 04/07/2005 8:16:32 AM PDT by OESY

...Today, government lawyers will ask a federal appeals court in Washington to reverse a November ruling that found the Geneva Convention protects prisoners held at Guantanamo and ordered an immediate halt to military commission proceedings against detainees because they didn't comply with the treaty....

The records make it clear that after World War II, U.S. military prosecutors and judges set out to establish a precedent barring any prisoner mistreatment, by aggressively pursuing and punishing even comparatively small offenses.

..."Extreme brutality or serious injury to the victim is not a necessary element" for guilt....

Historically, such "unlawful" combatants "not only would not get POW status, they were executed on point of capture," he says. Under the "traditional paradigm, if you were a lawful combatant, you got everything. That has nothing to do with how unlawful combatants were treated."....

One Pentagon legal expert says the World War II-era cases are of uncertain relevance to the treatment of prisoners, because President Bush has determined they do not qualify for international-law protections. "The distinction here is that these [suspected Taliban and al Qaeda fighters] are not members of the military services of a government," the official says....

All sides acknowledge that the situation after World War II isn't a precise parallel to today. Many Japanese war criminals clearly were guilty of heinous acts, such as forcing thousands of prisoners of war on death marches, beheading prisoners and presiding over mass starvation. Some of the convicted guards used severe tactics such as beatings and sleep deprivation to make prisoners talk. The charges are far deeper and more wide-ranging than anything the U.S. has been accused of today....

U.S. tribunals dismissed defense arguments that Japanese practices were necessary for disciplinary or interrogation reasons....

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; Japan; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: abughraib; davidcohen; davidrivkin; enemycombatant; genevaconvention; gitmo; guantanamo; katyal; kikuchi; militarytribunal; scotthorton; torture; tribunals
We must ask ourselves which is more important:
prohibiting detainee humiliation or stress as a form of torture, or
saving 3,000 or 30,000 or 300,000 or 3 million American lives from a prospective terror attack?
1 posted on 04/07/2005 8:16:33 AM PDT by OESY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: OESY

Why is it these rules only apply to the US. The LIBS. scream about the US tactics but never about the headcutters.


2 posted on 04/07/2005 9:00:52 AM PDT by snowman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson