re: "Indefinite detention: We knew this was coming"

TigerHawk ("thoughts of the day on international affairs, politics, things that strike us as hilarious and personal observations") has some news about unlawful, er, indefinite detention.

Money quote(s):

"(T)he Bush administration was not taking all that flack for nothing, and that there is no practical alternative in dealing with unlawful combatants in a stateless war."

&

"The sophisticated media also knew, of course, but was never going to admit it."

S&S - MP unit tarnished by Abu Ghraib scandal returning to Iraq

From my archive of press clippings:

Stars and Stripes

MP unit tarnished by Abu Ghraib scandal returning to Iraq


By David Dishneau, The Associated Press

Online Edition, Saturday, April 10, 2010


HAGERSTOWN, Md. — The Army Reserve unit tarnished by the Abu Ghraib detainee-abuse scandal has been mobilized to return to Iraq in its first deployment since photographs of naked, humiliated prisoners surfaced more than six years ago, the Army said Friday.

Read the whole article here.

Snippet(s):

"The 372nd Military Police Company of Cresaptown will leave April 29 for one to three months of training at Fort Bliss, Texas, followed by a planned deployment to Iraq, said Sgt. Darius Kirkwood, a spokesman for the 200th Military Police Command at Fort Meade. Few members of the unit remain from when the detainee photographs were taken, due to normal turnover, he said."

S&S - Obama considering holding some detainees indefinitely

From my archive of press clippings:

Stars and Stripes

Obama considering holding some detainees indefinitely


Stars and Stripes


Mideast edition, Friday, May 15, 2009


The Obama administration is considering the possibility of detaining some terror suspects in the United States — indefinitely and without trial, the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.

Read the whole article here.

re: "We’ll See If The “Perfect” Record Continues"

Robert at Expat Yank ("One American living in the south of England") made a point that seems to be nearly universally overlooked (except by soldiers).

Money quote(s):

"As we know, most in media are perpetually wilting over the fact that the U.S. actually detains enemy who fall into U.S. hands alive. Moreover, they have little to n0thing to say about how nearly all of those the U.S. detains survive to be released."

&

"Insofar as this blog is aware, every single U.S. or coalition soldier captured by the jihadist enemy, has been murdered in captivity. That is a 100 percent record of barbarity unequalled by any enemy in all of human history."

re: "A lefty blogger eyes the Gitmo flip-floppery"

Tigerhawk ("thoughts of the day on international affairs, politics, things that strike us as hilarious and personal observations") remarks on the absurdity of trying Gitmo detainees in federal courts.

Money quote(s):

"There is lots of "information" in the world, but very little admissible evidence, a distinction essential to many politicians and to all courts. The difference is also at the heart of the argument over whether jihadis detained on the battlefield by soldiers ought to be treated as illegal combatants or as criminals. One needs evidence (as opposed to mere information) to detain the latter, but not the former."

&

"Soldiers are not trained, ordered, or even gently encouraged to gather evidence, and if they should happen to come into possession of some their own institution lacks the procedures to maintain a chain of custody suitable to admit that evidence in a United States criminal trial."

re: "Green Cards for the GITMO Gang?"

TSB at The Skeptical Bureaucrat ("Giving my fellow Americans the view from my cubicle") is wondering about certain soon-to-released Gitmo detainees.

Money quote(s):

"Exactly what legal status will these ex-detainees have if they are admitted? Can they qualify for Lawful Permanent Residence? If not, then what? "

SFC - New report blasts U.S. on immigrant detainees

From my archive of press clippings:

San Francisco Chronicle


New report blasts U.S. on immigrant detainees

Tyche Hendricks, Chronicle Staff Writer


Wednesday, March 25, 2009


More than 400,000 people a year are detained by immigration officials in the United States - including undocumented immigrants, legal immigrants who run afoul of the law and asylum seekers who come fleeing persecution - but according to a report released today by Amnesty International, conditions are often deplorable and detainees are routinely denied due process.

Read the whole article here.

JO - The challenge of restoring US credibility

Jamaica Observer


The challenge of restoring US credibility


CLAUDE ROBINSON

Sunday, January 11, 2009


FROST-NIXON, one of several wonderful movies showing in New York City when I was there over the Christmas and New Year holidays, has a great line which could serve to introduce discussion in the US media around President-elect Barack Obama's pick to head the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

CLAUDE ROBINSON

The movie is based on the celebrated interview of President Richard Nixon by the British journalist and broadcaster David Frost about crimes committed by Nixon and some of his top aides in the Watergate burglary and executive cover-up leading to Nixon's fall in the 1970s.

Read the whole article here.

Snippet(s):

"In one memorable sequence Frost quizzed Nixon as to whether he was suggesting that it was OK for the president to break the law. The reply was swift, if somewhat incredible: "What I am saying is that when the president does it, it is not illegal".

The exchange was a chilling reminder of assertions by the outgoing Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld administration that denial of the protections of the Geneva Conventions to detainees at Guantanamo was justified because they were not prisoners of war, as decreed by the Conventions and US law, but 'enemy combatants' as decreed by President Bush."

(Clearly this is another person who hasn't actually read the Geneva Conventions. - CAA)

a question about Gitmo

A longtime friend and former roommate emailed me today and asked if we needed to close Gitmo.

He said:

"What's your opinion about Gitmo? I have a problem with giving those prisoners the same rights as someone who committed a crime on US
soil (although KSM could be tried for murder in NYC and VA). Why aren't they just deemed POW's? etc etc."

Off the top of my head I responded:

The Gitmo detainees fall into a very dark grey area. By their conduct (as combatants who did not conduct themselves in accordance with the laws of war, incl. Geneva Convention requirements such as recognizable uniforms) they do not qualify for POW status under the GC.

Traditionally, such persons are, when captured, shot as spies.

The U.S. military has, in recent decades (and since the invention of television journalism) gotten out the habit of shooting such folks upon capture.

They have no rights under the GC. By their conduct they have forfeited the GC protections afforded to civilians (i.e., non-combatants) but have not done so in a manner which would entitle them to the protections to which actual POWs are entitled. Sucks to be them.

Pres. Bush made the decision (and it's reasonable enough decision given the information warfare aspects of it) to treat Gitmo detainees POW level treatment, just as if they were entitled to POW status. Which they're not.

The only legal protections they have do not come from international law or treaty, but from our own laws and regulations.

We could convene military tribunals (authorized under the GC), try them as war criminals (which is what unlawful/illegal combatants are) and execute them. Or sentence them to death, and suspend the sentence at our convenience/whim. Such as to influence cooperation. Or execute 10 (or a hundred) of them whenever we learn that one of our own has been captured/tortured/murdered. Which is why you don't ever hear about how awful the detention of U.S. prisoners is at the Al Qaida equivalent of Gitmo. 'Cuz there ain't one.

Keeping them out of the U.S. was, as a goal, intended to avoid them coming under the criminal justice system, which decades of experience have shown to be inadequate to deal with terrorists of this sort (recall how many times the WTC were bombed), most Gitmo detainees not having been arrested and evidence processed with a civilian-style federal prosecution being in mind. Nor should we expect our combat troops to collect evidence CSI style.

I don't know what Pres. Obama intends to do with them; frankly it's unclear that he does either. We could certainly intern them at POW-style camps in the U.S. until the end of hostilities, but that makes them a target for their co-terrorists to ramp up operations to secure their release, target their guards (and their families) and other scary drawbacks. Putting them in civilian courtrooms only increases those hazards and does so exponentially.

Anyhow, those are just some rough thoughts on the matter. I carried a copy of the Army field manual on Laws of Land Warfare with me throughout my Iraq tour and consulted it frequently.