Good for Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., for calling on Attorney General-designate Michael Mukasey to be firm in opposing the U.S. use of the interrogation technique known as water-boarding. “I am convinced as an individual senator, as a military lawyer for 25 years, that water-boarding, the technique that was described to Judge Mukasey, does violate the Geneva Convention, does violate our war crimes statute, and is clearly illegal under domestic and international law,” Graham said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “And I think it would serve the attorney general nominee well to embrace that concept. He’s talked around it.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- CapnAmerica on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- Monkeyhawk on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Health care reform would save state money
- writerdog on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
43 Comments
Well that’s nice but if Mukasey refuses to recognize waterboarding as torture will Graham and McCain actually vote to block his nomination or cave in like they have on the torture issue in the past?
Senator Graham is interesting to listen to. When I first saw him, I thought he was a Colonel I knew in the Air Force. Both talked with the same accent and looked very similar.
I imagine Mukasey hasn’t received any briefings from the Federal government on exactly what waterboarding is or isn’t. The prospective DOJ head answered the question correctly before the sentence because relying on press reports is not what we want our jurists to do.
A U.S. Senator is an expert at ‘talking around it’. Why should he expect anything less from another politician?
Maybe he should get some first hand experience on what water-boarding is, then make up his mind.
Well, senator, if it’s a violation of law…why do you not habve the courage to cause the arrest and trial of the ‘water-board’ guys?….oops, they may be republicans too…ok, forget it.
Kansas you are just too generous, yeah that’s the word…. generous! LoL
These past few years we have seen conduct by our government employees, elected officals etc which is so far below past standards it is shocking.
It appears that we, as citizens need to give all the government, and especially all government employees at all levels move “oversight”.
The lack of a moral compass is unacceptable.
Arresting people for water-boarding is the job of the DOJ and Attorney General… oh, wait.
Anybody who doesn’t believe waterboarding is torture ought to be perfectly willing to undergo a few rounds of it themselves, shouldn’t they? Then they could testify from personal experience rather than just have an opinion based on speculation.
I agree and nominate “Dead Eye Cheney” to be the first participant! He needs the exercise.
A little trivia: Waterboarding was invented by the Spanish Inquisition. Several Nazis were executed at Neuremburg for their participation in waterboarding. Sixty years later, the Vice President of the United States went on record saying “a little dunk in water” is “a no brainer for me” and the President refuses to comment on the practice.
So who did you vote for?
Don’t you think they have been doing this for decades? When they captured a Soviet spy, etc…?
Now it’s such a big deal, because it’s some a hole radical muslim? I think not! I don’t support open policies and procedures like this, but I’d never kid myself and say it hasn’t been going on since the 50’s. We might not be here as we are if our government didn’t do these things!
Protecting this nation is a dirty business. Somebodys gotta do it!
SemperFi – I think a big part of the issue is that the people being tortured are NOT all terrorists but often are ordinary citizens of the occupied country. Just like those gunned down by the terrorist Blackwater organization.
Hint:
The Geneva Conventions do not apply to illegal enemy combatants, those terrorists who are not in uniform and do not answer to the orders of a recognized country are not covered.
The Jews weren’t considered Germans so I guess Paul says everything done to them was acceptable. Good ol’ fascism, doesn’t care anything for human rights. Keep your jackboots shiny Paul.
Econ – just what IS an ‘illegal combatant’? Blackwater is not in uniform and does not answer to either the US nor the Iraqi government.
If Soviets were occupying this country and we objected would we be ‘illegal combatants’?
Doug and Ben
Do I need to post the link the Geneva Conventions, again?
Actually, you liberals don’t get it.
By trying to grant Geneva protections to EVERYONE, you are taking away any incentive for people to be civilized.
It was understood, at the time the Geneva Conventions were written, that the whole point was to get countries to agree to standards, and those who agreed to those standards would be protected.
Liberalism undercuts the force and authority of the Geneva Conventions by placing terrorists and common criminals on the same field of honor and protection as uniformed forces.
Please read the Geneva document before making uninformed comments about it:
http://www.genevaconventions.org/
So, if a country invades and occupies another country the citizens are all illegal combatants because they do not answer to the occupying country.
Sorry Paulette, Geneva does not say that.
And about non-uniformed foreign mercenaries – those I agree should not be covered by Geneva. However, the US says they are covered.
civilians ARE covered:
civilians, imprisonment of
Civilians who commit an offense against an occupying power which does not include an attempt against the lives of members of the occupying force or administration, pose a grave collective danger, or seriously damage property or installations of the occupying power may only be punished by internment or imprisonment. (Convention IV, Art. 68)
If civilians in an occupied territory are charged with an offense that carries a punishment of to two or more years of imprisonment, their protecting power must be notified immediately. If the notification is not received at least three weeks before the first hearing, the trial shall not proceed. (Convention IV, Art. 71)
civilians ARE covered:
civilians, imprisonment of
Civilians who commit an offense against an occupying power which does not include an attempt against the lives of members of the occupying force or administration, pose a grave collective danger, or seriously damage property or installations of the occupying power may only be punished by internment or imprisonment. (Convention IV, Art. 68)
If civilians in an occupied territory are charged with an offense that carries a punishment of to two or more years of imprisonment, their protecting power must be notified immediately. If the notification is not received at least three weeks before the first hearing, the trial shall not proceed. (Convention IV, Art. 71)
Blackwater is NOT protected:
mercenaries
A mercenary is any person who is specially recruited in order to fight in an armed conflict, who takes a direct part in the hostilities, who is motivated by money and is promised substantially higher pay than that paid to other combatants of similar rank, who is not a national of one of the countries involved in the conflict nor a resident of a territory controlled by any of the parties, is not a member of the armed forces of any of the parties, and who has not been sent by another country on official duty as a member of its armed forces. (Protocol I, Art. 47)
A mercenary does not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war. (Protocol I, Art. 37)
BenYou are actually caught up in the
“Common Article” provisions.
The US does NOT state that Illegal Enemy Combatants are covered by ALL the Articles.
Generally, if not covered specifically by the Uniformed Articles, other combantants would be covered by the law in the country of capture.
I am generalizing, it is complex.
My only point is that Geneva does make distinctions between different TYPES of prisoners.
If you do not agree with such distinctions, quit treating Geneva like your “holy grail” since YOUR bitch is with Geneva!
Ben
Read carefully:
An ILLEGAL ENEMY COMBATANT is not the same as a Civilian charged with a crime.
Paulie – that is my point. Iraqi civilians are NOT illegal enemy combatants under Geneva. However, non-Iraqi mercenaries ARE. It is the mercenaries the US is seeking to protect.
And, by the way, a SPY can be shot on site, no trial.
A spy, generally, is one who answers to a foreign power, to further that powers combat aims, but does not wear a uniform.
BenYou even misread the protections given to Blackwater.
The Blackwater protections are the SAME as the protections given to every employee of the State Department.
identification documents
immunity from attack
No definition for ILLEGAL …
BenShow me a person who has been “waterboarded” who is an Iraqi Citizen.
I believe that this has been done primarily to insurgents and terrorists from outside of Iraq or Afganistan.
Ben
Illegal is defined by what is not legal.
An exercise in logic.
Paulette – the Blackwater mercenaries are armed, killing people, and NOT IN UNIFORM. That makes them mercenaries.
Also – if one is INSIDE Iraq then is Iraq a foreign power. I think not. But again, Blackwater is foreign to Iraq.
Abu Gharaib. Remember that? Many were waterboadred there. Also Iraqis were tortured to death; some by non-uniformed mercenaries.
So lets get this straight though, so we are all clear. You support torturing people, as long as they are not wearing uniforms and as long as someone on our side says that they were doing something “bad”.
Just wanted to make sure you were getting across the point you wanted to get across. Because that seems an awful lot like what the axis powers were like, in the 30s and 40s.
Ooooh, Paul is trying to break out the law. Perhaps you can look up how it is a war crime to invade a country in order to secure it’s natural resources.
NOT IN UNIFORM. That makes them “terrorists”
Not mercenaries.
At Nuremburg we declared that insurgents (French, Polish, Jewish underground) had to be treated as POWs.
BenAmerican forces are in Iraq with the permission of the official Iraqi government.
It would be hard to say that American diplomats and politicians (including Democrats, by the way) do not have the right to have private security in Iraq.
There is nothing in the law that would support your theory.
DougThat is not true and it won’t become true through repitition.
Did we EVER take any resources from Iraq without paying for those resources?
Criminal terrorists who do not wear the uniform of a country while trying to kill Americans do NOT have the same rights and priveledges as those in uniform.
NOBODY can prove me wrong on that point.
You can argue degrees and shades of grey, but a terrorist from Palestine, captured, out of uniform, trying to blow up a bus full of civilians in Iraq, does NOT have full Geneva protection.
Period!
By the way, most prisoners in such an instance would far prefer to be held by the United States than by any other foreign power.
We can simply turn these folks over to some Moslem country.
Perhaps a threat to turn a terrorist over to another, friendly MOSLEM country would get even more information than the waterboard?
Scott
Waterboarding is a very, very mild form of torture compared to what even John McCain went through in Vietnam.
You liberals care more about granting “rights” to our enemies than you care about winning this war or protecting Americans.
Wear the uniform, follow International Rules of Engagement, and you have Geneva protection.
Murder civilians on purpose, target civilians on purpose, and you will not have full Geneva protection.
The Left encourages barbaric behaviour by taking away the risks of barbarism.
SorryI should have said:
“Target civilians and murder civilians on purpose, while you are out of uniform, and you will NOT have full Geneva protections.”
Like you would know Paul. You are one of them. Your kind practices terrorism and torture don’t you Paul.
Pall,”Waterboarding is a very, very mild form of torture compared to what even John McCain went through in Vietnam.”
Good! In that case, next time you’re in the neighborhood, why don’t you stop by and I’ll waterboard you………oh, I forgot, you live in my neighborhood! See ya tomorrow!