U.S. Should Renounce Torture before Powell Speech to U.N. - HRW

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *

Again, i simply don't know what to state. It is hard to imagine this is the US we are referring to, not Kuwait or Saudi Arabia. i think it is critical one bears in mind that these are still 'prisoners' or 'detainees', NOT terrorists. They have yet to be charged and convicted in a court of law (not through military tribunals, but the proper judicial channels). An extremely sorry state of affairs - even prisoners of war have unequivocal and inalienable rights under the Geneva Convention. When will someone from the US government address these deeply disturbing reports?
[/QUOTE]

Thats what the HRW letter specifically asked for when it quite starkly asked:-

...what message is sent to the world when the President of the United States condemns torture by Iraq, while unnamed officials of his administration defend, and even gloat about, the use of torture against detainees held, or once held, by the United States? What message is sent when the Department of State urges Middle Eastern and North African countries to end this brutal and unlawful practice, while the United States renders suspects to the very same countries so that, as stated by U.S. officials to the Post, they can be interrogated by the very same methods?

It goes onto say about the Washington Post article:-

...since the article appeared, neither the President nor any senior figure in the administration has contradicted any of the statements made to the Post, or announced any corrective measures.

Do we take from the fact that as they have not contradicted these allegations, they must be true?

Human rights watchdog group Amnesty International has accused the United States of depriving detainees of their basic human rights, accusations disputed by the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Accusations are disputed by the US.Isn`t this what you asked for?

So by your logic,if they are not contradicted(the allegations)they must be true,then if they are contradicted they must be innocent,right?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Braveheart: *

Accusations are disputed by the US.

[/QUOTE]

Did Powell answer the high-level allegations of American torture in his speech? No. Has the United States government ever given any explanation for the allegations of torture that have been levelled against it by different sources? No.

As importantly, and a question you have failed to answer is why the US authorities continue to keep hundreds of detainees in places like Guantanamo bay (a non-American territory) for well over a year, without charging them or putting them on trial to date? In fact they have even been denying many due legal representation. Those are all violations of a persons basic human rights are they not? Powell failed to even mention this subject in his widely discredited speech...

Malik the Red Cross has a permenent presence at Quantanamo,where is the HRW presence?nowhere.You may not have heard anything regarding the prisoners but i certainly have.I suppose the Red Cross is a puppet of the great satan as well Malik?

Not in all cases it appears. Read one of the above articles where it says - ***Begg has not seen a lawyer, a Red Cross official or any member of his family either since he was arrested in the Pakistani capital of Islamabad last February. ***

Now the question you keeping failing to answer, and which lies at the very heart of this debate. Why do the US authorities continue to keep hundreds of detainees in places like Guantanamo for well over a year, without charging them or putting them on trial to date? In fact they have even been denying many due legal representation. Why is that? Those are all violations of a persons basic human rights are they not?

Why not charge them after so long?

Why not let them see their lawyers?

Some of these issues have even been raised by the Red Cross…

Red Cross; American Forces ‘May Be Breaking PoW Convention’](http://www.globalpolicy.org/wtc/analysis/2002/0114redcross.htm)

Red Cross: US Broke Geneva Conventions](http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0123-03.htm)

Wow you really are stretching it Malik,2 links from Jan 2002,just a little bit behind the times,it just goes to show how flimsy your evidence really is.All it takes is for an allegation to be made and that is proof of guilt as far as your concerned.I say again there is a permenent Red Cross presence at Quantanamo.

Also,it is you who are failing to answer questions,like what evidence Powell used that was obtained through torture? for one.

Of course the anti-US contingent will try to distract the discussion, while in the mean time important information is over looked. Apparently a great deal of information did not come from the “tortured”, it came from scientist who have recently defected:

Feb. 10 — In the last 10 days, United Nations inspectors have been given what are described as “important, new and credible leads” from a recent defector, who also told ABCNEWS that Iraqi scientists involved in the nuclear, chemical and biological weapons program were systematically intimidated.

The defector, interviewed by ABCNEWS in an undisclosed European country, is an engineer described as close to several of the weapons scientists who, he said, live in fear.
Many of the scientists are eager to cooperate with the United Nations, but the intimidation is so effective that the scientists are terrified of meeting in private with the inspectors. One scientist who met with the inspectors this week was so frightened, it took an hour for him to stop shaking, according to U.N. sources.

“Iraqi scientists and researchers are under a lot of pressure and influence by the Iraqi authorities,” the Iraqi defector told ABCNEWS. "They were scared and threatened in different ways, including threatening to go after their families if they leave Iraq to meet with inspectors and going after their relatives if their families go with them and going after them even if they were in exile.

“For these reasons, the scientist or researcher becomes scared to tell the secrets, even though he knows it’s a way to lift the difficult, miserable conditions the Iraqi people are living under.”

According to the Iraqi, many of the scientists involved in the weapons of mass destruction program are housed with their families at a secret compound in downtown Baghdad.

In mid-October 2002, when it became clear that U.N. inspectors would be returning to Iraq, the security at the compound was upgraded substantially and the personnel elevated from low-level Iraqi police officers to members of the elite Special Security Organization, which is responsible for ensuring the loyalty of all security and military personnel, protecting the president and controlling the weapons of mass destruction launch platforms.

Scientists Detained, ‘Loyalty’ Questioned

At about the same time, a group of approximately seven to 10 scientists involved in the secret weapons of mass destruction programs were detained and taken to another secret location. These scientists were detained because their loyalties to the regime were in question.

According to the Iraqi, the scientists were not permitted to communicate with their families. “They went to their work as usual, as any other day,” he said. “They were detained there and taken to unknown places. Afterwards, their families were contacted and assured that they will return shortly and that they were in good condition.”

Most of the scientists were released between one to two months later. One of the scientists who was released in late November was killed in a mysterious automobile crash less than a week after he returned. The message to the other scientists was clear:

“This was a clear message from the Iraqi authorities to all scientists and researchers to stay away from the inspection teams and not to tell any secrets or give any piece of information that could harm the Iraqi government,” said the Iraqi defector, “because if they do, their fate would be the same as their colleague’s.”

Saddam Hussein’s security organizations have killed a number of opponents in arranged “accidents” Amatzia Bar’am, a professor in the Department of Middle Eastern History at the University of Haifa in Israel, told ABCNEWS. “I could provide you with 10 such cases during the last few years,” he said. “If you assassinate someone like that, there is no reason for it except to warn everybody watch it, you don’t want to divulge any secrets.”

Held Legally Responsible

The Iraqi also revealed, for the first time, how the scientists were compelled to sign two documents. The first was a declaration that he would cooperate fully with the U.N. inspectors. The second declaration negates the first, obliging every Iraqi researcher and scientist not to cooperate with the U.N. teams and hide the information.

“If he causes any harm to the Iraqi authorities, he is considered legally responsible,” said the defector. “The first pledge is public and a copy is sent to the U.N., while the second is only for some Iraqi security agencies.”

The words “legally responsible” have a particular meaning in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. “The penalty: killing and torture and going after the family, even if in exile.”

American intelligence sources say this defector was one of those whose information was used in Colin Powell’s speech to the U.N. Security Council last week. Powell said, “Some of these sources have put their lives on the line to talk to us.”

The description of the secret compound and secret pledges is consistent with what many experts say is Saddam Hussein’s usual tactics.

“He has a need for legal niceties, and this is exactly what he has done in the past: getting people to sign pledges not to harm the country,” said Bar’am. “They know then they face death if they do.”

The Iraqi has been interviewed by U.S. intelligence officials who have found his story to be credible and have verified certain key details.

The defector’s information about the intimidation of the scientists is being pursued this week in Baghdad, according to U.N. sources.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/World/iraq_scientists030210.html

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Braveheart: *

Wow you really are stretching it Malik,2 links from Jan 2002,just a little bit behind the times,it just goes to show how flimsy your evidence really is.

[/QUOTE]

What it proves is that since Jan 2002 the US government has also failed to answer the legitimate legal and human rights questions put forward by the Red Cross. The Red Cross may have a permanent presence, but as I have proved they have not had access to all the detainees. Read the above articles carefully especially where it says - Begg has not seen a lawyer, a Red Cross official or any member of his family either since he was arrested in the Pakistani capital of Islamabad last February.

Why was Begg denied access to the Red Cross in all the time he was there?

I ask you again why has no detainee yet been charged with any offence and put on trial, in the over one year they have been there? Why are these people routinenly denied legal representation, and visits form their families?

Along with a plaigirised UK report, the US government made some laughable claims about Saddams's links to Al Qaida. Where do think such information (that even the CIA and MI6 don't take seriously) came from? The HRW letter asks Powell and the US government straight:-

We understand that your presentation this week to the U.N. Security Council on Iraq's weapons programs and ties to Al Qaida may include intelligence derived by interrogating detainees captured in the war on terrorism. This again raises a question that to our great distress has not yet been answered by the administration: whether, as alleged on December 26 by the Washington Post in an extensively sourced article, information from detainees is being obtained through torture or other severe mistreatment, either by U.S. intelligence agencies or by countries to which detainees have been rendered. We urge you to use this opportunity to set the record straight.

So where do you think that these claims about Al Qaida links came from, if not from information tortured out of Al Qaida/Taliban detainees in Guantanamo etc?

Deleted <

>>Why do the US authorities continue to keep hundreds of detainees in places like Guantanamo for well over a year, without charging them or putting them on trial to date? In fact they have even been denying many due legal representation. …] Those are all violations of a persons basic human rights are they not? Why not charge them after so long? Why not let them see their lawyers?<<
For all prisoners of war, certain rights are afforded under the Geneva Conventions. However, even if one is not a POW, and is an “unlawful combatant” (a label that i believe should be determined through something other than a closed military tribunal presided over by an American govt’l. official), “unlawful combatants” are STILL entitled to particular protections provided under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. (Source: HRW). As Malik has pointed out, denying legal representation constitues a violation of an individual’s basic human rights. In some cases, some individuals are not even aware for what charge(s) they are being detained.

It’s a very simple request made by HRW towards the US admin. Just address the allegations in a forthright and direct manner. It is not asking for too much, surely, from a country that prides itself on its dedication towards ensuring human rights.

This again raises a question that to our great distress has not yet been answered by the administration: whether, as alleged on December 26 by the Washington Post in an extensively sourced article, information from detainees is being obtained through torture or other severe mistreatment, either by U.S. intelligence agencies or by countries to which detainees have been rendered. We urge you to use this opportunity to set the record straight.

yeah right., like the following photo shows the luxurious hospitality given to detainees. If being chained up, being forced to sit on your knees for hours in the sun, wearing darkened googles, not allowed to talk, wearing masks, or even turn your head is anything other than torture than I dont know what is!!!

[thumb=A]Guan173.JPG[/thumb]
Source: Radio Netherlands (News)US Torture Motive Unclear

Two Afghan prisoners killed in US custody](BBC NEWS | South Asia | Prisoners 'killed' at US base) BBC NEWS 06 Mar 03

Prisoners ‘killed’ at US base

Two Afghan prisoners were killed while in US custody at their base at Bagram, a military coroner has concluded. The report said “blunt force trauma” had contributed to the deaths. The detainees had spent about a week in the detention facility when they died last December. However, US spokesman Colonel Roger King told BBC News Online the pathologists’ verdict was not final - a military investigation had been launched and was due to be completed later this month.

There are hundreds of former Taleban and al-Qaeda prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and in various overseas facilities.** Last month, human rights groups accused the US Government of subjecting the prisoners to physical abuse leading to a number of deaths and attempted suicides in custody. Washington described the allegations of torture as “ridiculous”.**

The first
The US spokesman at Bagram said the two men who died there had been under allied custody for about 10 days altogether. The first man died on 3 December after a blood clot in his lungs, and the second died a week later after developing blood clots as well as suffering a heart attack.

“The homicide entry on the [military death certificate] form is different from the legal meaning of the term”- Colonel Roger King US spokesman at Bagram. But Colonel King vehemently denied the prisoners had been mistreated by US forces. “They are the first detainees to have required medical treatment at the Bagram facility,” he said, and “the only casualties” so far. Pathologists, he said, had a limited choice when filling the military death certificate.

Torture allegations
Specific allegations of prisoner torture were first published in the Washington Post in December last year. According to the paper, interrogators from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had been subjecting Taleban and al-Qaeda suspects to “stress and duress” techniques of dubious legality.

Suspects at US facilities in Afghanistan and other foreign countries were sometimes held in uncomfortable positions for hours and deprived of sleep, the paper alleged. About 650 men have been at Guantanamo Bay since the detention base was established in January 2002. Many more are held elsewhere.

Just posting my selective excerpts; follow the link for the entire article.

Afghan prisoners beaten to death at US military interrogation base, Duncan Campbell
The Guardian, 7 March 2003

Two prisoners who died while being held for interrogation at the US military base in Afghanistan had apparently been beaten, according to a military pathologist’s report. A criminal investigation is now under way into the deaths which have both been classified as homicides.
The deaths have led to calls for an inquiry into what interrogation techniques are being used at the base where it is believed the al-Qaida leader, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, is now also being held. Former prisoners at the base claim that detainees are chained to the ceiling, shackled so tightly that the blood flow stops, kept naked and hooded and kicked to keep them awake for days on end.

The two men, both Afghans, died last December at the US forces base in Bagram, north of Kabul, where prisoners have been held for questioning. The autopsies found they had suffered “blunt force injuries” and classified both deaths as homicides.

A spokesman for the Pentagon said yesterday it was not possible to discuss the details of the case because of the proceeding investigation. If the investigation finds that the prisoners had been unlawfully killed during interrogation, it could lead to both civil and military prosecutions. He added that it was not clear whether only US personnel had had access to the men.

US Army violating Human rights

I guess it is ok for the US to do it. Forget all the resolutions they signed. Forget basic humanity. For the UN conventions. Lets torture and kill some Afghanis.

"The homicide entry on the [military death certificate] form is different from the legal meaning of the term."

Not too much so... Anyway, there could be reasons other than US torture for why these 2 died. But, if the injuries were sustained while they were in US custody we are nevertheless responsible.

How is it that these people can be kept in these conditions for so long without answers? Sure, the conditions aren't constantly over the top.. but more than anything it is the uncertainty that destroys these people.

I wonder why our good friend Senator McCain doesn't object to any of this.

Just more proof of what I have been arguing throughout this thread, and still no American explanation or counter to the allegations that they are collecting their “proof” through torture.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by spoon: *
Not too much so... Anyway, there could be reasons other than US torture for why these 2 died
[/QUOTE]
Spoon, the autopsies found that the Afghan prisoners had suffered "blunt force injuries" whilst being detained by the US authorities in Afghanistan. You can draw your own conclusions from that, or shall I mention again the word 'torture'.

Bush Administration trying to Legitimise Torture of Detainees](U.S. Sidesteps Charges of Mistreating Detainees (Human Rights Watch Press release, New York, April 17, 2003)) HRW Report

U.S. Sidesteps Charges of Mistreating Detainees

(New York, April 17, 2003) The Bush administration’s first formal response to allegations of torture and other mistreatment of detainees in Afghanistan risks legitimizing practices that are legally prohibited, Human Rights Watch said today. “The administration’s response is totally inadequate. Disavowing torture is welcome. But side-stepping detailed reports of mistreatment invites the conclusion that the reports are true.” : Kenneth Roth Executive Director of Human Rights Watch

The administration replied in writing last week to a letter from Human Rights Watch calling on President Bush to investigate and condemn allegations of torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment that emerged in press reports last December. According to unnamed U.S. officials quoted in those reports, the United States has subjected detainees at Bagram Air Force base in Afghanistan to sleep deprivation, holding them in awkward, painful positions, and other “stress and duress” techniques of interrogation.

In its response to Human Rights Watch, signed by Department of Defense General Counsel William J. Haynes II, the administration states “United States policy condemns torture.” But it does not acknowledge that the United States has a legal obligation to refrain from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The letter also fails to address whether the United States is using the specific “stress and duress” techniques that have been widely reported over the past several months. Earlier statements by White House officials claimed that U.S. interrogators were acting in full compliance with domestic and international law.

As a party to the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the United States has accepted a legal obligation not to engage in torture or other forms of mistreatment. Interrogation techniques do not have to rise to the level of torture to be prohibited if they fall under the category of “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.”

Methods similar to those the United States is reportedly using have been found to be illegal mistreatment under international law, including in landmark decisions by the Israeli Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights. The U.S. Department of State has condemned numerous countries for using similar techniques, such as sleep deprivation and placing prisoners in awkward, painful positions. Its annual human rights reports list these methods as forms of torture or other cruel or inhuman treatment.

“The administration is sending a very unfortunate signal to other governments, including potential captors of U.S. soldiers, that such practices are acceptable,” Roth added. “The U.S. government needs to unequivocally state that it is not engaging in the same kinds of cruel and inhuman treatment that it rightly condemns abroad.” In ratifying the UN Convention Against Torture, the United States limited its commitment regarding cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment only to conduct that is prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. The Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which bans cruel and unusual punishment, would clearly prohibit much of what reportedly is being done at Bagram.

The administration’s letter does not state whether the U.S. government - either the Department of Defense or the CIA - instructs its officials to refrain from engaging in cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees. It does not indicate that the specific allegations are being investigated fully, and that anyone found to have engaged in cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment will be prosecuted or otherwise held accountable. The administration has also inadequately responded to reports that the United States has transferred suspects to the custody of countries that routinely practice torture.

Human Rights Watch welcomes Haynes’ statement that the U.S. government seeks assurances from foreign governments that they will not torture a detainee before handing him over. But he does not say whether the United States takes any steps to verify that governments are in fact treating rendered suspects humanely, or whether it takes any action if it learns that they are not. In its annual report on human rights practices, the Bush administration documents torture by the countries to which suspects have reportedly been handed over for interrogation, such as Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and Jordan.

“The Bush administration should not just accept assurances from the very same countries whose use of torture the U.S. government itself has documented,” said Roth. “It’s hardly reassuring to know that the administration is taking Egypt at its word on torture. If the Administration is following up on these cases and taking action to ensure transferred suspects are not tortured, it needs to say so.”

To read the letter from Department of Defense General Counsel William J. Haynes II, please see: http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/04/dodltr040203.pdf

To read an earlier press release and letter from Human Rights Watch Executive Director Kenneth Roth to U.S. President George W. Bush, please see: United States: Reports of Torture of Al-Qaeda Suspects | Human Rights Watch

In its response to Human Rights Watch, signed by Department of Defense General Counsel William J. Haynes II, the administration states "United States policy condemns torture." But it does not acknowledge that the United States has a legal obligation to refrain from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Interesting, so they are not really coming out and denying the allegations of torture carried out by US forces?

I don’t know about torture.. but this doesn’t sound kosher under Geneva:

Children held at Camp Xray, US admits](http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s836988.htm)

The US military has revealed it is holding juveniles at its high- security prison for terrorists at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, known as Camp Xray.

The commander of the joint task force at Guantanamo, Major General Geoffrey Miller, says more than one child under the age of 16 is at the detention centre.

However, Maj Gen Miller has revealed little more about their welfare.

Maj Gen Miller says the US is holding “juvenile enemy combatants” at the centre, confirming rumours of children being held.

He has refused to reveal how many there are, their exact ages or their countries of origin.

He says they are being well cared for and are kept in facilities separate to adult prisoners.

The children are still being interrogated and will continue to be held at Guantanamo.

About 660 prisoners are in the camp.

They have not been tried or convicted of any offence but are being held as part of what the US calls its war on terror.