Peter H Proctor wrote in message . ..

True, torture may be wrong, but unless the combatants qualify
as POW's, the Geneva conventions don't hold for them, although other
international conventions may. Thus, e.g., you can still shoot
spies.

Since torture is wrong, it doesn't matter if the Geneva Conventions
for POWs or civilians apply or not. Consider the Nurenberg trials--
criminals were executed for crimes which violated no statute
or treaty. Rightly so, IMHO, they were tried and executed under
common law.

I also support the doctrine of command responsibility. While there
are, as of yet, only rumors that the abuses in Iraq and Afghanistan
were ordered, there are accusations that the responsible officers
took no action to prevent the abuses, which leaves those officers
without a defense. Further, the public sentiments toward prisoners
expressed by Secretary Rumsfeld, clearly fostered the abuses that
have been publicised during the last two years.

Our leaders have failed to provide proper leadership. They are
rotten. They share the blame.

Summary execution of suspected spies has been explicitley outlawed
since at least the 1907 Hague conventions. It is also a violation
of the UCMJ--see 'murder'. Please don't make things up, or rely
on bad movie scripts for your information.

However, it would appear that convicted murderers are not punished,
they are rewarded with a free ticket home:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=5038963

Army officials said the military had investigated the deaths
of 25 prisoners held by American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan
and determined that an Army soldier and a CIA contractor murdered
two prisoners. Most of the deaths occurred in Iraq.

An official said a soldier was convicted in the U.S. military
justice system of killing a prisoner by hitting him with a rock,
and was reduced in rank to private and thrown out of the service
but did not serve any jail time.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said a private
contractor who worked for the CIA was found to have committed
the other homicide against a prisoner. [No information was
provided on the contractor's dispositon, perhaps he was reassigned
to Guantanamo Bay.]

I might be inclined to suppose that the soldier might not have
intended to kill the prisoner, but for now accept the use of
'murder' by Reuters.

Please note also that these were kept secret until now.


And yes, prisoners are supposed to get some sort of hearing
to determine their POW status.


More than 'some sort'. The word 'competent', a legal term of
art, is used. Tribunals established by Presidential decree
would fail the competency test since the US Constitution
empowers the Congress to establish courts not the President
and past USSC cases have held that the Congress cannot delegate
authority to the President, when that authority is original
to the Congress in the Constitution.

--

FF