The Silence of Amnesty International
Or why the Geneva convention doesn’t apply to western troops
By streiff Posted in War — Comments (11) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Article 13
Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. […]Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.
Read on
The public confession of Leading Seaman Faye Turney is a violation of the clear text of the Geneva Conventions.
Now I don’t really care about that because the Geneva Conventions were intended to govern conflict between civilized societies and that is not what we are confronting in the Long War. I’m long on record in contending that obeying the Geneva Conventions in the hopes that our opponents will do the same is just stupidity of the first order. So when we carry out our second invasion of Canada I’m sure that we will both obey the Geneva Conventions. Right now, in the Long War, not so much.
I just checked Amnesty International’s web site for to get a copy of their demand that the Iranians release the British prisoners and condemning the statements made under coercive conditions and the broadcast of the images of the prisoners.
Surprise. There isn’t one. But for anyone who lived through the sham that was Amnesty International during the Cold War this is not a surprise.
« We need more COIN in the Afghan realm — Comments (0) | HMS Cornwall Incident: A Cause for Concern — Comments (42) »
The Silence of Amnesty International 11 Comments (0 topical, 11 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Pretty unimpressive. I'm willing to give AI the benefit of the doubt for another day or two and chalk it up to them being slow. But something ought to be appearing soon.
It seems pretty tough to argue against a GC violation in this case. Actually, is Iran even a signatory? Maybe that would be an excuse for Iran, but its certainly no excuse for the lack of condemnation from AI and the rest of the world.
about us putting the Hussein boys on tv (because the tinfoil brigade would have never believed they were _really_ dead) I can't see why they would let such an apparent double standard show to the public.
Amnesty International and the ACLU are simply anti-American/anti-Western. The ACLU is still opposed to searches of passengers before they board airplanes and they sued the NYPD to try to stop random checking of backpacks etc in the subway.
Remember it's only an offense against human rights when it's the USA, Britain, or Australia involved.
What is chilling to me is putting her in Islamic dress. Imagine if we captured an Iranian woman and put her in western dress and paraded her before the cameras as a prize. I understand that we hold ourselves to different standards than the Iranians do, but I have to point out that this is being done to the woman in the group. Where is the outrage? Speaker Pelosi? Senator Clinton? Senator Boxer?
Anyone?
"I'm kind of old-fashioned. I like to engage my brain before my mouth." Donald Rumsfeld
Scenes coming from that area of the world,or more precisely from the radical side of their religion anywhere in the world, that should upset any American and especially American women are just ignored like the pictures/acts do not exist. But let an American say, "wait a minute, there's something wrong with these actions" and all kinds of political repercussions start occurring. Notice the actions of the airline passengers concerning a recent appearance of possible suspicious activities aboard an aircraft waiting to take off. The Congress felt it necessary to take action regarding the threats of legal action against passengers who reported what they felt was a possible terrorist threat. In the house vote 121 Democrats vote NO. They do not want to protect the passenger who reports a possible terrorist act.
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 200
(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)
H R 1401 RECORDED VOTE 27-Mar-2007 7:22 PM
QUESTION: On Motion to Recommit with Instructions
BILL TITLE: Rail and Public Transportation Security Act
121 Democrats support the terrorists again, Why? What possible reason could any American claim to have that would prevent a passenger from reporting a suspected act of terrorism?
but the stronger feeling at this time is shock. I'm shocked that the Brits haven't acted. At least an ultimatum...
And what happens if they are released?...Anything?..do the Iranians suffer for the act, or do we just wait until they pull this crap again?...Pretty certain they will. Just shocked.
" in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years."
Abe Lincoln
Well, still nothing from AI, HRW or any of the usual suspects. Although plenty on Hicks, GITMO, etc. The UN Security Council has released a statement saying they have “grave concern” over the capture (thanks for that, I am sure that will help after all Iran is cooperating so well on other matters).
I’ll give the UK press a pass up until know. Usually, they provide a very small amount of coverage on hostage situation until the government let’s loose; that happened today.
Overall, expect to see a slowly escalating situation that is the Brit’s style. No direct action, just a slow squeeze on their lifelines. This has become somewhat easier with Iran’s increasing isolation. The moves will be expedited as they are not eager to repeat the last incident and the parading today was a major Iranian mistake, especially what they did to the woman. It’s a chess game now and Iran has the upper hand by holding the Brits. However, expect to see that advantage chipped away by intermittent negotiation followed by indirect action.
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
Contributor to The Minority Report
Not that we would expect them to ever hold up their end of the bargain anyway.
--CG--

I had a long email conversation with a friend (LtC) in the Army last year ranging from Abu ghraib to CIA rendering etc. His contention was that the Geneva Conventions precluded us from 'vigorous' interrogation of the enemy, but more importantly, that was not who we are as a nation. I took the position that in war, the goal was to win and the level of savagery has been, and will likely always be set by our opposition.
If one reads stories about war in the Pacific, one cannot help see the transition of the average Marine's initial attitude from a 'stand up fight' to later 'killem' all, any way, any time'. That was based on atrocities perpetrated by the Japanese on our troops. We responded in kind, but there was still more compassion shown to them than they ever showed to us.
The reason this situation cannot reoccur now is because of malignant organizations like AI. They and their putrid bedfellows such as the ACLU, have so neutered our sense of outrage at damages inflicted upon us, that it becomes a kneejerk reaction to ignore rather than confront. Coupled with the crippling theology of PC, where every other culture is equal (although all are superior to Western Civilization), we have what we see now - a civilization fighting for its life, but unable to muster the will of the majority for survival.
That attitude was shown by my freind - a good, decent and well read man - but even in his position, not immune to that line of poisoned thought.
AI is only the tumor that indicates the cancer.