RANGER AGAINST WAR: Hostage Takers <

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Hostage Takers

What does conservatism today stand for?
It stands for war. It stands for power.

It stands for spying, jailing without trial,

torture, counterfeiting without limit,

and lying from morning to night.

There comes a time in the life of every believer

in freedom when he must declare,

without any hesitation,

to have no attachment to the idea of conservatism.

--Rally for the Republic
, Lew Rockwell
_________________

Many argue that it was a mistake to announce Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's scheduled appearance in U.S. Federal Court in New York City.

A
Wall Street Journal editorial says, "Given [Attorney General] Holder's misguided decisions to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a Manhattan civilian court, and to limit interrogation of the Detroit Christmas bomber to 50 minutes, the quality of his counsel is a major concern. (The "al Qaeda Seven")," But what is at issue goes far beyond the logistics of the trial.

The editorial goes on to praise the substance (if not the presentation) of Liz Cheney's "Keep America Safe" ad, which questions Justice Department lawyer Daskal who
"argued that detainees who have not been charged with a crime should be set free, even though 'some of these men may cross the border and join the battlefield to fight U.S. soldiers and our allies.'"

It seems clear to an old Ranger without benefit of a legal education that here is the crux of the issue: If a Gitmo detainee cannot be charged as a criminal due to tainted or inadequate evidence, or because they are not a terrorist, then it follows they should be released back into the wild. A Federal Catch-n-Release program.

Allowing that many of the released prisoners would return to the battlefield (as the opponents of release claim), then it follows:

[1] The detained are military types and NOT terrorists; at the very worst, they are members of the military wing of al-Qaeda. If either case is so, then they were captured on the battlefield and will return there. This is not a legal consideration.

If the U.S. fears the repatriation of less than 200 battlefield enemies, then we are surely a paper tiger.

[2] The Phony War on Terror (
PWOT ©) has been a dismal failure on all levels.

Legally, the U.S. Congress can pass laws that criminalize material support for terror groups and for associations with al-Qaeda and attendance in al-Qaeda training camps. This simply blocks U.S. citizens from participation, as U.S. jurisdiction does not extend to the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
But it does not address the basic problem of terrorism, as citizens of other nations are not bound by our laws.

Anybody outside U.S. borders may join any organization they desire and will not meet with our laws unless they enter our jurisdiction or conspire to attack U.S. targets. The Gitmo prisoners do not fit the bill, as they were largely captured on the battlefield largely within the borders of their own country, and had no intent or capability of projecting their violence onto our shores.

The combatant detainees are fashioned as aggressors, although most were fighting defensively against an attack by the sole world superpower. In our aggression we have created a legal and military morass. We claim to be at war, yet our adversaries are not Prisoners of War -- how is this? The detained are then denied legal access and treated like Michael Vicks dogs, yet we accept this desecration of international law as another day at the office.

The logical conclusion is that these people kept in endless detention in an endless non-war are HOSTAGES.
No other legal or military definition is as apt. The national keeping of hostages is in violation of the Hague Convention.

A hostage-taking nation cannot expect to maintain respectability. We are judged not by what the terrorists are or do, but by our own actions. The perpetrators of this miscarriage of justice may never be held to account, but their violence to our reputation may be irreparable.

How do our leaders fail to see the untenability of the situation? Reality, unlike U.S. law, has a universal jurisdiction.

Labels: , , ,

7 Comments:

Blogger The Minstrel Boy said...

at least the brits have the teeth to investigate this shit

Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 2:45:00 AM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Most Americans do not understand that it is a small minority of AQ members who are terrorists that would reach out and strike non-muslims in their (non-Muslim) home countries and that the majority are soldiers with the mission of defending Muslim lands against foriegn invaders.

Most Americans probably do not care to understand the difference. There is a lot of racism at play in this issue. For many Americans all "rag heads" are potentential, if not actual, terrorists and, therefore, feared and hated.

For most Americans our troops are sacred heros and their lives are infinitely more valuable that any number of Muslim lives.

Therefore, it is politically damn near impossible at this point to treat these prisoners in accordance with the Geneva Conventions or the Consitution.

If you set them free you would be pilloried as having loosed potential 9/11 type killers back into the world. If they did show up on a battlefield where there were American casualties your political carreer would be over right then and there. I think this a realistic scenario.

Whatever they were before the GITMO, I'll wager that a number of these men have become some America hating vendetta swearing fanatics after a few years there.

It's too late for these guys. My advice would be to make a show of releasing them and then afterwards quietly take them out back and shoot them.

Then take measures to ensure that this sort of shit never happens again.

avedis

Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 5:12:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

MB,
I never accepted putting people's heads in sand bags, or blinders to sensory deprive them.
This art indicates that bagging was outlawed in 1972, but i wonder if this is a European union rule or something else.?
Any input?
Avedis,
We can't shoot them unless they can come up with money to pay for the cartridge, which they can't do. So maybe we should start some slave labor plants so that they can do so.We can do this in Poland ,and call it Living History. Sorta.
We can use Latvian volunteers.
jim

Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 9:49:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger Rick said...

Nothing enrages a bully more than his victims having the temerity to fight bck.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 10:38:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger Terrible said...

There is ONE legal alternative to releasing those captured while defending their homeland. That is for Congress to declare war on that homeland and declare the detainees POWs. Otherwise the detention of these individuals is an international act of terrorism. It IS kidnapping and absolutely nothing more.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 12:50:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There's always money for ammo.

But, check it out.
If they're repatriated their own neighbors will smoke them, because they may have been turned. Or they can prove their continued dedication to the cause by voluntering for martyrdom.

They're dead men walking anyway you cut it.

avedis

Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 7:42:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger jo6pac said...

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/

I know this will cheer up you all up it did me. If I could figure out to make some $$$$$$$$$$$ out it.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 10:50:00 PM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home