[meteorite-list] Good By Bush - the nightmare is over

From: Sterling K. Webb <sterling_k_webb_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 02:12:48 -0600
Message-ID: <058c01c97ba0$0cfb0110$6043e146_at_ATARIENGINE>

Hi,

Knowing full well that it would be wiser to steer
clear of a spot (the List) which is one of the few
places in the United States where a certain good
feeling is not in evidence tonight, I foolishly plunge
right in. I say "good feeling" if for no other reason
than to celebrate a peaceful and lawful transfer of
power that has continued unbroken since 1788,
something rare in the last 220 years of history for
most nations of this Earth.

> violated the Geneva Conventions (emphasis removed)

The Geneva Conventions apply ONLY to the uniformed
armed forces of a nation as well as to members of such
militias or volunteer corps that form part of those armed
forces in a declared war. Do we even have declared wars
anymore?

The Taliban is not a nation. Neither is Al Qaedah. Their
forces are not uniformed. They are not organized by
ranks under superior officers. They do not conduct "their
operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war."
All of these are requirements for the Convention to apply.
Moreover, the nation of which they might be the armed
forces (if there were one) must be a prior signatory to the
Convention. (Afghanistan, even before the Taliban existed,
was not a signatory nation.)

True, a certain President pledged to treat these prisoners
according to the Convention, but I strongly doubt he even
understood what he was saying. The Convention requires,
among other things, that they be "allowed to receive by
post or by any other means individual parcels or collective
shipments containing, in particular, foodstuffs, clothing,
medical supplies and articles of a religious, educational or
recreational character which may meet their needs, including
books, devotional articles, scientific equipment, examination
papers, musical instruments, sports outfits and materials
allowing prisoners of war to pursue their studies or their
cultural activities."

The only thing missing from that list is hi-speed internet
access. The only reason it's missing is that the Conventions
are a century old, are utterly out of touch with reality, have
always been out of touch with reality. However, since the
prisoners currently in question were not uniformed soldiers
of a nation engaged in "lawful war," the whole point is moot.

No soccer uniforms for Al Qaedah, no trombones and violins
for the Gitmo Band and Orchestra, no scientific equipment
and how many pounds of ammonium nitrate was it that you
needed for these science experiments?

Attempting to apply the Geneva Convention to the real
world generates nothing but absurdities. As long ago as
WWII, it was completely out of touch. A spy behind
enemy lines who was not wearing his uniform (and who
would?) could and would be shot summarily, as would
an escaped POW in a civilian suit. Resistance fighters
were terrorists. But the world is not like that anymore.

How does an 18-year-old girl wearing a bomb vest into
a mosque in Iraq fit into the underlying conceptions of
the Geneva Conventions? Or a Saudi grad student highjacking
an airliner and flying it into a building? What does the
Geneva Convention have to say about cutting off hostages'
heads with comic opera swords on video?

As a charge, the issue of the Geneva Convention is entirely
irrelevant. The question of what should have been done, of
what was done and why and how it was done, and how to
resolve it are all vital concerns, but the Geneva Convention
is neither here nor there in that matter. The question of our
policy has to be resolved on its own merit or lack thereof.

And lastly, the Geneva Convention is not a Law; it is a
Treaty, or more precisely a Contract, between the signatory
nations. There are no penalties for "violating" it, and any
nation that is a party to it can withdraw at any time. The
full text of the Convention on Prisoners can be found at:
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm

Ironically, if the Geneva Convention had been in force in
1776, it would NOT have applied to a rebellion or insurrection
or other treasonous activities carried out within the lawful
territory of a nation (that is, the British Empire) by various
malcontents and purveyors of radical subversive "democratic"
doctrines. In fact, George III declared American combatants
traitors in 1775, denied them any POW status, and ordered
their execution.

Initially, these American terrorists were simply hung, but
once there were British prisoners of the Americans as well,
instant executions stopped. The British solution to the POW
problem was put captured American forces on damaged
or disabled naval vessels anchored off shore and then forget
to feed them. The treatment was sufficiently bad that the
vast majority of all American POW's died of starvation
or disease, in numbers far greater than those killed in actual
combat.

Guantanamo is not good, but it's a lot better than that. In
1782, just before the war ended, American prisoners were
declared legal POW's by the British Parliament. Possibly
this was only because WE captured an entire British Army
intact and now had something to bargain with. And in our
paradoxical American Rodney-King-esque way, we all get
along fine now... Don't we?

True, this was not a meteorite-related post, but neither
was all the rest of this evening's crap. Apologies to Michael
Blood for yielding to the temptation for a dip in the duck
pond; it just comes over me sometimes. And lastly, I want
to thank Bernd Pauli for his gracious congratulations to
this country as a whole, the best comment of the night,
one that wasn't contentious but intended with good feeling.


Sterling K. Webb
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Darren Garrison" <cynapse at charter.net>
To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 10:32 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Good By Bush - the nightmare is over


On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 21:23:15 -0700, you wrote:

>...haters....hypocritical nonsense...bullying pulpit...nonsense

All this over someone merely saying that they are glad that Bush was gone
and
wished he would be charged with war crimes? That is "hate"? If you
genuinely
think someone was corrupt, incompitent, and VIOLATED THE GENEVA
CONVENTIONS--
and say so-- that makes you a "hater"? Are you in the camp that nobody
should
say anything negative about a national leader? Because if so, you might be
more
happy here: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/01/19/thai.jail/
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Wed 21 Jan 2009 03:12:48 AM PST