CP Learns that CSIS interrogated tortured Afghan Detainees

[Born Free]

Correct. Civilians are covered....But the definition of combatants does not include terrorists or bandits. And the Taliban are both. They do not fall within the legally accepted definition and so aren't covered by the convention.

But cheer up...they are covered by Afgani law....

Try googling "geneva convention articles on the treatment of bandits and terrorists.

Eyeball hasn't written it yet.

You've been the one to define the Taliban as bandits and terrorists. Even if they are the evil bastards everyone assumes they are, they are still to be accorded all the rules of the Geneva convention.

"It requires humane treatment for all persons in enemy hands, without any adverse distinction. It specifically prohibits murder, mutilation, torture, cruel, humiliating and degrading treatment, the taking of hostages and unfair trial."

If a Canadian soldier turns their captive (regardless of what their involvement might or might not be) over to a group of people who are known to employ torture, that is breaking the Geneva convention. Any Canadian military personnel pleading ignorant to that is either lying or shouldnt be in a combat zone. I have previously posted six reasons why this should be so.

[Born Free]

Well perhaps you would be so kind to prove you are not posting falsehoods and quote in the article where it says CSIS interogated tortured afghan detainees.

I look forward to your proof.

Yes. Yes. It all sounds so familiar. I recall when the military brass stonewalled the media about the "Somalia problem". General Boyle got caught with his proverbial hands in the cookie jar. Turned out that the media pretty well had it right back then. No reason to think otherwise today. Of course some will refuse to do any dot connecting when it could lead to some bad shit happening.

[M.Dancer]

You've been the one to define the Taliban as bandits and terrorists. Even if they are the evil bastards everyone assumes they are, they are still to be accorded all the rules of the Geneva convention.

False

They are to be treated humanely etc etc etc....but they can still be tried, found guilty and hung...in other words they can be treated as criminals....with a notable exception....criminals turned over by Canadians are exempt from the sentence of death.

Prisoners of war with the exception of war criminals are immune from prosecution.

The other fun part of POW status is...you can hold them until there is a peace accord...and hold them outside their native soil far away from their families....

[M.Dancer]

Yes. Yes. It all sounds so familiar. I recall when the military brass stonewalled the media about the "Somalia problem". General Boyle got caught with his proverbial hands in the cookie jar. Turned out that the media pretty well had it right back then. No reason to think otherwise today. Of course some will refuse to do any dot connecting when it could lead to some bad shit happening.

I'm not sure what this is apropos to....are you saying you think she's full of it too?

[Born Free]

False

Actully I am right.

They are to be treated humanely etc etc etc....but they can still be tried, found guilty and hung...in other words they can be treated as criminals....with a notable exception....criminals turned over by Canadians are exempt from the sentence of death.

Untill such time as they are tried.... (except POWs )the Geneva conventions apply. Saboteurs & spies are examples. Ergo, handing over prisoners/detainees who have yet to be tried to people you know that are known to torture prisoners is against the rules. THAT is essentially what the issue is and what Harper is tring to duck away from.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Born Free

[Born Free]

I'm not sure what this is apropos to....are you saying you think she's full of it too?

What I am saying is that the government needs to open up and show some integrity over the matter of alleged torture of prisoners.....regardles of who did the torturing.

I am also saying that this matter is reminiscent of the "Somalia affair" where the media was stonewalled by the Canadian top brass (Generl Boyle). I suggest that this is very possibly happening once again.

I know you dont think its an issue but lots of us do. If there is no basis behind the story, then Harper shouldnt be concerned about delving into the matter in a public manner. Frankly, I think he is worried. He probably doesnt like what he already knows.

[M.Dancer]

Actully I am right.

Untill such time as they are tried.... (except POWs )the Geneva conventions apply. Saboteurs & spies are examples. Ergo, handing over prisoners/detainees who have yet to be tried to people you know that are known to torture prisoners is against the rules. THAT is essentially what the issue is and what Harper is tring to duck away from.

So then, naturally you think that the conventions apply to canadian jails too....

Edited March 10, 2010 by M.Dancer

[M.Dancer]

What I am saying is that the government needs to open up and show some integrity over the matter of alleged torture of prisoners.....regardles of who did the torturing.

I am also saying that this matter is reminiscent of the "Somalia affair" where the media was stonewalled by the Canadian top brass (Generl Boyle). I suggest that this is very possibly happening once again.

I know you dont think its an issue but lots of us do. If there is no basis behind the story, then Harper shouldnt be concerned about delving into the matter in a public manner. Frankly, I think he is worried. He probably doesnt like what he already knows.

I think it's an issue...I just don't think you know what you are babbling about...vis a vis the conventions or how uproven allegations in one part of a sentance become facts in the next.

No really, I don't think you know what you are babbling about but I admire you for not letting that stand in the way of being a content provider....

[Born Free]

I think it's an issue...I just don't think you know what you are babbling about...vis a vis the conventions or how uproven allegations in one part of a sentance become facts in the next.

No really, I don't think you know what you are babbling about but I admire you for not letting that stand in the way of being a content provider....

As usual Morris, you decide to attack the poster when the facts get in the way of your brain washed belief system.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Born Free

[M.Dancer]

As usual Morris, you decide to attack the poster when the facts get in the way of your brain washed belief system.

You are confused. I said I admired you for not letting not knowing get in the way of not learning...

so again, tell me how the conventions are applied to criminals arrested in canada....don't let not understanding the question get in the way of not answering it.

[Born Free]

So then, naturally you think that the conventions apply to canadian jails too....

Perhaps...perhaps not....but that is not what this is all about. Its about what allegedly transpired in Afghanistan. Canadian military brass have tried to obfuscate bad stuff before and they are definitely capable of doing it again. This needs to be aired out in the public eye.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Born Free

[Born Free]

You are confused. I said I admired you for not letting not knowing get in the way of not learning...

so again, tell me how the conventions are applied to criminals arrested in canada....don't let not understanding the question get in the way of not answering it.

This isnt about that Morris. Its about what happened in Afghanistan. Criminals arrested in Canada have been known to end up in Syria and tortured....

[M.Dancer]

This isnt about that Morris. Its about what happened in Afghanistan.

Glad that not knowing didn't get in the way of not answering...I was not disappointed..

Criminals arrested in Canada have been known to end up in Syria and tortured....

Crimonals? Crikey!

Name one.

Edited March 10, 2010 by M.Dancer

[nicky10013]

So then, naturally you think that the conventions apply to canadian jails too....

As I said, the conventions do apply, just in a different form. The rights guaranteed by the convention are already guaranteed by the constitution and no matter how much you still think they should be prosecuted (no one ever disagreed with this point of view, the point of argument magically shifted after you finally realized that torture no matter what was against the law) that's not what you argued. You essentially argued that the Geneva Convention didn't apply to them and can therefore be abused. Even if the Geneva Conventions DON'T apply but most agree that they do, it's still against international law that Canada has signed on to. That's what this has been all about. Clearly from all your babble you haven't been the one who has been able to understand and you're still deflecting and calling people stupid to lead them away from the fact that you've failed miserably, sound like an idiot and are truly the one that doesn't know what they're talking about.

Just drop it and walk away.

[M.Dancer]

As I said, the conventions do apply, just in a different form. The rights guaranteed by the convention are already guaranteed by the constitution

How semi interesting. Which takes precedent. Where in the consitution is photographing a criminal outlawed?

... and no matter how much you still think they should be prosecuted (no one ever disagreed with this point of view, the point of argument magically shifted after you finally realized that torture no matter what was against the law) that's not what you argued.

I'm not sure whether you are dishonest or cluelee....please show where I argued that torture was okay....quickly now...

You essentially argued that the Geneva Convention didn't apply to them and can therefore be abused.

Please show where I said that they can be abused.

Even if the Geneva Conventions DON'T apply but most agree that they do,

Who is most? certainly not the lawyers for those responsible....ie, the US, UK and CND governments...if you mean others who don't know hwat they are talking about, I concede your point.

it's still against international law that Canada has signed on to.

More importantly, it's against CND law.

That's what this has been all about. Clearly from all your babble you haven't been the one who has been able to understand and you're still deflecting and calling people stupid to lead them away from the fact that you've failed miserably, sound like an idiot and are truly the one that doesn't know what they're talking about.

Just drop it and walk away.

I'm not the one who has made several false claims in this thread.

[nicky10013]

I'm not the one who has made several false claims in this thread.

Not that you think. You've made several false claims you're just too stupid to realize it.

[Born Free]

Glad that not knowing didn't get in the way of not answering...I was not disappointed..

I know its hard for you Morris but try to get past your stupor and be civil. At least give some lip service that you actually understand the underlying issue concerned in this thread. That is....

-Did CSIS interrogate tortured Detainees?

-As an add-on from previous allegations...Did Canadian forces turn over prisoners to Afghan authorities knowing that they would be likely tortured and did nothing to ensure that torture wouldnt take place?

Clearly you now seem to understand that ALL prisoners/detainees (no exclusions) are to be accorded the rights of the Geneva Convention and that Canada as a signatory has the obligation to honour those rules.

[Born Free]

I'm not the one who has made several false claims in this thread.

Must be a typo. I think you mant to type "I am the only one..."

[Born Free]

As I said, the conventions do apply, just in a different form. The rights guaranteed by the convention are already guaranteed by the constitution and no matter how much you still think they should be prosecuted (no one ever disagreed with this point of view, the point of argument magically shifted after you finally realized that torture no matter what was against the law) that's not what you argued. You essentially argued that the Geneva Convention didn't apply to them and can therefore be abused. Even if the Geneva Conventions DON'T apply but most agree that they do, it's still against international law that Canada has signed on to. That's what this has been all about. Clearly from all your babble you haven't been the one who has been able to understand and you're still deflecting and calling people stupid to lead them away from the fact that you've failed miserably, sound like an idiot and are truly the one that doesn't know what they're talking about.

Just drop it and walk away.

That just about sums it up...

[Army Guy]

You know, he could've been misniformed. However, I'd like to think that he isn't when it comes to such serious issues.

So you'd agree he may of been misinformed....It's not uncommon persons in leadership postions to rely on suborinates to keep them informed about topics at hand, and although this is a very serious topic , i'm sure it does not rank at the top of the list for the CDS....And if he was lying then why just the next day on national news correct himself...going again'st party policy, to cover his ass ? or was he doing his job ? everyone assumes he's covering his ass, because of his postion and ranking in the food chain... Which is why i have so much problem with this tread, to much assuming....no proof

While there are legal definitions of abuse and torture, what'st he point in distinguish them? This one man was beaten while in police custody. Does it really matter all that much whether it was during questioning or not?

Big piont, A criminal down town toronto is roughed up, beaten, can you see the headlines the next morning, "Toronto police torture a man in custody"....can you imagine the inter national response to an action carried out by a few local policemen.....And while i do not condone the action of those local Afghan police officers we don't know the entire story on what drove them into doing it...

What i mean by that is these cops are part of the local community, this terrorist that was beaten with a "shoe" may have been responsiable for one of hundreds of terrorist events that killed or maimed dozens daily...I've seen torture victims up close and trust me there is alot better instruments of torture than a simple shoes....and in this country those that practice it know it well, and would not pick a shoe as there primary instrument....

I know if i had access to such a man , and he had killed any of my family, friends etc etc i'm not sure i could say with 100% certainity i would'nt beat the crap out of him as well...So once again we assume it was torture ....because we've been warned so many times before....we automatically fear the worse...and then we paint all of them with the same brush....everyone of those Afghan police and army and government are torturers in waiting....much like everyone would paint all toronto cops .....

Finally, though I'm usually optimistic about most things, the fact that there were so many warnings from many different sources, including members of our own bureaucracy, there are too many signs here that systematic abuse has taken place. Pretty much everyone but the government has been screaming at the top of their lungs that something was going on yet nothing was done.

Can any one here say for sure nothing has been done, The fact that DND policy has changed atleast half a dozen times in regards to Detainees, they've changed the entire way they are handled, turned over, and dozens of other things....DND does inspect regularly Afghan prisons, in fact Dept of corrections (from Canada) has personal in those prisons, working with and training Afghan nationals...thats right down to prison gaurds to the warden....RCMP officers work with some of the local police...And foreign affairs also has people on the ground performing checks and balances...So this is not just a DND thing this is a Canadian government thing, with each responable for a small part in the big picture.....

Not saying it's perfect, there are small holes in it, but it is improving to the piont now where a prisoner report of abuse is looked at right away....but i want to add this, it's also Taliban SOP to make these alligations , just like it is a POW responsibilty to escape....we must balance it all...

I'm under the impression that the CF doesn't inspect prison facilities, so really, no proof from the military end could be as much a lack of will to investigate or inability to investigate due to operational demands. This leads me to the impression that agencies that actually do investigate Afghan prisons such as other NATO Allies, the EU or Human Rights Watch may very well know what's going on more than the Canadian Military. I could be completely wrong, and if I am, please let me know.

Although DND does inspect it is not thier main function, it falls under many of the sub depts i mentioned before...Human rights watch and red cross, are free to inspect when they wish but thier reports are not going to be our governments main focus, unless they find something gravely wrong...

[M.Dancer]

-Did CSIS interrogate tortured Detainees?

There is no evidence they did

-As an add-on from previous allegations...Did Canadian forces turn over prisoners to Afghan authorities knowing that they would be likely tortured and did nothing to ensure that torture wouldnt take place?

Absolutely not. In fact there was one single incident of a man who who hit with a shoe...and he was removed from afghan custody by CDN forces when they learned of it.

Clearly you now seem to understand that ALL prisoners/detainees (no exclusions) are to be accorded the rights of the Geneva Convention and that Canada as a signatory has the obligation to honour those rules.

Which Conventions? We have been around this before....you failed the last time...

[M.Dancer]

Not that you think. You've made several false claims you're just too stupid to realize it.

We can start with the headline that you have failed to back up.

Your honesty as a poster is wanting...

...

[M.Dancer]

Not that you think. You've made several false claims you're just too stupid to realize it.

Not suprisingly, in your response you have failed to back up the allegations you have made against me.

the point of argument magically shifted after you finally realized that torture no matter what was against the law) that's not what you argued.

You essentially argued that the Geneva Convention didn't apply to them and can therefore be abused.

I wait patiently for your apology.

[Army Guy]

Are the Taliban terrorists? Or are they a sub-national group? I'd argue the latter.

Does the Taliban use terror to accomplish thier goals, or to influence the population ? the UN and Canada has already defined the defination of who is a terrorist....you can't be both....

Law applies to everything. No person or activity falls outside the rule of law. Therefore, even if the Geneva Convention does not cover terrorists, it's because it falls under civil jurisdiction where they would be afforded the rights of the geneva convention anyway just under a different name

According to the conventions they do, terrorists/ and some others are not afforded any of the protection the convention provides...with exception that they must be treated humanily....everyone is also afforded basic human rights...There is no transfer of civil jurisdiction of rights, as it would or could conflict,

IE Canadian rights are very different than Afghan civil rights. Canadian rights stop outside of our border for normal Canadians , however they do govern what and how we act in other countries as a Canadian contingent, Acting under our flag....but have no bearing on other nationalities in other countries....of course you knew that....If an enemy terrorist combatant is captured by Canadian forces all he is entitled to is to be treated humanily...He will recieve his due process through the Afghan system....IE a court hearing to determine his status, then charged with any crimes and another court hearing to determine his guilt..

Furthermore, handing over people to be tortured despite their classification under the geneva convention anyway is still a violation of international law and a war crime as defined by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Even though I still contend that these people are still covered by Article 3 of the Geneva Convention, it still doesn't really matter.

Your right handing over prisoners that are knowily going to be tortured is again'st the convention....

Art 3 does not apply to terrorists....

As for Canada, the soldiers may not have abused anyone themselves, the act of handing them over is illegal. It's not the troops that are at fault, it's the government and their inability to fix this problem.

No it's not....It must be proven in a court that detainees where in fact tortured , if this is done then all future transfers would be illigal, alligations are to be investagated but are not legal grounds to halt transfers....a country may decide to halt or delay transfers pending results but legally transfers can continue until proven....remember alliagations are a daily occurance...we could be locking them up in disneyland and the complaints would still continue....With all the checks and balences in place by all the different players involved i doubt very much the complaints hold any water....

[Argus]

Good for you. The problem is that's always been the Conservative position. Not like you've really been independent in those 6 years.

No, the position is mine. It's one of the reasons I abandoned the PC party, and was first attracted to the Reform Party. I don't support any political party with unwavering loyalty because I have prescious little respect for political parties and even less for most politicians.