On Monday 30 October 2006 16:56, ken barber wrote:
> the trials will determine what is done to them. your
> remarks about the not being proven killers ignores who
> they are and where and how they were captured. but
> they are going to get trials that will not ignore
> these things.
>

Ken,

How do you envisage these "trials" working?

It doesn't seem to be like a normal trial, where the burden of guilt proof is 
on the prosecution, defendant gets told exactly the crime of which he is 
accused, and, perhaps most important of all, proceedings occur in public.

Perhaps you envisage something more in line with the Nuremberg Trials after 
WWII. Held in public, filmed, overwhelming physical evidence, multiple eye 
witness accounts, cast iron identification evidence. Noone was found guilty 
at Nurembourg just because they were an SS Officer, it was always tied to a 
particular criminal action which it could be proved beyond any doubt was 
perpetrated by the person accused. Just being a soldier who had shot at 
Allied soldiers would not have led to a prosecution.

Are the Guantanamo prisoners in this sort of category? Lets look at the facts 
as released by the US Govt.:-

The Govt says all the prisoners are "Enemy Combatants" and defines that 
as "The definition of an enemy combatant is in the implementing orders,
which have been passed out to everyone. But, in short, it means anyone who is 
part of supporting the Taliban or al Qaeda forces or associated forces 
engaging in hostilities against the United States or our coalition 
partners.". So just aiding the Taliban/aQ gives the status of "Enemy 
Combatant". Taking in, caring for, a wounded Talibani, would classify you 
as "Enemy" - to be locked up for years.

According to released US Govt information over 50% of the prisoners are not 
accused of "hostilities" but just "supporting" Taliban/Aq. The Govt says that 
only 8% have been classified as "fighters" and 60% are simply "Associated 
with" Taliban/Aq.

Now, what counts as "engaging" in hostilities? Again the US Govt have told 
us:-

1. The detainee fled, along with others, when the United States forces
   bombed their camp.
2. The detainee was captured in Pakistan, along with other Uigher
   fighters.

(I think I'd flee my camp if bombed!!!) So "camp cook" is hostile act.

Only 5% were actually captured by US forces so it seems most of the prisoners 
were just "handed over" by other Pakistanis or Afghans including Bounty 
Hunters (since the US gave large bounties for prisoners received).

The Govt admits that the following reasons were sufficient for accepting the 
prisoners from Bounty Hunters:-

"Associations with unnamed and unidentified individuals and/or organizations;
Associations with organizations, the members of which would be allowed into 
the United States by the Department of Homeland Security;
Possession of rifles;
Use of a guest house;
Possession of Casio watches; and
Wearing of olive drab clothing."

The number of "dangerous" detainees is surprisingly small, the vast majority 
should never have been incarcerated for this length of time. 

Cheers

Deri

-----------------------

To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:

http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy