 |
 |
|
|
       |
|||
|
Treatment of Prisoners in a Post 9/11World September 21, 2006 The current debate about clarifying detention and trial procedures for terrorists is a good thing. Debate is the strength of this country. But sadly, many people are unwilling to discuss the issue, preferring instead to indulge in shrill denunciations of the President and dire warnings about infringements on liberty. Drowned by the noise, the rationale for the President’s action becomes lost in the fog. But it should be given serious attention. Dead serious! Specifically, the President wants the Congress to declare that U.S. personnel are in compliance with the Geneva Convention as long as they do not engage in inhumane treatment of prisoners. The Geneva Convention and federal law prohibits “cruel, inhuman or degrading” treatment of war prisoners. The Geneva Convention also prohibits what is termed “outrages upon human dignity.” To people of other nations and cultures, the meaning of these prohibitions can vary in significant ways. For Americans on the front lines in this war, the President seeks to provide clarity in place of interpretation so that it is clear that the methods we employ are legal, precise and understood. Unlike the Axis powers in World War II, the enemy we face today is not identifiable as a nation. Its soldiers— al Qaeda and their followers— do not wear military uniforms, nor do they respect human life. Death by spectacular means is their way. Against this enemy, it is only right that we do everything we legally can to prevent the murder of innocent people. This is not to say that we should adopt the terrorist’s methods. We, unlike them, value human life. And very simply, that is the point in this debate. The tools that President Bush has brought to the war against terror, such as the Patriot Act, the tracking of money transfers, the eavesdropping on al Qaeda communications and now, the request to Congress regarding the detention and trial of terror suspects, are all aimed at saving lives and preventing the terrorists from achieving their murderous goals. Yet there is a concern that by treating terrorists as terrorists, we somehow cede the moral high ground and therefore, become no better that our enemies. But we do not engage in beheadings or mutilations, we do not hang dead bodies from bridges or drag dead bodies through the streets to the sounds of celebration. But it is not the loathsome tactics of the enemy that should motivate this debate. Rather, it is a question of our responsibility to ensure that the men and women we send to engage the enemy have at their disposal both the tools and the authority to win this war. I believe that the President’s proposal provides just that._________________________________________________________  Back
|
||
The Kerik Group, LLC, a Kerik International Affiliate |
|||
 |
|||
© Copyright 2007 The Kerik Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved.