US Military: OK With Human Rights Violations
After all, George W. Bush and his henchmen insist that the presence of the US troops in Afghanistan and Irak obeys to a higher goal, which is to bring democracy and peace to those who do not share our Western values.
But what is democracy without up most respect for human rights?
That is a question that racist genocidal maniacs like Condoleeza Rice or Donald Rumsfeld are unable to answer, all they care about can be reduced to how much money they have in their bank accounts by the time their Washington stint is over.
Here you have a note about how the US military will not include a landmark regulation to prevent torture and mistreatment contained in the Geneva Convention:
Pentagon to omit Geneva ban from new army manual: report
Mon Jun 5, 8:49 AM ET
New policies on prisoners being drawn up by the Pentagon will reportedly omit a key tenet of the Geneva Convention that explicitly bans "humiliating and degrading treatment."
Citing unidentified but knowledgeable military officials, the Los Angeles Times said the step would mark a further, potentially permanent, shift by the US government away from strict adherence to international human rights standards.
The decision could end a lengthy debate within the Defense Department but will not become final until the Pentagon makes the new guidelines public, the report said.
The State Department fiercely opposes the military's decision to exclude Geneva Convention protections and has been pushing for the Pentagon and White House to reconsider, the paper pointed out.
The Pentagon has been redrawing its policies on detainees for more than a year.
It intends to issue a new Army Field Manual on interrogation which, along with accompanying directives, represents core instructions to US troops around the world, The Times said.
The directive on interrogation, a senior defense official said, is being rewritten to create safeguards so that all detainees are treated humanely but can still be questioned effectively, according to the report.
Critics and supporters of President George W. Bush have debated whether it is possible to prove a direct link between administration declarations that it will not be bound by the Geneva Convention, and events such as the abuses at Abu Ghraib or the killings of Iraqi civilians last year in Haditha, The Times said.
Omitting the Geneva provisions may make it harder for the administration to portray such incidents as aberrations, the paper noted, saying it would also undercut contentions that US forces follow the strictest, most broadly accepted standards when fighting wars.