# Brit Gitmo Kidnappees to be Released **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 11, 2005, 10:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brit-gitmo-kidnappees-to-be-released/284196 "2005-01-11T10:05:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brit-gitmo-kidnappees-to-be-released/284196/41 "2005-01-11T17:28:29Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > You honestly believe this to be the case? Sure. > [@](#): > > Let us imagine the scenario: The Northern Alliance, a bunch of guys with Kalashnikovs but no uniforms… No uniforms? Not even ‘fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance’? Well golly, I guess they don’t qualify for protections under Article.4, GC. > [@](#): > > At that very instant, the commanding officer says “You are an Enemy Prisoner of War, under full provision of the Geneva Convention”. The wind blows amid the silence, as the young man looks on, uncomprehending. A few seconds tick by. Heh. > [@](#): > > “And _now_, I hereby invoke the authority of George W Bush and declare that you are an Enemy Combatant, under no such provision and subject to indefinite detention and even execution without trial”. As good a sketch as that would be, you are overformalizing the process. While they were in Northern Alliance hands, their status was irrelevant to us. Once they turned them over to us, and this is conjecture (though not particularily wild), I would bet that they were processed (names recorded, et cetera), and once processed, they were EC. Perhaps during that interim processing period, they would legally be considered EPW? I don’t know. > [@](#): > > Come now, **Brutus**. You surely cannot be so utterly deluded as to consider this scenario as being consistent with those US Army Regulations? What trumps what? I imagine that one source (regs or EO) is of a higher legal authority than the other. Assuming the EO takes precedence, then being fully consistent with regs doesn’t really matter. Assuming the regs take precedence, then any number of legalisms could come into play to cover the transition period from ‘EPW’ to ‘EC’. If I had to bet money, though, I would guess that most, if not all, of our ECs started out their careers in Gitmo as ECs, with no EPW status. > [@jayjay](#): > > Your optimism in this case, while admirable, is sadly misguided… You bring a lot to the table, don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brit-gitmo-kidnappees-to-be-released/284196/42 "2005-01-11T19:10:52Z")
> [@](#): > > Assuming the EO takes precedence, then being fully consistent with regs doesn’t really matter. \*ie. the regs are being _ignored_, as I said all along. > [@](#): > > If I had to bet money, though, I would guess that most, if not all, of our ECs started out their careers in Gitmo as ECs, with no EPW status. So your bet is that the US is ignoring its own regulations in favour of an executive order by the administration? ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2005, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brit-gitmo-kidnappees-to-be-released/284196/43 "2005-01-11T20:08:56Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > You bring a lot to the table, don’t you? That’s that “irony” stuff, i’n’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 7:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brit-gitmo-kidnappees-to-be-released/284196/44 "2005-01-12T07:58:56Z")
According to the BBC the four Brits illegally detained at Gitmo are to be released today. Expect more revelations from them about the torture regime at the Cuba Concentration Camp. What explanation will the Bush apologists for torture make about releasing these ‘dangerous’ men back in to society after all their posturing about their threat to the American way of life. More information: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanam...1387545,00.html](http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanam...1387545,00.html) And the debate is SentientMeat says- how does the Bush administration compose a consistent history about what they have done to these people. Either they are criminals or they are to be allowed to be free. Either they are POWs or Illegal combattants Either they are a threat to the US or they are not Either they should be tried before a tribunal or given the right to appeal to the Supreme Court Either they should have attorneys or they shouldn’t Either they were subjected to torture or they were not Either they were ‘taken on the battlefield’ or they were kidnapped from a third country. Composing a coherent hsitory and explanation will be well nigh impossible. To repeat the question, how can Bush compose a coherent account of the detention and torture of these people? ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 8:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brit-gitmo-kidnappees-to-be-released/284196/45 "2005-01-12T08:09:47Z")
> **[Blair and Bush hope issue will fade away](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/jan/12/uk.usa)** > > The political pain the Blair government has been caused by the detention of four Britons in Guantánamo Bay will not end when the men get home. "Yesterday’s announcement of their imminent release raised questions about why the Bush administration had finally agreed. The US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, had claimed those held in Guantánamo were the “hardest of the hard”; now the Britons are to be sent back to the UK and almost certain freedom. Eugene Fidell, president of the US National Institute of Military Justice, is in no doubt about the reason: “They would have been charged if the government had any evidence on them. The purpose of these detentions is to squeeze people for information, not to prosecute them.” In the US, the free run the Bush administration had enjoyed in its treatment of up to 680 Muslim men at Guantánamo came to an end last summer. In June the supreme court struck down the president’s claim that Guantánamo was not under the jurisdiction of US courts. The ruling meant that detainees could sue the government to force it to justify their detention and lawsuits were launched. US government lawyers have so far failed to have the cases struck out. Mr Fidell said: “The credibility of Guantánamo is extremely low. The government have lost every legal battle that has occurred concerning the detentions.” In the US FBI documents have emerged showing the agency’s concern about how detainees were being treated. Former Guantánamo interrogators told the New York Times that ill treatment was used or threatened at the prison, and the Pentagon was forced to announce an inquiry into the allegations of abuses. Brent Mickum, US lawyer for Mr Mubanga, said concern had been growing: “The Bush administration has realised it is hurting them now. These hideous allegations are established; it is not an anti-terrorism facility, it is a torture facility. The government can’t deny the torture anymore because it is their own documents, from the FBI, saying this. Rather than letting all these people parade through the courts saying they were tortured or ill-treated, they let them go.”" ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2005, 8:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brit-gitmo-kidnappees-to-be-released/284196/46 "2005-01-12T08:22:08Z")
It is damage control. They stood to lose a succession of court cases. The trend has been all that way so far. There will still be the court cases. To continue imprisonment in the light of facts and law now known would be an aggravating factor in the damages claims the US will be forced to pay out. Stand by for legislation denying them the right to damages. Swift and sure passage through congress, as the most elementary of rights is trampled by the US. \*\*Brutus, \*\*sorry, right first steps but wrong conclusion. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brit-gitmo-kidnappees-to-be-released/284196.md?page=2)