Former Vice President Dick Chaney blew Senator Feinstein’s ‘report’ out of the water:
It is a pity the language of political discourse in this country prevented Mr. Chaney from calling out Di Fi and her fellow co-conspirators for sending their warning to the intelligence community —— from now on you will serve the International community before you defend the nation.
I want to examine two aspects of Mr. Chaney’s comments. The first one addresses all of the so-called talk one hears rooted in misguided philosophical hogwash about a line between interrogation techniques and torture.
THERE IS NO LINE IN WAR.
There is only one proof. You count the American military personal, along with the American civilians, saved by any method available —— after you win the war. That ain’t philosophy.
Incidentally, there is no line between bombing cities to rubble in order to save American lives, yet you never hear Democrats cite the countless American lives that would have been lost by dragging out their touchy-feely wars for years. Every one of them tries to convince the world that war is the Great Satan when the greatest evil born in the 20th century is TOTALITARIAN GOVERNMENT.
The Geneva Conventions mentioned by Mr. Chaney is the second topic I want to examine. This one is easy for me because over the years I posted countless messages critical of the Geneva Conventions.
Somewhere along the way the United Nations set itself up as the authority on the Geneva Conventions. Any International organization with the military muscle to enforce the Geneva Conventions is code talk for worldwide Socialism. There is nothing new in the Socialist agenda. In practice, Democrats have been openly angling towards enforcing the Geneva Conventions under the supervision of the anti-America United Nations.
By speaking so highly of the Geneva Conventions for so many decades liberals subliminally taught many generations to love them; much like children love to hear the same bedtime stories told night after night.
A little background on the Geneva Conventions.
In 1882 the first illegitimate president, Chester A. Arthur, signed the 1864 Geneva Convention and the Senate ratified it.
President Arthur locked America into the Geneva Conventions at a time when the world was much different than is today’s world. In spite of the Geneva Conventions, inhumanity grew in leaps and bounds throughout the last century. The Geneva Conventions are now a millstone around the necks of civilized countries while the Geneva Conventions do nothing to curtail the behavior of brutal aggressors.
The Geneva Conventions originated in the 1860s. The one and only impetus for the first Convention was better treatment for wounded soldiers.
The excerpts come from my computer almanac. There are two separate entries. The first is about the Red Cross when the Geneva Conventions were in the rudimentary stage. Should you do further research you’ll find that in the beginning there was no mention of torture, prisoners of war, habeas corpus, or anything else:
Initiative for founding the Red Cross came from the 19th-century Swiss philanthropist Jean Henri Dunant. Appalled by the almost complete lack of care for wounded soldiers, he appealed to national leaders to establish societies devoted to the aid of the wounded in wartime. Five Swiss citizens formed a committee, which later became the ICRC, and issued a call for an international conference. The first conference was held in Geneva in October 1863.
Today, Dunant’s national leaders are now mistakenly called world leaders.
There’s a touch of the charity hustle in the Geneva Conventions. The International Committee of the Red Cross (not to be confused with the American Red Cross) was founded in 1863 prior to the first Geneva Convention in 1864. In following years the ICRC grew into a well-funded organization dedicated to self-aggrandizement. Committee membership is restricted to Swiss citizens. Aside from making porous cheese those Swiss know a good thing when they see it.
Let me suggest that caring for the wounded in accordance with the first Geneva Convention evolved into deliberately wounding enemy combatants. Professional soldiers in every modern army know that a wounded enemy soldier ties up more resources and manpower than does a dead enemy. I am not suggesting that the wounded should be treated as they were treated in long-forgotten wars. I am simply pointing out one result of the Geneva Conventions. Call it one more example of “The highway to hell is paved with good intentions.”
The next excerpt explains the Geneva Conventions:
The Geneva Conventions are 4 international treaties governing the protection of civilians in time of war, the treatment of prisoners of war, and the care of the wounded and sick in the armed forces. The first convention, covering the sick and wounded, was concluded in Geneva, Switzerland, in 1864; it was amended and expanded in 1906. A third convention, in 1929, covered prisoners of war. Outrage at the treatment of prisoners and civilians during World War II by some belligerents, notably Germany and Japan, prompted the conclusion, in August 1949, of 4 new conventions. Three of these restated and strengthened the previous conventions, and the fourth codified general principles of international law governing the treatment of civilians in wartime.
The 1949 convention for civilians provided for special safeguards for the wounded, children under 15, pregnant women, and the elderly. Discrimination was forbidden on racial, religious, national, or political grounds. Torture, collective punishment, reprisals, the unwarranted destruction of property, and the forced use of civilians for an occupier?s armed forces were also prohibited.
Also included in the new 1949 treaties was a pledge to treat prisoners humanely, feed them adequately, and deliver relief supplies to them. They were not to be forced to disclose more than minimal information.
Most countries have formally accepted all or most of the humanitarian conventions as binding. A nation is not free to withdraw its ratification of the conventions during wartime. However, there is no permanent machinery in place to apprehend, try, or punish violators.
The First Convention covered care for the wounded and sick members of the armed forces in the field.
The Second Convention covered care for the wounded, sick, and shipwrecked members of the armed forces at sea as well as civilian shipwreck survivors.
The Third Convention covered prisoners of the war.
The Fourth Convention covered civilians in times of war.
WW II torture, inhumane treatment of prisoners, and the executions of Americans by the enemy shows that the League of Nations and the Geneva Conventions were as absurd as is the UN. Flying planes into skyscrapers in violation of the Fourth Convention is a no-no, but that did not stop it from happening.
The Geneva Conventions tells Americans how to behave while enemy countries ignore the them with impunity. Not every country is a signatory. Those that did not sign have no legal obligation to comply. That makes the certainty of winners punishing the losers a more useful deterrent than is the Geneva Conventions, or at least it did before Socialists decided otherwise.
Countries that signed onto the Geneva Conventions often engage in the most brutal forms of torture. Proponents of the Geneva Conventions seem to be saying that America should avoid war against the non-signers if it expects captured Americans to get better treatment than they get from Muslim fanatics who are non-signers.
The Geneva Conventions would be wonderful things if all wars were fought by gentlemen. Colonel Saito was on the right side of the issue:
America should not be bound by the Geneva Conventions. That is where Supreme Court Internationalists are pushing this country. Americans will always dictate their own conduct in war. So I see no reason to give Geneva Conventions legitimacy irrespective of what moralists wearing black robes say.
There is no evidence to support the claim that says the Geneva Conventions made the world a better place. There is much evidence to support the opposite view. TOTALITARIAN GOVERNMENTS have become increasingly barbaric from the outset of the Geneva Conventions in 1864.
Since 1864, the Geneva Conventions gained worldwide respectability. During that time governments took to killing everyone. The Ottoman Empire, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and Communist China, along with countless lesser-known brutal regimes have slaughtered well over 100 million of their own citizens. Mankind cannot possibly be worse off after scrapping the Geneva Conventions.
So long as the Geneva Conventions remain a political force nothing else will be tried. Scrap the Geneva Conventions and see what develops. Renouncing the Geneva Conventions is the only logical course for America if for no other reason than to strike a crippling blow at Socialists and Socialism. Bring back the Geneva Conventions if things are worse at the end of this century.
