Theresa May Quotes

The press were asking about the claim that the United States were sending detainees (“rendition” it is called) in the War on Terrorism to countries where they are tortured in ways that United States law prohibited. This quotation is an excellent illustration of the nuanced language that is sometimes used by politicians with the press. For example this statement was made in the Press Conference about our Human Rights Annual report. In it specific countries were named and accused of torturing prisoners or suspects. The press had learned that detainees had been renditioned to those same countries. Lowenkron went on to explain that U. S. officials had explained to officials of the countries to which detainees had been renditioned that the detainees should not be tortured; therefore they did not BELIEVE that they would be. So the statement was “correct” whether or not they detainees had been tortured. In another nuance, some people wondered what “we” meant—the United States or the State Department. Perhaps the State Department followed this policy and practice but the CIA may not have.

It is surprising that these ideas would come from one of the most autocratic powerful monarch in the world at the time. However there were many very liberal influences on her from Europe. This set of proposals she even sent to Voltaire to get his feedback and criticism. As late as 2006 the American President was reluctant to outlaw torture for terroristsand the Vice President actually argued for its retention as an interrogation technique. Over 300 years earlier the autocrat of Russia argued against it.

Peace on Earth

Major Fleener had been assigned to defend accused terrorists who were being held at the military prison in Guantanamo, Cuba. For several years they were held without a hearing or trial. Then the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that they had to be given a hearing or trial. A Military tribunal was selected. The methods and procedures of these hearings came under much public world-wide criticism as they did not meet the normal legal standards of most countries. Surprisingly, one of the military officers made public statements criticizing the army and the trials.

A woman whose children were kidnapped and tortured by Argentine government officials during the Dirty War appealed for assistance to the Papal Nuncio. Amnesty International had validated the facts of the case.

This was not an official legal opinion but his personal opinion.

When TR came to office, the U. S. was in the midst of war with Philippine insurgents who were fighting an asymmetric , guerrilla war against the U. S. Army. The war had become very brutal with the insurgents using terror and atrocities and some Army units executing prisoners and torturing captives. Roosevelt, actually fired the General who was in charge of the field troops rather than just discipline lower level officers as usually has happened.

Clinton did believe that there might be a rare situation where extra judicial methods might be resorted to but he felt that those involved should be ready to take the responsibility and the consequence. He had suggested formalizing the theoretical exception, but then changed his mind as the exception would be abused.

There has always been some confusion in the case of the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Geneva and Hague conventions are very clear when prisoners are official members of an state’s armed force with uniforms, insignia and ranks. It is also clear with respect to civilians. But the combatants of the insurgent and terrorist forces fall in between, and international law is less clear. The George W. Bush administration at first took the position that the captured combatants were not captured soldiers and were therefore not entitled to the treatment due that status. But the military regulations made no distinction as to how prisoners in combat should be treated. It is a very gray area, except that in either case, torture is illegal under U. S. and under International law.