Difference between revisions of "Template:ARB pic"

Revision as of 21:36, 22 August 2012 (edit) Anarchangel (Talk | contribs) (Update) ← Older edit		Revision as of 21:49, 22 August 2012 (edit) (undo) Anarchangel (Talk | contribs) (Links) Newer edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:ARB trailer.jpg|thumb|Hearing room where Guantanamo captive's annual Administrative Review Board hearings convened for captives whose Combatant Status Review Tribunal had already determined they were an "enemy combatant".<ref name=TheWire20060310> {{cite news | url=http://www.jtfgtmo.southcom.mil/wire/WirePDF/v6/TheWire-v6-i049-10MAR2006.pdf#1 | title=Review process unprecedented | publisher=[[JTF-GTMO Public Affairs Office]] | pages=pg 1 | author=Spc [[Timothy Book]] | date=Friday [[March 10]] [[2006]]|accessdate=2007-10-10 }}</ref>]]		[[File:ARB trailer.jpg|thumb|Hearing room where Guantanamo captive's annual Administrative Review Board hearings convened for captives whose Combatant Status Review Tribunal had already determined they were an "enemy combatant".<ref name=TheWire20060310> {{cite news | url=http://www.jtfgtmo.southcom.mil/wire/WirePDF/v6/TheWire-v6-i049-10MAR2006.pdf#1 | title=Review process unprecedented | publisher=[[JTF-GTMO Public Affairs Office]] | pages=pg 1 | author=Spc [[Timothy Book]] | date=Friday [[March 10]] [[2006]]|accessdate=2007-10-10 }}</ref>]]
−	Following the Supreme Court's ruling that prisoners the [[Department of Defense]] set up the [[Office for the Administrative Review of Detained Enemy Combatants]].<ref name=UsaToday20071011/>	+	Following the Supreme Court's ruling that prisoners the [[Wikipedia:Department of Defense|Department of Defense]] set up the [[Wikipedia:Office for the Administrative Review of Detained Enemy Combatants|Office for the Administrative Review of Detained Enemy Combatants]].<ref name=UsaToday20071011>{{cite news
		+	| url        = http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-10-11-guantanamo-combatants_N.htm
		+	| title      = U.S. military reviews 'enemy combatant' use
		+	| publisher  = [[USA Today]]
		+	| date        = 2007-10-11
		+	| archivedate = 2012-08-11
		+	| archiveurl  = http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fwashington%2F2007-10-11-guantanamo-combatants_N.htm&date=2012-08-11
		+	| dead        = no
		+	| quote      = Critics called it an overdue acknowledgment that the so-called Combatant Status Review Tribunals are unfairly geared toward labeling detainees the enemy, even when they pose little danger. Simply redoing the tribunals won't fix the problem, they said, because the system still allows coerced evidence and denies detainees legal representation.
		+	}}
		+	</ref>
	Gul attended his [[Combatant Status Review Tribunal]].<ref name=NYTimesGuantanamoDocketIsn457>		Gul attended his [[Combatant Status Review Tribunal]].<ref name=NYTimesGuantanamoDocketIsn457>
	{{cite news		{{cite news

---

Revision as of 21:49, 22 August 2012

Following the Supreme Court's ruling that prisoners the Department of Defense set up the Office for the Administrative Review of Detained Enemy Combatants.^[2] Gul attended his Combatant Status Review Tribunal.^[3]

Detainees who were determined to have been properly classified as "enemy combatants" were scheduled to have their dossier reviewed at annual Administrative Review Board (WP) hearings.^[4] The US government, careful to avoid the standards of international law, made a point of declaring that Administrative Review Boards were not authorized to review whether a detainee qualified for POW status, as this would have invoked the Geneva Convention standards. They further distanced the ARB boards from international consideration by distancing the ARB boards from the CSRT and the government's own definition of "enemy combatant", by not authorizing the ARB boards to review whether a detainee should have been classified as an "enemy combatant".

They were set on a purely opportunistic venture to assess the government's self interest, in the manner of the villain holding a gun to a hostage's head and saying, "don't make me do this". "If we do the right thing and release these prisoners, the board asked, "will we be inconveniencing ourselves?" And so they considered whether a detainee should continue to be detained by the United States, because they continued to pose a threat -- or whether they could safely be repatriated to the custody of their home country, or whether they could be set free.^[5]

1. ↑ Spc Timothy Book (Friday March 10 2006). "Review process unprecedented". JTF-GTMO Public Affairs Office. pp. pg 1. http://www.jtfgtmo.southcom.mil/wire/WirePDF/v6/TheWire-v6-i049-10MAR2006.pdf#1. Retrieved 2007-10-10. </li>
2. ↑ "U.S. military reviews 'enemy combatant' use". USA Today. 2007-10-11. Archived from the original on 2012-08-11. http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fwashington%2F2007-10-11-guantanamo-combatants_N.htm&date=2012-08-11. "Critics called it an overdue acknowledgment that the so-called Combatant Status Review Tribunals are unfairly geared toward labeling detainees the enemy, even when they pose little danger. Simply redoing the tribunals won't fix the problem, they said, because the system still allows coerced evidence and denies detainees legal representation." </li>
3. ↑ Margot Williams (2008-11-03). "Guantanamo Docket: Mohammad Gul". New York Times. http://projects.nytimes.com/guantanamo/detainees/457-mohammad-gul. Retrieved 2012-08-19. </li>
4. ↑ Army Sgt. Sarah Stannard (October 29 2007). "OARDEC provides recommendations to Deputy Secretary of Defense". JTF Guantanamo Public Affairs. http://www.jtfgtmo.southcom.mil/storyarchive/2007/07octstories/102907-2-oardec.html. Retrieved 2008-03-26. </li>
5. ↑ Annual Administrative Review Boards for Enemy Combatants Held at Guantanamo Attributable to Senior Defense Officials. URL accessed on November 12, 2010.

</ol>