January 30, 2002
Konrad Switters

September 11, 2001: George W. Bush declares, "America and our friends and allies join with all those who want peace and security in the world, and we stand together to win the war against terrorism."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010911-16.html

September 20, 2001: George W. Bush declares, "Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there." He goes on to ask, "How will we fight and win this war? We will direct every resource at our command -- every means of diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every instrument of law enforcement, every financial influence, and every necessary weapon of war -- to the disruption and to the defeat of the global terror network."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.html

September 24, 2001: George W. Bush declares, "At 12:01 a.m. this morning, a major thrust of our war on terrorism began with the stroke of a pen. Today, we have launched a strike on the financial foundation of the global terror network."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010924-4.html

October 8, 2001: On the day after the first air strikes against al Qaeda terrorist training camps and military installations of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, George W. Bush declares, "On all efforts and all fronts, we're going to be ongoing and relentless as we tighten the net of justice. This will be a long war. It requires understanding and patience from the American people."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/10/20011008-3.html

November 6, 2001: George W. Bush declares, "Later this week, at the United Nations, I will set out my vision of our common responsibilities in the war on terror. I will put every nation on notice that these duties involve more than sympathy or words. No nation can be neutral in this conflict, because no civilized nation can be secure in a world threatened by terror."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/11/20011106-2.html

December 7, 2001: George W. Bush declares, "Our war against terror is not a war against one terrorist leader or one terrorist group. Terrorism is a movement, an ideology that respects no boundary of nationality or decency. The terrorists despise creative societies and individual choice -- and thus they bear a special hatred for America."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011207.html

December 28, 2001: George W. Bush declares, "The war on terror is not just an American war on terrorists, it's a civilized government war on terror that we're talking about here."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011228-1.html

January 13, 2002: 20 Taliban and al-Qaeda prisoners of the "war against terror" are transported to the Guantánamo Bay military base in Cuba.

January 28, 2002: George W. Bush declares that the prisoners of the "war against terrorism" are not "prisoners of war": "However I make my decision, these detainees will be well treated... We are not going to call them prisoners of war in either case, and the reason why is al Qaeda is not a known military. These are killers, these are terrorists."

January 29, 2002: Every American Citizen in the United States of America, as well as any other intelligent person in any nation around the world, is now fully exposed to, and aware of, the hypocrisy of the transparent war rhetoric of the current administration.

Is this not a war, as Mr. Bush has stated on every possible speaking occasion?

Are these members of the Taliban and Al Qaeda regimes, currently in custody, not prisoners? - as defined by Merriam Webster: a person deprived of liberty and kept under involuntary restraint, confinement, or custody.

George W. Bush has wielded the word war tirelessly, to invoke the passions of the American public, in an effort to gain their support for a military campaign against terrorism. But he has now discarded the word war, as a nuanced suffix used to describe the legal rights of a prisoner captured during a military operation.

He is attempting to rob these prisoners of their rights, because he knows that these prisoners of war are no good to this country if the United States is not able to get information from them that can be used to identify and eradicate other terrorist cells around the world; thus potentially saving innocent lives in the future. In order to glean this information, these prisoners must be tortured and abused; and the "prisoner of war" status, which will invoke the Geneva Conventions, will not allow this kind of treatment.

The flimsy semantic argument, as to the relevancy of these prisoners being, or not being, part of a "known" military, reveals a staggering moral hypocrisy, if not an outright lie and a flagrant deception. It also suggests that this administration will break the rules, when necessary, to suit their needs. This is a very, very dangerous proposition at a time when the United States is so feverishly advocating the advancement of its universal Democratic principles.

If the United States is to be respected and admired for its cherished Democratic principles, and not just feared for its capacity to bomb its adversaries into submission, then the application of the laws it expects to be granted to its military personnel abroad, must be not be discarded as it deals with its enemies.