|
|
|
|
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/5/2008 2:29:34 PM | Your mistaking citizens breaking away from an oppressive government who taxed it's citizens without any kind of representation, with a religious fanatic suicidal zealot group, bent on destroying the current government and imposing their strict Sharia law on all it's populace.
Al-Quaeda makes up the minority of Iraqi resistance fighters.
But our founding fathers had no intent to travel to England and over throw the crown.
Neither do the Iraqis, you're just being amusing now.
It's kind of a simple minded difference.
Actually it's a relatively simple analogy, suddenly it's not about freedom fighters from an outside authority, suddenly religion counts.
Besides, if all these people are confirmed suicidal zealots as described, they obviously should be found guilty in a trial. What do you fear from trials?
An occupying army has obligations, but also authority. Civilians who commit acts of sabotage and violence, even soldiers who fight out of uniform, can be dealt with quite harshly without violating the laws of war. Your knowledge of the Geneva Conventions is pretty shaky, apparently.
Actually its the view shared by the majority of Convention scholars, and the international community, it's held by the United States and other pro torture advocates however. | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/5/2008 4:40:43 PM |
Your mistaking citizens breaking away from an oppressive government who taxed it's citizens without any kind of representation, with a religious fanatic suicidal zealot group, bent on destroying the current government and imposing their strict Sharia law on all it's populace.
Al-Quaeda makes up the minority of Iraqi resistance fighters.
But our founding fathers had no intent to travel to England and over throw the crown.
Neither do the Iraqis, you're just being amusing now.
It's kind of a simple minded difference.
Actually it's a relatively simple analogy, suddenly it's not about freedom fighters from an outside authority, suddenly religion counts.
Besides, if all these people are confirmed suicidal zealots as described, they obviously should be found guilty in a trial. What do you fear from trials?
My bad. I didn't make it clear in my post. That portion (that was referenced above) was in reference to Afghanistan. In referencing Iraq and Afghanistan so often, I forget to make sure to state which I am referring to.
The first portion about the U.N. mandate was in reference to Iraq. The second part was in reference to Afghanistan.
 | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/5/2008 4:47:15 PM |
People can feel what they want, and only liberals get wrapped up about what they are entitled to.
Not that I think what you said really means anything at all....but taking it for what you think you mean the obvious response is that fortunately for non-liberals, we give a damn what you're entitled to as well.
An occupying army has obligations, but also authority. Civilians who commit acts of sabotage and violence, even soldiers who fight out of uniform, can be dealt with quite harshly without violating the laws of war. Your knowledge of the Geneva Conventions is pretty shaky, apparently.
Can you identify something I've said that would back up your statement about my shakiness here? Mind you, I don't pretend to be an expert on the Geneva Convention, but when it comes to the detainees at Gitmo, it's not JUST the Geneva Convention that is at stake....indeed, I recognize that the Convention "defines" what constitutes a POW, and I also recognize that they don't dictate wrapping prisoners of this sort in cotton wool and feeding them sweets. But there are no "rules of war" in the sense that they are meant here that sanction the use of torture on human beings OR the indefinite detention of people NOT considered POWs without access to legal counsel, specific information regarding the REASON for their imprisonment and the evidence against them, and/or the right to be PROMPTLY heard by a court or similar form of authority; indeed, the UN's "Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment" (1988) specifies these things. If I'm wrong about that, or some international standard has supplanted the UN principles on this matter, I'm happy to be enlightened....perhaps you could describe the ways in which the situation at Gitmo is actually in conformity with "rules of war" or broader international standards or laws? And by that, I don't mean yet another exercise in verbal, gung-ho masturbation about how "horrible" they all are and how if we let them go they'd immediately kill us all. | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/5/2008 5:51:35 PM | The question of the thread was.....there was none. A statement was made that the prisoner's of the Iraq war at Gitmo and (possibly) else should have trials and the thing be done with instead of detaining them as is being done.
I was on topic but you didn't understand what I wrote. So I'll explain it better and then you judge if Gitmo is really that bad.
In a message of your's loony you made this statement...."Hmmmm, what punishment do you think an American citizen would deserve for fighting an invading force IN America?" I made my remark as to what happens to American's and others who are captured by Bin Laden's crew in Iraq. I was showing the difference of how one side of the war treats it's prisoners in contrast to how the other side treats it's prisoners. One side kills them. The other side tortures them and then lets them live. I believe the latter of the two who sponser's Club Gitmo's is the more lienant of the two sides. At least the prisoners in Gitmo "might" have a chance to see their familys one day while that hope does not exist for the other side that usually has their head lopped off or are shot to death execution style.
So while we have a bunch of "Feel sorry for the Gitmo men and let them have a trial" keep in mind most who are captured by Bin Laden's crew will NEVER have a trial or ever see their familys. | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/5/2008 6:26:43 PM | ^^^What Bin Laden's "crew" does or doesn't do to their prisoners is not the yardstick by which we should measure our own behavior.
| |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/5/2008 7:37:02 PM |
If the US were invaded, I'm sure that random, law abiding, property owning, Protestant, God fearing male gun owners in Texas would be comforted by liberal assurances that they are entitled to their feelings, though they might have more pressing concerns at that point. That wouldn't stop the liberals from issuing press releases validating people's emotions, asking themselves what the United States had done to deserve an invasion, and hiring lawyers for the invading army.
This kind of thing is ridiculous and does nothing to move discussion forward...although it does reveal a great deal about the man who wrote it.
Or a freedom fighter. Either way, he's not a soldier, and if captured, is not afforded the protections due to a POW. The general provisions of dealing with civilian population don't apply either, because this person has taken up arms, and is not a non-combatant.
I think we all understand the status according to which these men are being held.
The current legal status of the Gitmo prisoners is problematic, as much as some would like to over simplify it. Probably, they should be turned over to the government of Afghanistan along with any evidence relating to their transgressions. They didn't commit crimes within US territory, so there's really no reason to try them in American civilian courts.
Unfortunately, due to the stance of the administration, it's only through civilian courts that any resolution of this matter, other than simply either holding these men forever or subjecting them to hearings as under the MCA with all the potential for abuse that goes along with that, seems to be possible. I don't know what you mean when you say that "some would like to over simplify" this matter: when the administration refuses to acknowledge any international norm or standard or potential resolution, obviously the only present recourse is to the civilian judiciary--part of the responsibility of which is to watchdog the other two branches of govt, ONE of which, at the moment, is behaving in a way that is clearly unconstitutional.
It seems to me that the real "over simplification" lies with those who would say: "men bad, get what they deserve...and those who care are idiots," and move on. | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/6/2008 1:53:22 AM | "What Bin Laden's "crew" does or doesn't do to their prisoners is not the yardstick by which we should measure our own behavior."
Our behavior with prisoners of war is being measured by all. Compared to other countries the way we treat any kind of prisoner, especially prisoners of war, well, there is no comparison. They end up having more rights, more food, more recreation, etc., then is ever even dreamed about in other countries.
They are there because of a war. They are not there because they came to America (or were an American citizen) and broke the laws of the land and were arrested, jailed, tried and sentenced to do time.
The military works differently then the civilian courts regarding war and prisoners.
These terrorists would do time in American federal and state prisons. They would mix with the common prisoner in for rape, robbery, etc. Most of those common prisoners already blame cops and the American goverment for all their problems. So tossing in a mix of actual terrorists would be a great thing to do according to Libs and screw the possible outcome.
Prisoners of war have always been kept imprisoned till the war was over. Then they were released.
The Gitmo detainees are not actual men of the Iraq military under Saddam who fought American forces, were captured and detained as prisoners of war.
And a terrorist is much different then an actual enemy of an actual war. A terrorist usually has no mother country sponsering them and their units with uniforms, wepons and food etc., in our day and time because that would make that mother country liable to be invaded by other countries for out right supporting the terrorists that strap bombs to women and children to blow up innocent people and military personal.
*- Post has been edited to remove flamebait. Please stay on topic and within the rules. Anyone needing a refresher can find the rules here. -TheMadFiddler-*
| |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/6/2008 2:03:27 AM |
Our behavior with prisoners of war is being measured by all. Compared to other countries the way we treat any kind of prisoner, especially prisoners of war, well, there is no comparison.
Using the same method's of communist china?
China Inspired Interrogations at Guantánamo
By SCOTT SHANE
Published: July 2, 2008
WASHINGTON — The military trainers who came to Guantánamo Bay in December 2002 based an entire interrogation class on a chart showing the effects of “coercive management techniques” for possible use on prisoners, including “sleep deprivation,” “prolonged constraint,” and “exposure.”
What the trainers did not say, and may not have known, was that their chart had been copied verbatim from a 1957 Air Force study of Chinese Communist techniques used during the Korean War to obtain confessions, many of them false, from American prisoners.
The recycled chart is the latest and most vivid evidence of the way Communist interrogation methods that the United States long described as torture became the basis for interrogations both by the military at the base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and by the Central Intelligence Agency.
Wonderful
  | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/6/2008 2:11:02 AM | July 04, 2008
International Herald Tribune
The military trainers who came to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in December 2002 based an entire interrogation class on a chart showing the effects of "coercive management techniques" for possible use on prisoners, including "sleep deprivation," "prolonged constraint" and "exposure."
What the trainers did not say, and may not have known, was that their chart had been copied verbatim from a 1957 U.S. Air Force study of Chinese techniques used during the Korean War to obtain confessions, many of them false, from American prisoners.
The recycled chart was the latest and most vivid evidence of the way Chinese interrogation methods that the United States long described as torture became the basis for interrogations both by the military at the base at Guantanamo and by the Central Intelligence Agency.
Some methods were used against a small number of prisoners at Guantanamo before 2005, when Congress banned the use of coercion by the military. The CIA is still authorized by President George W. Bush to use secret "alternative" interrogation methods.
Several Guantanamo documents, including the chart outlining coercive methods, were made public at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on June 17 that examined how such tactics came to be employed.
But committee investigators were not aware of the chart's source in the half-century-old journal article, a connection pointed out to The New York Times by an independent expert on interrogation who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The 1957 article from which the chart was copied was entitled "Communist Attempts to Elicit False Confessions From the Air Force Prisoners of War" and was written by Alfred Biderman, a sociologist then working for the air force, who died in 2003.
Biderman had interviewed American prisoners returning from North Korea, some of whom had been filmed by their Chinese interrogators confessing to using germ warfare and other atrocities.
Those confessions led to allegations that the American prisoners had been brainwashed and prompted the military to revamp its training to give some military personnel a taste of the enemies' harsh methods to inoculate them against quick capitulation if captured.
In 2002, the training program, known as SERE - for Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape - became a source of interrogation methods for the CIA and the U.S. military. In what critics described as a remarkable case of historical amnesia, officials who drew on the SERE program appear to have been unaware that it had been created as a result of concern about false confessions by Americans.
Senator Carl Levin, a Democrat from Michigan and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said after reviewing the 1957 article that "every American would be shocked" by the origin of the training document. "What makes this document doubly stunning is that these were techniques to get false confessions," Levin said. "People say we need intelligence, and we do. But we don't need false intelligence."
A Defense Department spokesman, Lieutenant Colonel Patrick Ryder, said he could not comment on the Guantanamo training chart. "I can't speculate on previous decisions that may have been made prior to current DOD policy on interrogations," he said. "I can tell you that current DOD policy is clear: We treat all detainees humanely."
Biderman's 1957 article described "one form of torture" used by the Chinese as forcing American prisoners to stand "for exceedingly long periods," sometimes in conditions of "extreme cold." Such passive methods, he wrote, were more common than outright physical violence. Prolonged standing and exposure to cold have been used by American military and CIA interrogators against terrorist suspects.
The chart listed other techniques used by the Chinese, including "semi-starvation," "exploitation of wounds" and "filthy, infested surroundings," and with their effects: "makes victim dependent on interrogator," "weakens mental and physical ability to resist" and "reduces prisoner to 'animal level' concerns."
The only change made in the chart presented at Guantanamo was to drop its original title: "Communist Coercive Methods for Eliciting Individual Compliance."
The documents released last month include an e-mail message from two SERE trainers reporting on a trip to Guantanamo from Dec. 29, 2002, to Jan. 4, 2003. Their purpose, the message said, was to present to interrogators "the theory and application of the physical pressures utilized during our training."
The sessions included "an in-depth class on Biderman's Principles," the message said, referring to the chart from the 1957 article. Versions of the same chart, often identified as "Biderman's Chart of Coercion," have circulated on anti-cult sites on the Web, where the methods are used to describe how cults control their members.
Robert Jay Lifton, a psychiatrist who also studied the returning prisoners of war and wrote an accompanying article in the same 1957 issue of The Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, said in an interview that he was disturbed to learn that the Chinese methods had been recycled and taught at Guantanamo.
"It saddens me," said Lifton, who wrote a 1961 book on what the Chinese called "thought reform" and became known in popular American parlance as brainwashing. He called the use of the Chinese techniques by U.S. interrogators at Guantanamo a "180-degree turn."
The harshest known interrogation at Guantanamo was that of Mohammed al-Qahtani, a member of Al Qaeda suspected of being the intended 20th hijacker in the Sept. 11 attacks. Qahtani's interrogation involved sleep deprivation, stress positions, exposure to cold and other methods also used by the Chinese.
Terror charges against Qahtani were dropped unexpectedly in May. Officials said the charges could be reinstated later and declined to say whether the decision was influenced by concern about Qahtani's treatment.
Bush has defended the interrogation methods, saying they helped provide critical intelligence and prevented new terrorist attacks. But the issue continues to complicate the long-delayed prosecutions now proceeding at Guantanamo.
Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, a Qaeda member accused of playing a major role in the bombing of the U.S. destroyer Cole in Yemen in 2000, was charged with murder and other crimes on Monday. In previous hearings, Nashiri, who was subjected to waterboarding, has said he confessed falsely to participating in the bombing only because he was tortured.
Happy 4th
 | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/6/2008 9:36:36 PM |
Our behavior with prisoners of war is being measured by all. Compared to other countries the way we treat any kind of prisoner, especially prisoners of war, well, there is no comparison. They end up having more rights, more food, more recreation, etc., then is ever even dreamed about in other countries.
Name one single other 1st world nation detaining foreign nationals without any charges. Name one single other 1st world nation accused of prisoner torture and corroborated by physicians. Name one single other 1st world nation detaining child-combatants "as a security risk". Name one single other 1st world nation hell-bent on using torture for confessions and "intelligence gathering" even though we already know any intel gathered this way is virtually useless as the detainee will just say whatever they THINK you want to hear to make it stop whether or not there is a bit of truth to it. Name one single other 1st world nation whose leadership has attempted to protect themselves from future war crimes investigations and charges.
Sure there are some cesspools that things like that happen in but is that really the company you would want to keep?
After 6 years charge them and hold public trials or release them. If you can't build a rock solid case against someone in 6 years you had no cause to detain that person in the first place. | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/6/2008 11:34:06 PM |
Name one single other 1st world nation detaining foreign nationals without any charges. Name one single other 1st world nation accused of prisoner torture and corroborated by physicians. Name one single other 1st world nation detaining child-combatants "as a security risk". Name one single other 1st world nation hell-bent on using torture for confessions and "intelligence gathering" even though we already know any intel gathered this way is virtually useless as the detainee will just say whatever they THINK you want to hear to make it stop whether or not there is a bit of truth to it. Name one single other 1st world nation whose leadership has attempted to protect themselves from future war crimes investigations and charges.
1) china
2)Egupt
3)United Kingdom
4)Israel
etc.
If you like here is a nice place to check it out: http://hrw.org/
It isnt that the US is so bad......its that in the past we have claimed to be morally "above" other countries. In practice, IMHO, I think the US is just like any other nation or group or state. We do what is percieved to be the most protective things we can for do to protect ourselves, citizens, and cultures.
Although I may not agree with some of the posters here or the Supreme courts interpretaion of the 14th amendment in this case, it is what it is.
I also have sympathy for anyone in this world detained without charge, yet also have no sympathy for acts of terror and no idea what methods should be used and condoned to halt the spread of terrorism.
Currently the use of terrorism is linked with religion. It has in the past been connected with political gain, religious gain, power, money, etc.
Maybe the idea that these detainies should be afforded hearings and trials and charges related thereto is noble, yet it is my humblest of opinons that terrorists have figured out how the legal system works and how a country would have an impossibly difficult time trying to gather evidence against any individual without the kinds of things that MAY be happening in Gitmo. I say MAY as I have never been there and have no firs hand evidence, therefore withhold judgement on whether or not actual "torture" is currently being applied or applied in the past to any one or many prisoners held there.
It might be the best decision for the US government to return detainies to countries where "torture" is condoned. But then again theres that moral question; why didnt we stop it? or Why did we let it happen if we had reasonable knowledge it would exist?
Thats the Catch-22 isnt it.
How do you stop terrorism.......?
Im sorry but I dont have the answer.....just my humblest of observations. | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/6/2008 11:37:50 PM |
1) china
2)Egupt
3)United Kingdom
4)Israel
Bzzzzt you just listed two non first world countries. | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/6/2008 11:43:57 PM | | HAHAHA....So China is not a first world country? Please enlighten me........what is its staus? 3rd world? | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/6/2008 11:54:17 PM | My mistake, apperently its a 2nd world country as defined by:
" The term "First World" refers to so called developed, capitalist, industrial countries, roughly, a bloc of countries aligned with the United States after World War II, with more or less common political and economic interests: North America, Western Europe, Japan and Australia.
Countries of the "First World"
"Second World" refers to the former communist-socialist, industrial states, (formerly the Eastern bloc, the territory and sphere of influence of the Union of Soviet Socialists Republic) today: Russia, Eastern Europe (e.g., Poland) and some of the Turk States (e.g., Kazakhstan) as well as China.
Countries of the "Second World"
"Third World" are all the other countries, today often used to roughly describe the developing countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America.
The term Third World includes as well capitalist (e.g., Venezuela) and communist (e.g., North Korea) countries, as very rich (e.g., Saudi Arabia) and very poor (e.g., Mali) countries."
Again my mistake.......but I think my point is still valid. | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/7/2008 1:00:48 AM |
How do you stop terrorism.......?
Give them rice.
(History 101...or it should be) | |
|
NERO1
|
Joined: 3/8/2008
Msg: 66 | |
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/7/2008 5:25:05 AM | QUOTE: Sure there are some cesspools that things like that happen in but is that really the company you would want to keep?
^^ Apparently America must have no major qualms about the company it keeps , ultimately. All rhetoric aside about being the world's beacon of democracy and human rights. Same with the State still condemning and executing citizens accused of certain types of crimes. In what other "1st world" democratic nation do you find this still being practiced? Think of the company America is actually in not only with this practice but also over the past 7 yrs with illegal detentions of foreign nationals and officially sanctioned torture, etc. It's America, and other well-known beacons of western democracy and human rights such as (business partner) Saudi Arabia (which actually favors public beheadings); Egypt; Iran; China; North Korea; the Democratic Republic of Congo.... et.al.... | |
|
| Free the Gitmo270
Posted: 7/15/2008 8:20:55 AM |
Name one single other 1st world nation accused of prisoner torture and corroborated by physicians. Name one single other 1st world nation detaining child-combatants "as a security risk". Name one single other 1st world nation hell-bent on using torture for confessions and "intelligence gathering" even though we already know any intel gathered this way is virtually useless as the detainee will just say whatever they THINK you want to hear to make it stop whether or not there is a bit of truth to it.
Canada
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts10402369.aspx | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
