• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The Truth about Koran Abuse

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,894
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
So, now we FINALLY know the truth about the "mishandling" of Koran's in Guantanamo Bay.

I know there's a lot of people on this board who mistakenly believed that the US was committing all these heinous crimes against the Koran, and I guess that's understandable, given the propensity of our media to do whatever they can to make Bush look bad.

Now the facts have come out, and once and for all, it's time to get the record straight.

Of course, true to form, the NYT has to lead with a paragraph that suggests heinous crimes, and spent the entire first page of the article criticizing the facility.

WASHINGTON, June 3 - A military inquiry has found that guards or interrogators at the Guantánamo Bay detention center in Cuba kicked, stepped on and splashed urine on the Koran, in some cases intentionally but in others by accident, the Pentagon said on Friday.
The final report released on Friday said that four of the five incidents took place after January 2003, after written procedures governing the handling of the Koran had been put in place. That contradicted an account provided last Thursday by General Hood, who was asked directly whether all five of the incidents had taken place before January 2003, and replied: "Not all of them. One of them occurred since then."

A spokesman for the task force, Capt. Jeffrey Weir, said in a telephone interview that he could not explain General Hood's comments last week. "Maybe he misspoke," Captain Weir said. "I'm not sure why he would have put it that way."
The military released the findings of the investigation about 7:15 p.m., Eastern time, well after the broadcasts of the network television evening news programs. A Pentagon spokesman, Bryan Whitman, denied that the military was trying to bury bad news late on a Friday night, a tactic often used by government agencies. "It was completed and we try not to hold these things after their reviews are completed," Mr. Whitman said in a telephone interview.
But then, we get down to the details:

The report said investigators had examined nine alleged incidents in which the Koran was mishandled, either intentionally or unintentionally, and confirmed five of them. Four involved guards at the detention center; one involved an interrogator.

According to the military's statement on Friday, this is what happened in the five confirmed incidents of Koran abuse.
In February 2002, a detainee complained during an interrogation that guards at Camp X-Ray had kicked the Koran of a detainee in a neighboring cell four or five days earlier, the inquiry's report said. The interrogator reported the complaint on Feb. 27, and confirmed that the guards were aware of the complaint.

The report said there was no evidence of any investigation into the incident, and investigators did not say why they believed it was credible or who might have been responsible.
So a detainee claimed that an interrogator had kicked his neighbors Koran, 4 or 5 days after the fact. The neighbor never claimed that, and there was no proof it happened. Doesn't seem logical.

On July 25, 2003, a contract interrogator apologized to a detainee for stepping on the detainee's Koran in an earlier interrogation. The detainee accepted the apology and agreed to tell other detainees and ask them to stop disruptive behavior caused by the incident.

The interrogator was later fired for "a pattern of unacceptable behavior, an inability to follow direct guidance and poor leadership," the military statement said.
Seems like the situation was handled pretty well to me.

On Aug. 15, 2003, two detainees complained to one set of guards that their Korans were wet because guards on the night shift had tossed water balloons on the cellblock. The complaints were recorded in the cellblock's log, but there was no indication that the incident was ever investigated. Investigators described the guards' conduct as "clearly inappropriate" but said it did not cause any disturbance among detainees.
Sounds like military people stuck in a shitty job had some fun that was inappropriate, but again, not intentionally harmful.

Less than a week later, on Aug. 21, a detainee who spoke conversational English complained that someone had written a two-word obscenity in English in his English-version Koran. The complaint was recorded in an electronic log. "It is possible," the military's statement said, "that a guard committed this act; it is equally possible that the detainee wrote in his own Koran."
With no more evidence than that, and proof that the detainees have been told to make allegations of abuse and torture, I'm not willing to draw judgement.

On March 25, 2005, a detainee complained to the guards that urine had come through an air vent in his cellblock, and splashed him and his Koran as he lay near the vent. A guard who had left his observation post to urinate outside acknowledged that he was to blame. He had urinated near the vent, and the wind blew it into the vent, from which it splashed into the cell.

The senior guard on duty immediately relieved the guard, and ordered that the detainee receive a fresh uniform and a new Koran. The guard was reprimanded and assigned to duty where he had no contact with detainees for the remainder of his assignment at the detention center.
This is the only incident which, to me, looks like anything bad happened to the Koran. It seems almost 100% obvious that this was a mistake, and that it was resolved as quickly and in the best way possible. I really don't know what else could be done about a situation like this.

The article then goes on into more interesting detail:

General Hood's report found 10 other alleged incidents, 7 involving guards and 3 involving interrogators, where the military personnel accidentally touched the Koran, touched a Koran within the scope of their regular duties or did not touch the Koran at all.

The inquiry concluded that none of these events involved mishandling of the Koran, but that some were clearly alarming to detainees, including a case in late 2002 in which an unidentified marine, during an interrogation, was said to have squatted down in front of a detainee "in an aggressive manner."

In the process, the report said, the marine "unintentionally squatted down over the detainee's Koran," and "this provoked a visible reaction from the detainee."
I know we have to be sensitive, but COME ON!

"Squatted down in an aggressive manner?" This is grounds for a complaint from someone who's being held in Guantanamo Bay? Oi. If all the terrorists we were fighting were this easily intimidated, there would be peace in the middle east.

And then, of course, typical of the New York Times, any information which would either

a) Make it seem like the military took these allegations seriously and did a fine job, or
b) Make it seem like the detainees aren't exactly holy

is relegated to the last paragraphs.

The report also found 15 incidents in which detainees had mishandled the Koran.
The military's statement said the investigation had examined 31,000 documents, both on paper and electronically; classified and unclassified computer drives used by task force personnel; and legal documents and news articles for any mention of possible abuses of the Koran.
After all this information has come to light, can anyone truly doubt that

a) the US Military is making every effort possible to behave in a manner fitting with Islamic law regarding the Koran.
b) the Military is doing their damndest to be treat the detainees themselves well.
c) any incidents where the Koran was mishandled were either accidental or extremely isolated, or
d) the Newsweek story, and the dozens of other stories in the mainstream media, were complete lies.

If you want to talk about media bias, read the NYT article. After you finish the article, read the headline and the first few paragraphs, and see if you feel those give you an accurate synopsis of the entire article, or if they're the worst sections, cut and pasted.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/04/politics/04koran.html?pagewanted=1&th&emc=th
 
Last edited:

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
RightatNYU said:
So, now we FINALLY know the truth about the "mishandling" of Koran's in Guantanamo Bay.

After all this information has come to light, can anyone truly doubt that

a) the US Military is making every effort possible to behave in a manner fitting with Islamic law regarding the Koran.
b) the Military is doing their damndest to be treat the detainees themselves well.
c) any incidents where the Koran was mishandled were either accidental or extremely isolated, or
d) the Newsweek story, and the dozens of other stories in the mainstream media, were complete lies.

If you want to talk about media bias, read the NYT article. After you finish the article, read the headline and the first few paragraphs, and see if you feel those give you an accurate synopsis of the entire article, or if they're the worst sections, cut and pasted.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/04/politics/04koran.html?pagewanted=1&th&emc=th
I'm comforted to know that the Pentagon has filed an independent report investingating themselves. Know one could ever doubt the legitimacy of an organization that investigates itself, right?

Funny, Republicans were so damn fast to convict Amnesty Intl. this week when they came out and condemned the treatment that our government has done done there south of Miami. Amnesty Intl. are full of sh*t they all said...people like Cheney & Rumsfeld, for example, that shining light of honesty, the VEEP & the head of the Pentagon, right?
Cheney dismissed the report last week from Amnesty Intl:
"For Amnesty International to suggest that somehow the United States is a violator of human rights, I frankly just don't take them seriously."

Perhaps Cheney should have a talk with Donald Rumsfeld, who took Amnesty quite seriously, as Think Progress discovered.

They found quotes like this one:
...t seems to me a careful reading of Amnesty International or the record of Saddam Hussein, having used chemical weapons on his own people as well as his neighbors, and the viciousness of that regime, which is well known and documented by human rights organizations, ought not to be surprised.
And this one:
f you read the various human rights groups and Amnesty International's description of what they know has gone on, it's not a happy picture.

Source: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/5/31/13424/4293

So now the brainwashing continues....Friday night, after 7pm, after all the national newscasts have ended this report is released (in a timeslot that is well known for propaganda announcements due to the lack of coverage and immediate retort) that sweeps almost everything under the rug!

Did you read it all? My favorite is the Guard who pissed against a wall and the wind blew his pi*s into a cell and onto a Koran. I can't wait for Jon Stewart to talk about this on Monday night!

How brainwashed are you exactly? Would you approve of a tactical PREEMPTIVE nuclear strike against one of our many enemies? Would you?

What's tremendously ironic to me is that the same brainwashed people in our country who believe their government on this one do not believe them when it comes to John Kerry's medals from Vietnam! You're all 100% certain that he was a traitor, that he didn't deserve the medals that the very same Pentagon gave to him.

Selective reasoning AKA - BRAINWASHING! Congrats you all, the Pentagonites must be super pleased to see threads like this one, it makes them feel so satisfied that their hard work is paying off!
 
Last edited:

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,894
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
I'm comforted to know that the Pentagon has filed an independent report investingating themselves. Know one could ever doubt the legitimacy of an organization that investigates itself, right?
Seemed to me like a pretty damn thorough investigation. But then again, you have no trust in anything the government does, so I'm pretty sure no matter what they did, you'd find a way to bitch.

Funny, Republicans were so damn fast to convict Amnesty Intl. this week when they came out and condemned the treatment that our government has done done there south of Miami. Amnesty Intl. are full of sh*t they all said...people like Cheney & Rumsfeld, for example, that shining light of honesty, the VEEP & the head of the Pentagon, right?
Cheney dismissed the report last week from Amnesty Intl:
Hmmm, you mean that Cheney dismissed a report from an outside organization that was based on nothing but allegations, rumors, and political bias, in favor of an indepth investigation by the military that was based on interviews, 31,000 documents, and plenty of sources? What an asshole! How DARE he.

Amnesty destroys its credibility when it does things like this.

So now the brainwashing continues....Friday night, after 7pm, after all the national newscasts have ended this report is released (in a timeslot that is well known for propaganda announcements due to the lack of coverage and immediate retort) that sweeps almost everything under the rug!
Did you SEE the quote in there where the Times mentioned that, and a spokesman said "We released it as soon as it was completed. We don't believe in holding things once we know them?"(Paraphrased)

Anyways, WHY would they want to hide this! This report basically CLEARS the military of all wrongdoing, and puts to shame the pathetic reports of Koran abuse that were so prevalent in the media. I wish it would get trumpeted from the rooftops so there'd be less "brainwashed" (to use one of your favorite words) people such as yourself.

Did you read it all? My favorite is the Guard who pissed against a wall and the wind blew his pi*s into a cell and onto a Koran. I can't wait for Jon Stewart to talk about this on Monday night!
I did read the whole article, actually. Your favorite, of the FIVE incidents? What's so funnt about that incident exactly? You think it was on purpose? Or perhaps the US didn't do enough to resolve the situation? Clarify, please.

How brainwashed are you exactly? Would you approve of a tactical PREEMPTIVE nuclear strike against one of our many enemies? Would you?
I've seen you try on numerous threads to put these idiotic words in the mouths of Bush supporters. When you become so hysterical like this, you come off less like a debater and more like a frother. The answer to your question is no. Under no circumstances that I could forsee would that be acceptable.

What's tremendously ironic to me is that the same brainwashed people in our country who believe their government on this one do not believe them when it comes to John Kerry's medals from Vietnam! You're all 100% certain that he was a traitor, that he didn't deserve the medals that the very same Pentagon gave to him.
And this relates to the topic how...? Oh, my mistake, it's just another misdirected outburst that you sporadically have against anyone who disagrees with you.
Selective reasoning AKA - BRAINWASHING! Congrats you all, the Pentagonites must be super pleased to see threads like this one, it makes them feel so satisfied that their hard work is paying off!
In all seriousness, if I were a "Pentagonite," I would be pleased to see that there were some people out there who recognized and appreciated that the US military has gone far, far, far out of its way to avoid the impression that we were complacent about disrespecting the Koran.
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
RightatNYU said:
Seemed to me like a pretty damn thorough investigation. But then again, you have no trust in anything the government does, so I'm pretty sure no matter what they did, you'd find a way to bitch.
Blind faith is the same thing as being brainwashed, sorry. I respect everyone in the military, especially the soldiers in Iraq. However, the Military Industrial Complex...aka...the Propaganda Arm of the Pentagon headed up by Rumsfeld the Evil does not deserve anyone's trust. Please don't make me provide multiple links, lots of proof that Rumsfeld is one of the biggest liars in government, it would be way too easy and a real waste of everyone's time.
RightatNYU said:
Hmmm, you mean that Cheney dismissed a report from an outside organization that was based on nothing but allegations, rumors, and political bias, in favor of an indepth investigation by the military that was based on interviews, 31,000 documents, and plenty of sources? What an asshole! How DARE he.
Damn right he's an asshole, the # 2 asshole in America. He repulsive, arrogant and probably the man I trust the LEAST, even less than Bush because he's at least bright, Bush is an idiot. Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld, three of a kind, three men who put their country second and the almighty dollar first. Is Iraq the perfect rape for them or what? Free oil for Bush's buds and a monopoly business that will go on for years for Cheney's old company. Coincidence? :rofl
RightatNYU said:
Amnesty destroys its credibility when it does things like this.
So if I understand you correctly, when Rumsfeld agrees with Amnesty they're cool, but when he disagrees their evil? They're objective when they agree with us, and subjective when they don't? Don't you know how wiped your mind sounds when you suggest this type of creditability test of Amnesty Intl.?

Why would Amnesty Intl. want to defend terrorists and deconstruct America? That makes ZERO sense! They're not partial to terrorists, nor is anyone else in America who believes that even terrorists deserve to be treated humanly, otherwise, we as Americans would be no better than our enemy, right? I take this to mean that we must never allow ourselves to accept ANY misdeeds by us in Guantanomo or anywhere else.
RightatNYU said:
Did you SEE the quote in there where the Times mentioned that, and a spokesman said "We released it as soon as it was completed. We don't believe in holding things once we know them?"(Paraphrased)

Anyways, WHY would they want to hide this! This report basically CLEARS the military of all wrongdoing, and puts to shame the pathetic reports of Koran abuse that were so prevalent in the media. I wish it would get trumpeted from the rooftops so there'd be less "brainwashed" (to use one of your favorite words) people such as yourself.
Why hide it? Because the consensus opinion around the world, including inside the US will doubt the truthfulness of the report, that's why. The BS about it was done so we released it is more brain cleansing, and effective to the people who will believe ANYTHING they say.
RightatNYU said:
I did read the whole article, actually. Your favorite, of the FIVE incidents? What's so funnt about that incident exactly? You think it was on purpose? Or perhaps the US didn't do enough to resolve the situation? Clarify, please.
It sounds like BS to me, sorry. It's almost as bad as the Kennedy "Magic Bullet" theory. Plus, why are you so convinced these are the only incidences? What makes you so sure that we're simply not covering up lots of other stuff to prevent further Anti-American demonstrations around the world?

Rumsfeld and his Pentagon constantly LIED to the world before and now during this war. Cheney, too!
RightatNYU said:
I've seen you try on numerous threads to put these idiotic words in the mouths of Bush supporters. When you become so hysterical like this, you come off less like a debater and more like a frother. The answer to your question is no. Under no circumstances that I could forsee would that be acceptable.
I believe you. For all the disagreements that we have, you've never appeared to me to be so stuck out on the far right that you would be unable to see the danger's ahead should Bush and his boys be allowed to "nation deconstruct" in other countries.
RightatNYU said:
In all seriousness, if I were a "Pentagonite," I would be pleased to see that there were some people out there who recognized and appreciated that the US military has gone far, far, far out of its way to avoid the impression that we were complacent about disrespecting the Koran.
If only that were true, and herein lies the problem. The Pentagon has lied so often, has done so many things to destroy their creditability that for who knows how many people around the world it is very, very hard to believe them when they do anything that is controversial.
 
Last edited:

Hornburger

Active member
Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Messages
452
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The article regarding the Koran abuse all came from an anonymous source. How credible are anonymous sources? Very uncredible. Funny how they had it retracted once they realized what a big impact it had...seems as though they weren't too confident in the story themselves.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,894
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
Blind faith is the same thing as being brainwashed, sorry. I respect everyone in the military, especially the soldiers in Iraq. However, the Military Industrial Complex...aka...the Propaganda Arm of the Pentagon headed up by Rumsfeld the Evil does not deserve anyone's trust. Please don't make me provide multiple links, lots of proof that Rumsfeld is one of the biggest liars in government, it would be way too easy and a real waste of everyone's time.
So you think that every single one of the dozens, possibly hundreds of people who worked on this investigation, from the lowliest paper pusher to General Hood, is lying to you at the behest of Rumsfeld? You can't make asinine claims like that with no evidence at all. They have far more credibility than you.

Damn right he's an asshole, the # 2 asshole in America. He repulsive, arrogant and probably the man I trust the LEAST, even less than Bush because he's at least bright, Bush is an idiot. Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld, three of a kind, three men who put their country second and the almighty dollar first. Is Iraq the perfect rape for them or what? Free oil for Bush's buds and a monopoly business that will go on for years for Cheney's old company. Coincidence? :rofl
Again, I explain reasons why its completely ridiculous to reject this report out of hand, and you rant for a paragraph about how stupid Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld are. Great diversionary tactic.

So if I understand you correctly, when Rumsfeld agrees with Amnesty they're cool, but when he disagrees their evil? They're objective when they agree with us, and subjective when they don't? Don't you know how wiped your mind sounds when you suggest this type of creditability test of Amnesty Intl.?

Why would Amnesty Intl. want to defend terrorists and deconstruct America? That makes ZERO sense! They're not partial to terrorists, nor is anyone else in America who believes that even terrorists deserve to be treated humanly, otherwise, we as Americans would be no better than our enemy, right? I take this to mean that we must never allow ourselves to accept ANY misdeeds by us in Guantanomo or anywhere else.
Comparing Guantanamo to a Gulag shows at best historical ignorance. Rather than deliniate all of the reasons why Amnesty is full of **** on this one, I'll refer you to an Instapundit post which, if you read and look at a few of the links, will sum it up nicely.

http://instapundit.com/archives/023409.php

Financial purpose of Gulag: Providing totalitarian economy with millions of slave laborers.

Financial purpose of Gitmo: None.

Seizure of Gulag prisoners: From apartments, homes, street corners inside the Soviet Union.

Seizure of Gitmo prisoners: From battlefield sites in Afghanistan in the midst of war.
Gulag prisoners were systemically starved, beaten, and forced to labor in sub-zero weather. The lucky ones were shot immediately. In contrast, at Guantanamo Bay, 1,300 Korans in 13 different languages were handed out to prisoners. Prisoners are served "proper Muslim-approved food." . . .

Nevertheless Amnesty International's "gulag" reference came as a bit of a surprise. The left has been notoriously silent about the gulags. It is normally a chapter in the history of socialism they prefer to leave out. On the other hand, the fact that Amnesty International used the term shows how little respect the left has for the tens of millions that suffered the hell of the gulag. You would never hear Amnesty International call Guantanamo Bay the "Auschwitz of our Time." Auschwitz is sacred to the memory of the Jews and Poles who died there. The gulag? That's not sacred. Just a failed experiment. . . .

By making such asinine comparisons, Amnesty International risks losing whatever credibility it has left. This is unfortunate because the organization normally does important work. However, Amnesty is caught in a Catch-22 situation. It can risk losing its credibility by throwing a bone to its wealthy liberal donors, or risk losing its funding. Amnesty has obviously chosen to risk its credibility.
Why hide it? Because the consensus opinion around the world, including inside the US will doubt the truthfulness of the report, that's why. The BS about it was done so we released it is more brain cleansing, and effective to the people who will believe ANYTHING they say.
First off, I don't think they're hiding it. Secondly, I think this report will help US standing. Sure, many won't believe in (in large part because they see people like you decrying our abuses without evidence), but what can you do?

It sounds like BS to me, sorry. It's almost as bad as the Kennedy "Magic Bullet" theory. Plus, why are you so convinced these are the only incidences? What makes you so sure that we're simply not covering up lots of other stuff to prevent further Anti-American demonstrations around the world?
Why are you so convinced we are? Could it be because you're so blinded by your hatred of Bush/Cheney/All things republican that you'll believe every ******* lie that's spread about them? Could it be because you have an obsession with complaining? Or could it just be that you are so weak minded you'll believe whatever the far left tells you?

Rumsfeld and his Pentagon constantly LIED to the world before and now during this war. Cheney, too!
......

I believe you. For all the disagreements that we have, you've never appeared to me to be so stuck out on the far right that you would be unable to see the danger's ahead should Bush and his boys be allowed to "nation deconstruct" in other countries.
Thank you for that?

If only that were true, and herein lies the problem. The Pentagon has lied so often, has done so many things to destroy their creditability that for who knows how many people around the world it is very, very hard to believe them when they do anything that is controversial.
Right. Your opinion couldn't at all be colored because of your political leanings. Hell, even the NYT accepts this report as fact, why can't you? Because you're irrational.
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
RightatNYU said:
So you think that every single one of the dozens, possibly hundreds of people who worked on this investigation, from the lowliest paper pusher to General Hood, is lying to you at the behest of Rumsfeld? You can't make asinine claims like that with no evidence at all. They have far more credibility than you.
No, I never said that. I said that we are only being told what the Pentagon wants to tell us. For example, this report only talks about incidents regarding the Koran, it makes zero mention of other abuses that Amnesty Intl. is referring to. You've taken this bit of propaganda and turned it into a blanket refudiation of any charges of prisoner abuse, Koran related or not. This is what I mean about brainwashing. You take one report and accept it blindly and then spin it into "proof" that we do not abuse prisoners. That is what I find objectionable.
RightatNYU said:
Again, I explain reasons why its completely ridiculous to reject this report out of hand, and you rant for a paragraph about how stupid Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld are. Great diversionary tactic.
Diversion? Really? You mean quoting Rumsfeld supporting Amnesty Intl. is a diversion? Questioning the truthfulness of the Moe, Larry & Curly based on their voluminous history of lies and deception as a reason to not take what they say as fact is a diversion? Good try! :2wave:
RightatNYU said:
First off, I don't think they're hiding it. Secondly, I think this report will help US standing. Sure, many won't believe in (in large part because they see people like you decrying our abuses without evidence), but what can you do?
I know, and the cow jumped over the moon too! Let us not forget Abu Graive? We didn't abuse anyone there either, right? Abu Graive must have been an isolated incident, right?
RightatNYU said:
Why are you so convinced we are? Could it be because you're so blinded by your hatred of Bush/Cheney/All things republican that you'll believe every ******* lie that's spread about them? Could it be because you have an obsession with complaining? Or could it just be that you are so weak minded you'll believe whatever the far left tells you?
I'll go with the weak mind theory, thank you. :slapme: :crazy3:

I'm dying to know your explanation for our imprisoning people in Guantanomo for more than 3 years and then releasing them without a charge against them ever being made? 3 years! How do you reconcile that? Isn't that what Gulags did too? Please tell me how we can keep anyone from any outside contact whatsoever and then release him without an explanation? Don't believe me?

Ever hear of Martin Mubanga? He was arrested by us in ZAMBIA and held in Guantanomo for 33 months as I described above. How come? Here's the story in case you think I'm being weak minded again:
Guantanamo man 'suing government'

Martin Mubanga claimed in the Observer that an MI6 officer played a key role in consigning him to the US camp in Cuba, following his arrest in Zambia.

Mr Mubanga, 32, from Wembley, London, said he was brutally interrogated and daubed with urine at the camp.

The home secretary said he would not be launching an investigation and that the media reports were not "well informed".

Mr Mubanga, who has dual British and Zambian nationality, was one of four Britons who were released from the US camp in January.

'Effectively kidnapped'

He said he was sent there after being interrogated by a British man who said he was from MI6, shortly after his arrest in Zambia in March 2002.

Mr Mubanga said he had been in Afghanistan and Pakistan to study Islam.

But he said he was unable to return to the UK because he had lost his British passport, and was travelling on his Zambian passport instead.

Mr Mubanga said the "MI6 agent" told him the passport had been found in a cave in Afghanistan along with documents listing Jewish groups in New York and suggested he had been on an al-Qaeda reconnaissance mission.

Mr Mubanga said the man, and an American female defence official, tried to recruit him as an agent, but he refused and within three weeks was told he would be sent to Guantanamo Bay.

"I've lost three years of my life, because I was a Muslim."

His lawyer Louise Christian said: "'We are hoping to issue proceedings for the misfeasance of officials who colluded with the Americans in effectively kidnapping him and taking him to Guantanamo."

And Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrats' foreign affairs spokesman, said it was vital to establish whether ministers approved Mr Mubanga's transfer to Guantanamo.

But a Foreign Office spokesman said he could not comment on the activities of British intelligence or security agencies.

And Home Secretary Charles Clarke told BBC One's Breakfast with Frost: "I'm not organising a specific investigation into it."

Mr Mubanga is the first of the four detainees freed last month to give a media interview.

He told the Observer his worst moment was when he was told he would be released last March, only to be confined and told he would be there for many more years.

The Department of Defense has no doubt that Mr Mubanga was properly detained as an enemy combatant under the laws of war

He claimed he was stripped of his clothes and mattress and forced to remain in an empty metal box, naked except for boxer shorts.

And he said an interrogator used a mop to daub him with his own urine while he was chained hand and foot.


Mr Mubanga, who insists he does not feel bitter, said: "I've lost three years of my life, because I was a Muslim.

He added: "The authorities wanted to break me but they strengthened me. They've made me what I am - even if I'm not quite sure yet who that person is."

The US government denied the claims, saying it condemned and prohibited torture. In a statement, it said: "The Department of Defense has no doubt that Mr Mubanga was properly detained as an enemy combatant under the laws of war.

"He was detained to prevent him from fighting against the US and our allies in the war on terror."

But Fair Trials Abroad director Stephen Jakobi said there were similarities between Mr Mubanga's account and those of other Guantanamo detainees.

He said: "The pattern is the same. The real problem is the concentration camp conditions in Guantanamo.

"Is [Charles Clarke] really pretending this is all made up?"


Mr Mubanga and the three other freed British detainees were released without charge by UK police on their return from Cuba.
Source:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4240107.stm

What say you know? I can hardly wait to hear what you've been programed to answer Sgt. Shaw?
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,894
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
No, I never said that. I said that we are only being told what the Pentagon wants to tell us. For example, this report only talks about incidents regarding the Koran, it makes zero mention of other abuses that Amnesty Intl. is referring to. You've taken this bit of propaganda and turned it into a blanket refudiation of any charges of prisoner abuse, Koran related or not. This is what I mean about brainwashing. You take one report and accept it blindly and then spin it into "proof" that we do not abuse prisoners. That is what I find objectionable.
You're right. It makes total sense. Our military policy in Guantanamo is to take extreme care with handling the Koran, and deal with all violations promptly...but also to abuse the prisoners on a daily basis. Use your head. If they're this careful about the Koran, you don't think they're careful about the prisoners as well?

As to your allegations of abuse: After the last round of hundreds of allegations of abuse which you proclaimed to be solid evidence was proven to be bullshit, any sensible person would rightfully hang their head in shame at having been so naive as to believe everything the detainees said. But not you. You're out there, still fighting the good fight to discredit "Bushco," no matter how stupid it makes you look.

Diversion? Really? You mean quoting Rumsfeld supporting Amnesty Intl. is a diversion? Questioning the truthfulness of the Moe, Larry & Curly based on their voluminous history of lies and deception as a reason to not take what they say as fact is a diversion? Good try! :2wave:
When that's not the issue at all? Yea, it is. What does Bush's truthfulness have to do with the treatment of the Koran at Guantanamo? In your mind it might, but not in mine.

I know, and the cow jumped over the moon too! Let us not forget Abu Graive? We didn't abuse anyone there either, right? Abu Graive must have been an isolated incident, right?
So far it looks like it was. Any evidence pointing to the contrary?

I'm dying to know your explanation for our imprisoning people in Guantanomo for more than 3 years and then releasing them without a charge against them ever being made? 3 years! How do you reconcile that? Isn't that what Gulags did too? Please tell me how we can keep anyone from any outside contact whatsoever and then release him without an explanation? Don't believe me?
Ever hear of Martin Mubanga? He was arrested by us in ZAMBIA and held in Guantanomo for 33 months as I described above. How come? Here's the story in case you think I'm being weak minded again:

Source:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4240107.stm

What say you know? I can hardly wait to hear what you've been programed to answer Sgt. Shaw?
This story sounds like the biggest crock of **** I've ever heard. Almost as good as Bob Herbert's little story about the bottles.
"I've lost three years of my life, because I was a Muslim."
No asshole, you lost 3 years of your life because you were dealing with terrorists. I didn't hear his explanation for how his passport ended up in a terrorist hiding place with Al-Quaida documents.

"Mr Mubanga, who insists he does not feel bitter,"

BULLSHIT. He's not bitter like I'm not irritated by his false allegations. We already KNOW for a fact that al-Quaida associates have been ordered to claim they were abused, and to use the media as best they can in the hope of enraging blind fools such as yourself who will seize on any opportunity to attack the actions of the US in this war. Congratulations, you've been played.

But Fair Trials Abroad director Stephen Jakobi said there were similarities between Mr Mubanga's account and those of other Guantanamo detainees.
Really? Couldn't be because they all used the SAME HANDBOOK, could it?


He said: "The pattern is the same. The real problem is the concentration camp conditions in Guantanamo.
What an asshole this guy is. It makes me sick to my stomach when douchebag activists (on both sides) make idiotic analogies that belittle the original horrors, ie Bush=Hitler, Guantanamo = gulag/concentration camp.

What conditions do these poor prisoners live in?


In Camp 4, part of Camp Delta, detainees live in 10-man bays with nearly all- day access to exercise yards and other recreational privileges.

Detainees generally are allowed out in exercise yards attached to their living bays seven to nine hours a day. Exercise yards include picnic tables under cover and ping-pong tables. Detainees also have access to a central soccer area and volleyball court.

Rundle said the large amount of outdoor time is a huge incentive for detainees to want to be transferred to Camp 4, which is based on good behavior. "The increased incentive of the additional time out here, that's a big thing for detainees to be able to come out for that duration of time over the course of every single day of the week," he said.

Part of the rationale behind the living arrangements at Camp 4 is to rebuild detainees' social skills, "which might have been lost over time," Rundle said. Detainees are provided games -- chess, checkers and playing cards are the most requested items -- and are responsible for keeping their own living areas clean.
Other privileges unique to Camp 4 include electric fans in the bays, ice water available around the clock, plastic tubs with lids for the detainees to store their personal items, and the white uniforms. White is a more culturally respected color and also serves as an incentive to detainees in other camps.
Thick steel airlock doors clang shut with a hiss and an echo as guards move through the cellblocks. In Camp 5, media and other visitors are not permitted to tour occupied cellblocks. The modern facility features some cells equipped with overhanging sinks and grab bars on the toilets for detainees with a physical disability and 10-foot-by-20-foot outdoor exercise yards that detainees generally have access to for an hour every day.

Camp rules are posted in four languages -- Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, and Pashto -- in the exercise yards in each of the camps. Recently, the enclosed bulletin boards have also featured posters with information about the Afghan elections. "It talks about the fact that 10 million Afghanis freely elected their own government," Rundle said. "So it's a bit of news from home … for a chunk of the detainee population here."

Cultural sensitivity is consistently practiced in each of the camps. Respect for Islam is evident in many of the policies. For instance, in each cell in Camp 1, a Koran is stored hanging in a surgical mask from the cell wall. The purpose of the surgical mask is to hold the Muslim holy book "in a place of reverence," Padmore said.

In each cell block a painted arrow points toward Mecca, Saudi Arabia, so the detainees know which way to face during their daily prayers. During Ramadan, detainees were allowed to break their daily fast with water and dates at the appropriate time, and prayer calls are broadcast over loudspeakers five times a day.
Sounds like a concentration camp, right? All the forced work, short rations, and gas chambers.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/news/2005/02/sec-050216-afps01.htm

Oh, but you asked what "programmed" response I have to Shaw?

How about that I think he's full of ****, there's no evidence to back him up, and I'd have thought you learned your lesson about believing uncorroborated stories propogated by people with motives.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,894
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Also, here's something else for you to wrap your mind around.

If Guantanamo is really such a black hole that nobody can escape from, how come many prisoners have been released? You bring up the fact "they released these people!" as a battle cry, claiming it as proof that there wasn't evidence to arrest them in the first place, therefore we're horrible people.

If we were really so bad, wouldn't it make sense to keep them? Why release people, if all it does is create bad publicity? And they KNOW for a fact that numerous detainees have returned to Iraq to attack US troops. So why take the chance and release someone, when they may attack us later? Could it be because they were arrested under a serious suspicion of terrorist activity, and after interrogation, not enough evidence surfaced to warrant holding them, so in good conscience, the US released them?

Nah, that'd mean we were good people.
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
RightatNYU said:
Also, here's something else for you to wrap your mind around.

If Guantanamo is really such a black hole that nobody can escape from, how come many prisoners have been released? You bring up the fact "they released these people!" as a battle cry, claiming it as proof that there wasn't evidence to arrest them in the first place, therefore we're horrible people.

If we were really so bad, wouldn't it make sense to keep them? Why release people, if all it does is create bad publicity? And they KNOW for a fact that numerous detainees have returned to Iraq to attack US troops. So why take the chance and release someone, when they may attack us later? Could it be because they were arrested under a serious suspicion of terrorist activity, and after interrogation, not enough evidence surfaced to warrant holding them, so in good conscience, the US released them?

Nah, that'd mean we were good people.
I didn't write or mean to imply that we are abusing most of the prisoners. I'm saying that we are abusing a small minority, OK? The problem is that even that is too many. If we want to be the standard bearer for world peace and set an example for humanitarianism is it too much to expect that we would NEVER abuse any prisoners? Think that's too high a standard?

You slough off Abu Graive as if it were nothing, but it was something, and it hurt us big time. The one and only way we can climb out of that big black hole that you suggest is to be politically correct always, and to not cover up when we fu*k up.

I also never wrote that everything that Amnesty Intl. suggests is fact. But you are so dogmatic in your views that you refuse to believe ANYTHING they claim. If not everything they say is true, is it not fair to say that not everything they say is false?

You profess to be American yet you've convicted every person in Guantanomo as guilty until proven innocent. I thought real Americans believe that everyone is innocent until proven guilty? I guess you disagree based on your comment that:
No asshole, you lost 3 years of your life because you were dealing with terrorists. I didn't hear his explanation for how his passport ended up in a terrorist hiding place with Al-Quaida documents.

"Mr Mubanga, who insists he does not feel bitter,"

BULLSHIT. He's not bitter like I'm not irritated by his false allegations.
 
Last edited:

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,894
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
I didn't write or mean to imply that we are abusing most of the prisoners. I'm saying that we are abusing a small minority, OK? The problem is that even that is too many. If we want to be the standard bearer for world peace and set an example for humanitarianism is it too much to expect that we would NEVER abuse any prisoners? Think that's too high a standard?
What evidence do you have that we're abusing ANY? Other than Abu-Ghiraib, which WAS an isolated incident, and has been discussed to death already, where are we abusing prisoners?

You slough off Abu Graive as if it were nothing, but it was something, and it hurt us big time. The one and only way we can climb out of that big black hole that you suggest is to be politically correct always, and to not cover up when we fu*k up.
Did you READ the lengths to which the US has gone to avoid offending any Muslim customs in Guantanamo? They're being as politically correct as they can be, and far more than a prison situation would require. And last time I checked, ordering a massive investigation is not covering anything up. Just because it didn't yield the result you hoped for, it doesn't mean it was a coverup.

I also never wrote that everything that Amnesty Intl. suggests is fact. But you are so dogmatic in your views that you refuse to believe ANYTHING they claim. If not everything they say is true, is it not fair to say that not everything they say is false?
Where did I say Amnesty always lied? The reason that I don't care what Amnesty has to say on this matter is because they have NO evidence to back any of their claims up. What does Amnesty know that you or I don't? Nothing. So why would they have any more authority to say that Guantanamo is a "gulag" than a political group like moveon.org? Because by making these claims, that's what Amnesty is sounding like.

You profess to be American yet you've convicted every person in Guantanomo as guilty until proven innocent. I thought real Americans believe that everyone is innocent until proven guilty? I guess you disagree based on your comment that:
Before you snipe at me about what "real Americans" believe, let me ask you if you think these people were just taken for no reason. Do you think we just walked around Afghanistan and Iraq picking civilians at random? Or do you think each person was taken for a good reason? Of course, there could be a few who are innocent, but there are most likely a vast majority that are not. What's your point?

[/QUOTE]

I can't even begin to ask what you are trying to prove with this picture. What is it a picture of? What are you trying to say? Is it supposed to convince me of something?
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
RightatNYU said:
What evidence do you have that we're abusing ANY? Other than Abu-Ghiraib, which WAS an isolated incident, and has been discussed to death already, where are we abusing prisoners?

RightatNYU said:
Before you snipe at me about what "real Americans" believe, let me ask you if you think these people were just taken for no reason. Do you think we just walked around Afghanistan and Iraq picking civilians at random? Or do you think each person was taken for a good reason? Of course, there could be a few who are innocent, but there are most likely a vast majority that are not. What's your point?
As a matter of fact there were X amount of people turned in by Afghanis because we offered financial rewards. Fact, not fiction my mind cleansed friend....
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,894
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
[/QUOTE]

So your responses have become limited to pictures now. Wow, you just won me over.

[QUOTE]As a matter of fact there were X amount of people turned in by Afghanis because we offered financial rewards. Fact, not fiction my mind cleansed friend....[/QUOTE]

I know about this. It surprises you that we offered rewards for the capture of people who were taking violent action against the US?

Oh, I see where you're going. You're going to try to claim that groups of innocent people were just picked up and sold like animals, just like the news story tried to imply, but held off on doing so because there was absolutely no evidence to support that claim.

You could learn something from the actions of the media. And that's saying something.
 

ludahai

Defender of the Faith
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
10,320
Reaction score
2,115
Location
Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
RightatNYU said:
So your responses have become limited to pictures now. Wow, you just won me over.
His lies haven't confused you, so he goes to the last weapon he has left. The accusation that we are the ones brainwashined by Fox News.
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,337
Reaction score
2,432
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I remain unsurprised.
Can you imagine the heat coming down on those guards to walk a straight line from day one?
I suppose after the "naked twister" pictures they get beat down every day about it.
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,337
Reaction score
2,432
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
RightatNYU said:
I can't even begin to ask what you are trying to prove with this picture. What is it a picture of? What are you trying to say? Is it supposed to convince me of something?[/QUOTE]



They appear to be listening to the audio version of the Koran. Either that or Charlottes Web. Everyone cries when the spider dies.
 

walrus

Member
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
191
Reaction score
15
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
First - we are under no legal (or I believe moral) obligation to go to the lengths which we have taken to avoid offending the religious sensibilities of person captured in armed conflict. Lets have a look around the world and see how other nations treat those captured in war. Even advanced nations such as Japan certainly have no moral high-horse on which to sit in judgment of our treatment of prisoners. And honestly, the reactions of people whose treatment of prisoners includes mechanical rape and decapitation (such as many of those nations protesting our "torture" of prisoners do) does not impress me a great deal. It's the same irony as when Germany called us a "nation of warmongers". This from the people who tried to conquer the planet twice in the last century.

Second - there is no guilty until proven innocent in this case. The protections of the Constitution extend to American citizens. I cannot imagine the founding fathers intended the Constitution to apply to the British in 1812, for example. There are certain protections provided by the Geneva Conventions (which I will agree we are violating in some ways) but these protections do not include "guilty until proven innocent".

When we offer rewards in this country for the capture of a criminal - does that mean that the criminal that we capture has been unfairly captured?

If you are going to reduce your post to a huge picture and a short sentence, at least shrink the picture a bit so it doesn't take up half a page worth of posts. Unless it is an interesting or effective picture, which in this case it wasn't.

As to the other pictures, I also am at a loss as to what I am supposed to gain from them. It looks like a man in a prison jumpsuit with his hands restrained and a mask. This is torture? We sure have drifted from the days of bamboo under the fingernails and the death of a million cuts.

Amnesty Intl. has proven time and time again that they are in no way an un-biased organization. They ignore human rights violations that are not politically expedient while highlighting those that are. This is why some of us take what they say with a large grain of salt. Just think of them as Fox News as you believe them to be. Do you believe everything Fox says is false, or do you just believe they are biased enough to generally disregard their opinion?

Why is it that we are the only nation held to such a ridiculously high standard of conduct? If we found out that China was abusing political prisoners (shocking thought, I know) the world would just shrug and move on. When Russia destroys entire Chechnyan villages in order to cleanse them of a few insurgents, the world never even notices. If a United States soldier speaks rudely to a Muslim prisoner, the world riots at our evil and inexcusable behaviour.
 

vandree

Member
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
234
Reaction score
0
Location
Studio City, ca
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
The fact that there are other countries that treat prisoners worse than we do, does not make it ok to use torture. And yes we do have a moral obligation to treat prisoners humanely especially when Bush wants to sell the idea of freedom to everybody and especially when we complain of other countries human rights violations.

How different or better than the terrorists are we if we behave the same way? Since I am not a religious person I have a hard time understanding all this outrage for the "desecration" of The Koran, because bottom line it is a book. All this outrage should be directed to the use of torture!...

The Constitution of the United States does not extend only to American citizens. It extends to anyone in the United States and yes, including illegal immigrants.
 

walrus

Member
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
191
Reaction score
15
Location
Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
vandree said:
The fact that there are other countries that treat prisoners worse than we do, does not make it ok to use torture.
As I have said before, I do not believe anything that has been proven or even alleged rises anywhere near the level of "torture". Anyone who thinks the humiliation that has been dealt a small number of prisoners at Guantanamo is torture has a very limited imagination with regards to the pain one human can inflict on another. It is also a slap in the face to those who have actually experienced torture. It is along the same lines as an intoxicated person having sex with someone they might not otherwise have, and in the morning crying "rape". It flies in the face of those who have actually been violated.

vandree said:
And yes we do have a moral obligation to treat prisoners humanely especially when Bush wants to sell the idea of freedom to everybody and especially when we complain of other countries human rights violations.
You speak of Bush "selling" the idea of freedom throughout the world as if this was his own innovation. I thought this had been a goal of virtually every administration since Wilson.

The U.S. complaining of genocide or human rights violations in other parts of the world is in no way undermined by the minor and sporadic occurences of what amounts to over-vigourous interrogation practices.

vandree said:
How different or better than the terrorists are we if we behave the same way? Since I am not a religious person I have a hard time understanding all this outrage for the "desecration" of The Koran, because bottom line it is a book. All this outrage should be directed to the use of torture!...
Again, if you believe what has gone on in Guantanamo is torture, I suggest you speak with a Japanese, Vietnamese, Iranian, Syrian, Chinese, Russian, African (pick your nation), or German POW. Perhaps the fact that the majority of the Arab worlds outrage is directed at the "desecration" of the Qur'an should tell you that they also realize that what has happened does not rise to the level of "torture". In fact, in most of the nations so bitterly complaining, it wouldn't even be considered inappropriate. Ever met anyone arrested in Saudi Arabia?

vandree said:
The Constitution of the United States does not extend only to American citizens. It extends to anyone in the United States and yes, including illegal immigrants.
Prove it. If possible with language within the Constitution. If not, with affirmed case law.
 

ShamMol

Only Way Round is Through
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
1,988
Reaction score
10
Location
Pasadena, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
walrus said:
First - we are under no legal (or I believe moral) obligation to go to the lengths which we have taken to avoid offending the religious sensibilities of person captured in armed conflict. Lets have a look around the world and see how other nations treat those captured in war. Even advanced nations such as Japan certainly have no moral high-horse on which to sit in judgment of our treatment of prisoners. And honestly, the reactions of people whose treatment of prisoners includes mechanical rape and decapitation (such as many of those nations protesting our "torture" of prisoners do) does not impress me a great deal. It's the same irony as when Germany called us a "nation of warmongers". This from the people who tried to conquer the planet twice in the last century.
Or moral eh? Are we not above other countries in our own minds in the fact that we are the land of the free, the land of justice, the land where we treat everyone fairly? It in fact is our duty to afford them those religious rights. I know the Bush administration just sees them as criminals, but they are captured soldiers and thus entitled to many rights under the geneva convention. Here is an excerpt from that document.
The Contracting States shall accord to refugees within their territories treatment at least as favourable as that accorded to their nationals with respect to freedom to practise their religion and freedom as regards the religious education of their children.
Second - there is no guilty until proven innocent in this case. The protections of the Constitution extend to American citizens. I cannot imagine the founding fathers intended the Constitution to apply to the British in 1812, for example. There are certain protections provided by the Geneva Conventions (which I will agree we are violating in some ways) but these protections do not include "guilty until proven innocent".
How is "guilty until proven innocent" a RIGHT? That is a punishment. They are not American citizens, but they are in our control. Are we so Darwainistic as to say that, hey, they aren't ours, so we won't accord them what we would want if we were captured? They are human beings. We have the duty to afford them the right to legal cousel and to let them debunk the case against them. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
If you are going to reduce your post to a huge picture and a short sentence, at least shrink the picture a bit so it doesn't take up half a page worth of posts. Unless it is an interesting or effective picture, which in this case it wasn't.
You are just jealous you don't have a cool paint picture too. :rofl
Amnesty Intl. has proven time and time again that they are in no way an un-biased organization. They ignore human rights violations that are not politically expedient while highlighting those that are. This is why some of us take what they say with a large grain of salt. Just think of them as Fox News as you believe them to be. Do you believe everything Fox says is false, or do you just believe they are biased enough to generally disregard their opinion?
You remember Donny boy quoting them in the lead up to the Iraq war? He quoted them, in fact, daily. I am a member of this fine organization and they do what they believe human rights demand. In this case, they stated what people were stating and one comment was out of place relating Gitmo to a Russian prison camp. They published exactly what was being alleged, not what was spun their way through clever sayings.
Why is it that we are the only nation held to such a ridiculously high standard of conduct? If we found out that China was abusing political prisoners (shocking thought, I know) the world would just shrug and move on. When Russia destroys entire Chechnyan villages in order to cleanse them of a few insurgents, the world never even notices. If a United States soldier speaks rudely to a Muslim prisoner, the world riots at our evil and inexcusable behaviour.
If we really held that high standard, Gitmo would have human right's abuses. We are seen as a cut above, and it is about time we started acting that way.
 

ShamMol

Only Way Round is Through
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
1,988
Reaction score
10
Location
Pasadena, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
walrus said:
As I have said before, I do not believe anything that has been proven or even alleged rises anywhere near the level of "torture". Anyone who thinks the humiliation that has been dealt a small number of prisoners at Guantanamo is torture has a very limited imagination with regards to the pain one human can inflict on another. It is also a slap in the face to those who have actually experienced torture. It is along the same lines as an intoxicated person having sex with someone they might not otherwise have, and in the morning crying "rape". It flies in the face of those who have actually been violated.
Here is a link to the Geneva convention. Read it and be enlightened as to what torture is. Geneva Convention It doesn't fly in the face as you put it of people who have been tortured. They were and these people are too, and while it is different degrees of torture, it is still torture.
You speak of Bush "selling" the idea of freedom throughout the world as if this was his own innovation. I thought this had been a goal of virtually every administration since Wilson.
:shock: Wow, you hit the nail on the head...but it wasn't every administrations goal to force feed their brand of freedom to the world...oh wait, what were those years when we held up dictators because they weren't communist or socialist...oh yeah, let's just forget about those years.
The U.S. complaining of genocide or human rights violations in other parts of the world is in no way undermined by the minor and sporadic occurences of what amounts to over-vigourous interrogation practices.
Over-vigorous interrogation practices...wow. That is what the younglings are calling torture these days. It does undermine our credibility to say they are hurting others when in fact we are doing it ourselves and saying it is our right to do so.
Again, if you believe what has gone on in Guantanamo is torture, I suggest you speak with a Japanese, Vietnamese, Iranian, Syrian, Chinese, Russian, African (pick your nation), or German POW. Perhaps the fact that the majority of the Arab worlds outrage is directed at the "desecration" of the Qur'an should tell you that they also realize that what has happened does not rise to the level of "torture". In fact, in most of the nations so bitterly complaining, it wouldn't even be considered inappropriate. Ever met anyone arrested in Saudi Arabia?
Those are all examples of torture all at varying degrees of torture, but it doesn't make what is happening at Gitmo any less of torture against human beings.
Prove it. If possible with language within the Constitution. If not, with affirmed case law.
How bout this, we always give the right of due process to immigrants who are arrested. That enough, or do I have to waste my time and look it up?

Oh and walrus, this is the second post I responded to of yours, please answer the last one as well.
 

teacher

DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
5,980
Reaction score
30
Location
Nomad.Got a couch,beer,meat,cute daughters,Batman
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
akyron said:
I can't even begin to ask what you are trying to prove with this picture. What is it a picture of? What are you trying to say? Is it supposed to convince me of something?


They appear to be listening to the audio version of the Koran. Either that or Charlottes Web. Everyone cries when the spider dies.
[/QUOTE]


I think the nice marines are playing duck,duck,goose with those nice terrorists.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,894
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
vandree said:
The fact that there are other countries that treat prisoners worse than we do, does not make it ok to use torture. And yes we do have a moral obligation to treat prisoners humanely especially when Bush wants to sell the idea of freedom to everybody and especially when we complain of other countries human rights violations.

How different or better than the terrorists are we if we behave the same way? Since I am not a religious person I have a hard time understanding all this outrage for the "desecration" of The Koran, because bottom line it is a book. All this outrage should be directed to the use of torture!...

The Constitution of the United States does not extend only to American citizens. It extends to anyone in the United States and yes, including illegal immigrants.
Where in Guantanamo was there torture? Because unless I'm mistaken, any allegations of such should join the dust heap of retractions that Newsweek and Amnesty have found themselves in.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,894
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
ShamMol said:
You remember Donny boy quoting them in the lead up to the Iraq war? He quoted them, in fact, daily. I am a member of this fine organization and they do what they believe human rights demand. In this case, they stated what people were stating and one comment was out of place relating Gitmo to a Russian prison camp. They published exactly what was being alleged, not what was spun their way through clever sayings.
But it is Amnesty's responsibility, as a bastion of truth, NOT to publish allegations as fact. They took what amounted to lies intended to damage the reputation of the US, and with absolutely no supporting evidence, gave it the stamp of legitimacy of Amnesty International. You don't see that as a problem? You aren't furious that an organization which you're a member of damaged its credibility so badly in an obviously partisan statement? Even the head of Amnesty USA is doing all he can to backpedal from those statements. You should hold organizations which you're a supporting member of to a higher standard.
 
Top Bottom