On Guantanamo suicides..
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General discussions
Forum Description: Discuss any topic at all that is not music-related
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24610
Printed Date: August 13 2025 at 07:33
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: On Guantanamo suicides..
Posted By: Logos
Subject: On Guantanamo suicides..
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 08:44
|
I was just checking the news after being away from internet and TV for the weekend and I read about the Guantanamo suicides. There was a certain comment I noticed: "I believe this was not an act of desperation but an act of asymmetric warfare against us." Base commander Navy Rear Admiral Harry Harris Disgusting  I wonder where these w**kers come from. |
Replies:
Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 08:52
|
So basically he's saying that the "detainees" were thinking: I know! We'll hang ourselves! that'll show those Americans we mean war! it almost makes sense, except for it doesn't at all. the lack of even the smallest amount of human compassion is frightening to say the least. ------------- http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic ALTAIC "Oceans Down You'll Lie" coming soon |
Posted By: Phil
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 09:04
|
Logos wrote:Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 10:26
|
to say something like that can only be called "cynical". what else do
they have to do show how they suffer? cut themselves slowly into pieces?
-------------  BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 10:46
|
**Admin hat off**
The men under Saddam's regime commited horrendous atrocities and tortured countless people,I have a hard time feeling any compassion for them,or their plight. -------------  |
Posted By: Logos
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 10:57
|
So they have the right to do the same? Just because others have done so too? Also many of the "terrorists" in Guantanamo have never done anything to deserve such horrible treatment. |
Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 11:03
|
They were two Saudis and a Yemeni. They had no ties to Saddam, they were held as "enemy combatants" under suspicion of links to Al Qaeda. ------------- http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic ALTAIC "Oceans Down You'll Lie" coming soon |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 11:04
|
Sorry Logos,that's just the way I feel.
I've been to war with these people,I am extremely biased.
Sad but true. ------------- |
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 11:05
These people were NEVER convicted by a jury, nor did they ever face one. They did not even have a chance to speak to a lawyer. How do you know they are what the American government claims them to be? They were just locked up like any dictatorship locks people up. ------------- BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 11:06
|
I'll stop commenting,because I will never agree with your point of view. ------------- |
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 11:09
|
If you claim the American government has the right to lock up anyone on
a mere suspicion, without giving him the chance of legal defense, then
ideed we never will. Had they locked them up and given them the right
to defend themselves, we could have talked about it (though it still
seems a little far-fetched to arrest a few hundred people at once). I
don't support Nazi methods anywhere, and these are Nazi methods.
------------- BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 11:32
|
While it is no excuse,my particpation in our first conflict in the Middle East really changed they way I look and feel about these things,and not for the better.
When me and my wife watch the news some of the things that come out of my mouth startle her,and she has told me more than once that I came home a very different person than the one who left.
I suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome,whose symptons really didn't surface until about a decade after my war experience.I don't like the way I feel about things of this nature and attend therapy and also meet with other combat veterans to talk and help each other and get things out of our systems.
Maybe I will feel differently in the future. ------------- |
Posted By: marktheshark
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 11:49
We can't put any finality on these prisoners Friede until Iraq's own government gets more stabilized and then hand them over to them and let them deal with the prisoners. And if that means holding then indefinitely then so be it. At least that's my guess. |
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 11:54
What nonsense! How can the USA appear as defender of Human Rights if they so blatantly disregard them like they do here? And how is Iraq supposed to learn from that very fine example? ------------- BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: Empathy
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 11:57
Wow, Jody, my respect for you just tripled. The fact that you can admit this openly speaks volumes about your integrity as a person, IMO. A good friend of mine (who I believe is actually quite brilliant) came back from his military experience a radically changed person as well. He's now very obsessed with violence, and sometimes says things that border on psychotic (IMO). I don't feel that the human mind is wired to do what militaries around the world seem to want to mold it into. I always wonder how different my friend would have been if he had gone a different direction. I toyed with the idea of joining the service, very briefly, but I realized I was such a fierce individualist that I would have had a very, very difficult time in basic training. I do wish there was a way to extract some of the positive qualities that seem to be part and parcel in the military experience, however. Namely, the discipline and focus!  ------------- Pure Brilliance: 
|
Posted By: Logos
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 13:58
Utter nonsense as Friede said. Iraq? What about the Taliban members? What's that got to do with Iraq? And why torture them if they're only waiting to be handed over to Iraq? This doesn't make any sense. |
Posted By: marktheshark
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:00
Explain torture. |
Posted By: Logos
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:12
|
No, I won't. Obviously the conversation is getting awkward for you and you're trying to change the subject.It doesn't work. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:13
I think in the past years, we realized that we don't defend human rights. We don't care about Darfur, we piss all over Kyoto (kind of related) in order to protect our precious industry which will be decimated if we don't get rid of the American ideology that we can have/do whatever we want. We have secret prisons all over the place in Europe (everybody could've guessed they were there in the first place though). If anybody still thinks the US is a defender of anything in the world except for US interests, then our leaders have done a pretty good job of convincing them so. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: crimson thing
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:15
|
I sincerely hope that the progtologist took greater care to distinguish between Iraqi & Yemeni; Saudi & Palestinian; uniformed soldier & innocent civilian; when he had a gun in his hand. I'm staggered that, because he fought in a war against one group of Arabs, that all are now considered fair game, and should be locked up regardless of legal procedures. And to insinuate that they're all Saddam's lackeys is intellectual laziness on a dangerous scale. Punish the guilty, by all means; but first make sure beyond reasonable doubt that they are guilty.
Guantanamo represents an early stage in the philosophy of the possible, as opposed to the philosophy of justice. It states that, what we can do, and which you cannot stop us doing, is, by definition, legal & moral. The big drawback with this approach, as the Americans will one day realise, is that it condemns you to an eternity looking over your shoulder........ ------------- "Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS 
|
Posted By: NetsNJFan
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:16
Its true, war changes people, in sometimes unpredictable ways. My grandfather fought in the 1948-49 Arab-Israeli war, which he would never talk about because he was sworn to secrecy afterwards. He probably did a lot of things he wasn't proud of, but I still admire him beyond belief.
I also had a family friend, a russian guy who served in the 1982-1985 Lebanon invasion who had to emigrate to the USA afterwards because he was so shaken up. ------------- 
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:27
You condemn Jody for generalizing a group of Arabs, and go right around and do as so many of the people do, and generalize the citizens of the US.
"The big drawback with this approach, as the Americans will one day realise, is that it condemns you to an eternity looking over your shoulder........"
While the drawback you explain may be true, the way in which you presented it shows that you think all Americans support the philosophy you described earlier. It's as if you're bestowing this great new idea upon us, assuming that we don't know it anyway. Perhaps it's the jaded quality of just about every youth in the country, but anyone worth their salt would not support barging into any country in the world just to prevent something from happening. Hell, we wouldn't even be in Iraq if it weren't for the terrifying impressions the Bush administration spelled out for us. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: crimson thing
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:31
|
I worked in Germany & Austria for a few years in the mid-eighties; and some of my colleagues were guys who had fought in the latter stages of WW2. My insurance agent even admitted to having voluntarily joined one of the nastier elements of the Nazi regime. Should we have hated each other? On the night my job offer was finalised, I celebrated alone in a small Gasthaus with excellent brewed-on-the-premises beer. I spoke very little German, and was a littled intimidated by the group of elderly gents who asked if they could share my table. The first thing they said to me when they found out I was English, was that most of them had been POWs in Britain - and they were great guys. Should they have hated me for being British? Or I them? Of course not. ------------- "Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS
|
Posted By: crimson thing
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:34
And have you written to the appropriate politician to express these views? Maybe you did so before the invasion?
And although I said the Americans would realise the error of their approach, read carefully; I wasn't careless enough to say they were all responsible...... ------------- "Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS
|
Posted By: James Lee
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:34
|
Nazi nazi nazi. Any group who does something wrong is a nazi. Any person who does something bad is Hitler. Last I checked, there were fewer than 500 people held at Gitmo, of which 140+ are scheduled to be released and 10 of which are facing direct charges. They were not citizens rounded up in mass arrests, but prisoners captured during active combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. They are not being held in secret, and their conditions are monitored by several worldwide human rights agencies- whose suggestions have been implemented regularly. Not regularly enough, it seems, for the focus of attention has led to serious consideration of closing the base completely...which of course will completely silence the critics of the US, right? Sure... Yeah, it sucks that people are being held without due process. And if any of the reports of abuse are accurate, conditions should be more tightly controlled. It also sucks that US taxpayers are footing the bill so that US critics can have such an easy target. But I think you're all dismissing the valid point that is raised in the Admiral's (poorly considered) words. What is the difference, essentially, between a suicide bomber and a suicide protest? Do you honestly think that a person who could kill themselves for a cause would do so in a car full of explosives...but not in a prison? It's called 'weakening the resolve of the enemy' and it's the basic goal of terrorism. It's not cynicism to recognize that. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/sollipsist/?chartstyle=kaonashi"> 
|
Posted By: Empathy
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:39
Were the people who died in the World Trade Center guilty of what their government had done (largely without their knowledge, I might add)? This works both ways. Many of us here in the U.S. are only now waking up to what our government (and the corporate interests that truly control it) has done in our names. Many of us here are interested in putting a stop to it. I see that you're located in the U.K. - I would add that a very similar situation exists there, as well. People would do well to heed your words about making certain of guilt before punishment. Killing innocent civilians is wrong, regardless of whether fighting to serve your nation, or your fanatical religious beliefs. ------------- Pure Brilliance:
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:40
I hardly believe they'd care if one 15-year old opposed an invasion of a country when a huge majority of the country supported it. I live in a Republican state where most people either support traditional values or don't care about anything but farming and raising kids. Our state is in a whole mess of trouble domestically, and I think it'd fall on deaf ears. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Empathy
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:45
Yes. yes it does. And it's contrary to everything this country is supposed to stand for. ------------- Pure Brilliance:
|
Posted By: Logos
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:48
A person dies in a car full of explosives. A person kills himself after being held in a prison for years without facing charges. There's no difference? |
Posted By: James Lee
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:56
Did I say there was no difference? I said there was no reason to think that the ideological impulse for suicide couldn't manifest itself in both ways.
Everything? That's a pretty sweeping statement. America stands for a lot of things, some of which are contradictory, and not all of which have to do with due process. Sounds like someone has completed the George W. Bush correspondence course in "Speaking in Soundbytes 101". ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/sollipsist/?chartstyle=kaonashi">
|
Posted By: crimson thing
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 14:59
If you won't stand up to be counted; you're complicit. If you consider yourself old enough to argue politics here, then go make a f++ difference! You're blessed with articulacy - sincerely. It's only people like you who can make a difference!!! I hope you know Pastor Niemoller's famous quotation? If not, look it up. ------------- "Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS
|
Posted By: Empathy
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 15:13
Well, I'll be more specific then. The 5th Constitutional Amendment http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am5.html - http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am5.html The 14th Constitutional Amendment http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am14.html - http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am14.html Hopefully the Bush correspondence course is free... anything else would be a rip-off. I would take the G.W. Bush course in Corporate Management techniques, though! That one should be a breeze!  ------------- Pure Brilliance:
|
Posted By: James Lee
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 15:35
 Much better...thanks for not taking my jab too seriously.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/sollipsist/?chartstyle=kaonashi">
|
Posted By: Empathy
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 15:37
No worries, dude!  ------------- Pure Brilliance:
|
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 16:20
Highly unlikely, and based on an unproven premise. The unproven premise is that these guys really were suicide terrorists; for all I know the mere fact of being held in Guantanamo does not mean anything at all. There has been no trial to convince them; it is legally customary to assume innocence until the opposite is proven. What's more: If they had been suicide terrorists, why wait two years to commit suicide? I think it is much more likely they were simply desperate. Imagine you were abducted without knowing why and kept in a camp, under subhuman conditions, for over two years, and your pleas for seeing a legal representant are constantly being ignored: Would you not become desperate too after a while? And think of suicide as a way out? No, that comment of Navy Rear Admiral Harry Harris can be considered as nothing else but cynical. ------------- BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 16:32
Extreme offense taken at the innocent civilans remark.I was a door gunner on a Blackhawk medevac chopper and anybody I fired my weapon at was wearing a uniform.
It's easy to be an armchair general sitting in your comfy living room watching war on tv and judging everybody.Try helping a medic hold a 19 year old kids guts in while he's screaming for his mother and looking at you and begging to not let him die.It changes the way you see things.
That is why I should always stay away from these conversations,I have what we call veteran's syndrome,if you haven't been through it.........
I'll stop right now.
------------- |
Posted By: AtLossForWords
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 17:10
|
I'll have to agree with you Jody. The empirical experience of fighting in a war against certain people will inevitably change one's perspective on his enemy. I will say that in combat a soldier must be allowed to commit any actions that are in the best interest of himself and his allies.
I believe the troube we're having is what to do with prisoners of war. So Jody, can I ask you what you believe is fair treatment of captured enemies? Enemies which at the moment pose no threat to the security of soldiers and their interest. -------------  
"Mastodon sucks giant monkey balls." |
Posted By: crimson thing
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 17:56
But you miss the point - many of these guys at Guantanamo aren't POWs - for sure there's a real mixture there, but look at the way they were picked up & you see that they include many who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. But I'm wasting my time - you just classify them all as guilty -why else would they be there....
And as for the "armchair general" jibe - I said elsewhere that I was vocally against the invasion of Iraq from the very beginning, when it was unpopular. If you want "soldiers only" threads - go ahead, label them as such.... ------------- "Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS
|
Posted By: maani
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 18:15
|
ALFW, in response to Progtologist, said: "I'll have to agree with you Jody. The empirical experience of fighting in a war against certain people will inevitably change one's perspective on his enemy. I will say that in combat a soldier must be allowed to commit any actions that are in the best interest of himself and his allies. "
What is being missed here is that it is not the soliders who determine who the "enemy" is: it is the government that sends them to kill and be killed. Thus, if the "government" decides that country "A" or people "B" are the enemy, it sends our troops, and the troops have no ability to question whether they are actually fighting an "enemy," or simply a country or people that the government has decided is the "enemy."
This is why the doctrine of unprovoked, pre-emptive war is so dangerous. And while it is admittedly wrong to play "armchair general," this does not change the fact that those of us who believe that we don't belong in certain military situations are torn between supporting our troops - since once they are over there, there is little else they can do but "follow orders" - and vehemently protesting the government and policies that sent them over there in the first place.
Peace.
|
Posted By: maani
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 18:21
|
Re crimson thing's cite, here is the quote from Pastor Martin Niemoeller, who was killed by the Nazis late in the war:
“First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.”
Peace.
|
Posted By: crimson thing
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 19:09
Thanks maani
 My ref (the ODQ) has a somewhat longer version, but the sense is the same.I hope stonebeard speaks out, even at the risk of inflaming his peers & others - he is articulate enough to make a difference.
I'll call a truce with progtologist - we come at these issues from such different positions that we can't possibly agree & I have no wish to inflame for the heck of it.......one comes to this site to find a new band, or make fun of people who like (gasp) different kinds of music from oneself, and yet end up daggers drawn with someone you've never met. Crazy.  ------------- "Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 19:43
I intend to speak out come election time.  (Not that it'll do any good with the electronic voting machines being hacked by shady GOP strategists... )------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Logos
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 19:57
That is good to hear. I understand him better after reading his posts in this thread and respect him a lot more now - the guy has true courage and honesty.  |
Posted By: rushaholic
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 21:56
Oh come on. Look, I am not a registered republican or democrat but these little conspiracy theories are just that - theories. You can't be serious. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: June 12 2006 at 23:52
No, there are little bits and pieces coming out of the woodwork about this. maani posted an article in another political thread that outlined one such instance, and I watched another story earlier this evening. I think there's little question that this is happening, all that remains is how widespread it is. I'm going after Republicans in charge because they have more to lose. The weight of their ideoligies is getting heavy. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Empathy
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 00:48
Read up a little on Diebold before you call for the tin foil hat brigade... ------------- Pure Brilliance:
|
Posted By: Ghandi 2
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 00:58
Or maybe, just maybe, this was the first chance they had to kill themselves. The military is very strict about letting anything dangerous at all get into these cells, but after 2 years they might get a little lax... Considering their ideology, I would think that suicide to prevent yourself from telling the Great Satan anything would be almost as good as killing yourself to kill other people. ------------- "Never forget that the human race with technology is like an alcoholic with a barrel of wine." Sleepytime Gorilla Museum: Because in their hearts, everyone secretly loves the Unabomber. |
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 02:29
Again your argument is founded on the unproven premise that the people in question really were terrorists. ------------- BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: James Lee
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 14:08
|
Nothing about this situation can be proven, BF. While I'm not willing to take the military's word about everything, the fact that these men are being held in the first place means that the military believes that they are a legitimate threat. Whether you or I believe it does not affect that line of reasoning. Therefore, a conclusion of cynicism on the part of the adimiral is equally flawed; it requires an understanding of his mental processes that we just don't have. I've provided a reasonable line of argument in absence of hard facts. The prisoners do not have to be 'terrorists' any more than they have to be 'desperate'. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/sollipsist/?chartstyle=kaonashi">
|
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 14:42
Sorry, James, but that's a bunch of poppycock. These people are being held against the convention of human rights, which the US-government propagate to protect. They were abducted and held prisoner for two years without any legal representation, and even granted there may be terrorists among them, I have no doubt there are a lot of people in there that don't have any idea why they are being held there. And even terrorists have the right for legal representation, according to the international charta of human rights. Ask yourself: What would YOU do if you were abducted and put behind bars under subhuman conditions for over two years, without knowing why or whether it is ever going to end? The whole situation of these people reminds me of the situation of the main character in Kafka's "The Trial". If you ever read the book, you may remember the main character was rather glad when he was executed in the end. So I will definitely stick to my verdict of "cynicism" on the part of this admiral. ------------- BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: rushaholic
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 15:04
|
Let's see here. Thre three guys that checked themselves out of the Gitmo hotel were the following: 1. Ali Abdullah Ahmed, a mid-to-high level Al-Qaeda strategist. 2. Mani Shaman Turki al-Habardi Al-Utaybi, who was a member of a group that recruited for Al-Qaeda. 3. Yassar Talal al-Zahrani. He was a front-line Taliban fighter...and helped that group get weapons. I am sure these guys knew why they were in there. Now they can enjoy their 60 virgins or whatever they think their reward is for killing innocent people in the name of their God. (source of names - Neal Boortz) |
Posted By: James Lee
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 16:45
|
BF: I love the word 'poppycock', I'm just happy it could be used. Even towards me. But you haven't convinced me. For one thing, they do have legal representation, provided by the military. What they don't have is a time limit to show reasonable proof of guilt or innocence. And I'm not even attempting to justify that. I'm not even arguing for the detention facility, which I admit is a serious black eye for the US cause. I'm just arguing in favor of the admiral's reasoning, which you have yet to disprove beyond simply calling it 'cynical'. If you have a reason to believe that this is true, rather than a general cynicism about anything any US official says...I promise to be just as objective and reasonable when I hear it. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/sollipsist/?chartstyle=kaonashi">
|
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 17:18
You can't be serious, James. You remind me of the dream of the barrister in "The Hunting of the Snark", in which one after one he takes the positions of prosecutor for the Crown, defendant's lawyer and judge. How much worth is legal representation that is being payed by those who accuse you and judge you at the same time? ------------- BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: marktheshark
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 17:41
|
I'd like to know what the subhuman conditions are. From what I've heard they're in air conditioned cells with a bed and a Queran. They're allowed to go outside and the food is better than what the guards get. The average prisoner there has gained 18 lbs.
You've been listening to Al Jazeera too much Friede. |
Posted By: Forgotten Son
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 17:48
That's who the US military say they are. I seem to recall US intelligence accusing a bunch of lads from Birmingham going to a mates wedding of being a hardened group of terrorists. |
Posted By: marktheshark
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 18:05
| Well I tell you what, let's just not believe anybody. Don't believe the military, don't believe the terrorists, don't believe the governments, don't believe the media. Let's just walk around in constant confused state of haze gray thinking. Whew! |
Posted By: Forgotten Son
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 18:16
Way ahead of you  Seriously, though I'm not advocating that people disregard information put forward by the military, but I am suggesting that they're fallible and other cases points to a fairly high possibility that what they claim in this instance might not be true. |
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 18:38
Oh yes, the cells are certainly "air-conditioned". I have no idea what you have been listening too, Mark. Probably the propaganda of the US-administration. Have you ever wondered why the US-administration does not allow Red Cross inside? ------------- BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 18:51
^ They're terrorists too!  And allowing terrorist into Guantano is just plain silly.  ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: NetsNJFan
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 18:56
|
Haha politics even carries into the Red Cross. The American Red Cross hasn't really coordinated with the International Red Cross in years.
I do agree, the Red Cross should be let in though. Red Cross inspection means little though, I mean they regurarly toured Terezenstadt, and found it up to par.
But the US Army is correct in keeping the United Nations as far away as they can from Gitmo. -------------
|
Posted By: NetsNJFan
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 19:01
That quote always bothered me; who exactly should he have spoken up to? The British, the Americans, the Soviets?! No one cared. Keeping quiet was the best you could do to stay alive. -------------
|
Posted By: marktheshark
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 19:07
Red Cross to visit US prison camp in Cuba 13 June 2006 10:21 The International Committee of the Red Cross is to visit the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, following the deaths at the weekend of three men held at the prison camp there. Military authorities at the camp have also announced a review of its procedures. The Red Cross is the only outside agency that has regular access to the prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay. A delegation from the ICRC normally visits around six times a year to check on the condition of prisoners. This visit is not part of the regular schedule and follows the suicides at the camp of two Saudi men and one man from Yemen on Saturday. A spokesman for the ICRC said that if the agency had concerns, it would share them bilaterally with the US. The ICRC does not make the findings of its visits public. None of the three men who died was among the ten at the camp who have been charged with a crime under a military tribunal system. Around 460 men, labelled 'enemy combatants' by the US, are currently held in Guantanamo. |
Posted By: Logos
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 19:10
| Yes, the pressure is on. Today the European Union made very clear where it stands. Hopefully the end for Guantanamo is near. |
Posted By: Ghandi 2
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 19:56
And yours is founded on the unproven premise that they weren't. ------------- "Never forget that the human race with technology is like an alcoholic with a barrel of wine." Sleepytime Gorilla Museum: Because in their hearts, everyone secretly loves the Unabomber. |
Posted By: crimson thing
Date Posted: June 13 2006 at 20:00
Think of it as a version of the Prisoner's Dilemma, and maybe the right answer will occur to you...... ------------- "Every man over forty is a scoundrel." GBS
|
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 14 2006 at 06:10
In case you have forgotten: It is common legal practice to assume the defendant's innocence until the opposite is proven. It is an important part of the legal systems of modern constitutional states. It is in fact a great achievement for modern jurisdictional procedure. And isn't that part of what the US-government supposedly want to bring to Iraq? ------------- BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: Empathy
Date Posted: June 14 2006 at 14:50
|
Wow, this is pretty big... From Reuters:
http://today.reuters.com/favicon.ico - WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush acknowledged
on Wednesday that the But he said a plan for relocating the prisoners was needed
first and he was also awaiting a Supreme Court decision about the forum for
handling detainee cases. "I'd like to close Guantanamo, but I also recognize
that we're holding some people there that are darn dangerous and that we better
have a plan to deal with them in our courts," Bush told a news conference
in the White House Rose Garden. He said "No question, Two Saudis and a Yemeni were found dead at the prison on
Saturday after hanging themselves with clothes and bedsheets. The suicides were the first prisoner deaths at The suicides came amid an investigation of U.S. Marines
after an alleged massacre of two dozen civilians at Bush, who spoke hours after returning from a surprise visit
to "And I reminded her that ours is a transparent society
where people will see and follow these investigations. And people will be held
to account, according to our laws," Bush said. "But I also want the people to understand, here and
around the world, that 99.9 percent of our troops are honorable, decent people
who are serving our country under difficult conditions," he added. Nearly all the prisoners at The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule this month on the
legitimacy of special military tribunals set up to try some of the prisoners
for war crimes. Ten detainees face hearings before the tribunals. Bush said the "Of course, sometimes we get criticized for sending
some people out of Guantanamo back to their home country because of the nature
of the home countries -- a little bit of a Catch-22," Bush said. He added that a lot of detainees have been sent back
already. ------------- Pure Brilliance:
|
