Senators want to know -- 'ghost' detainees

POSTED BY: Honey
UPDATED: Sunday, August 1, 2004 21:22
VIEWED: 8255
PAGE 2 of 5

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE

CONNORFLYNN

Monday, July 19, 2004 10:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Knibblet:
Quote:
Originally posted by Connorflynn:
What flag do the terrorists fight under? Do they have names, ranks and serial numbers? What is their common identifiable uniform?

Quote:
Originally posted by Knibblet:
We should abandon international law and the Geneva conventions (designed to protect the fighters of ALL nations) when it suits our purpose?

My standards of moral and ethical conduct are not built on a sliding scale. What is right and wrong is not determined by the conduct of my enemy but rather, by the content of my soul.

Throwing our constitution and its protections into the trash is not something I'm willing to do. Having people kidnapped and tortured in foreign countries to avoid United States laws is not something I'm willing to condone.

Of course, invading a sovereign nation in the quest for a natural resource which will be depleted within 40 years is also not high on my "to do" list.

The invasion of Iraq and the seizure of the oil fields has nothing to do with terrorism or 911. The sooner people pull their heads out of Bush's ass and realize that, the fewer US troops and Iraqi's will die in the quest for oil and power.

As a Jew - but a non-Zionist, I must state loudly and clearly: Muslims don't hate our "Freedoms". They aren't pissed because we can choose between 40 brands of feminine hygiene products and 300 cable channels -- we are being targeted due to 100 years of exploitive policies and the fact that our government supports Israel and its genocidal policies.

"Just keep walkin, preacher man."

You stated that we were breaking the edicts of the Geneva Convention. You were blatantly wrong and skirted direct questions.Too many people spout off bullshit about the Geneva conventions without a F***ing clue as to what they are talking about.

While skirting the direct questions, you claim it has something to do with our constitution? What "Constitutional Protections" do our enemies have outside of America? Or were you claiming that your own personal liberties are hindered horrifically by "the Patriot Act"? *snickers* I know so many people are being hampered daily by the time consuming breach of civil liberties brought on by the PA that they can't live normal lives. PUHHHLEEEASSE...Give me a break. The only people crying are the ones who have something to hide and their bleeding heart supporters.

The content of your soul isn't what is written down in "International law" or the "Geneva Conventions". Frankly , if Osama was to have the opportunity to cleave your head from your body, I doubt very much he'd give a rats ass about the contents of your soul or it's moral and ethical convictions. Nor would he be worried about whether or not he was impinging on your constitutional rights. Though we all seek that "love one another Utopian ideal", where everyone lives peacefully in harmony..it's far from realistic and quite far outside of human nature.

Personally, proclaiming yourself a non-Zionist Jew, is pretty laughable. The terrorists don't make a distinction between the 2. Hell, I can't really think of any distinctions that they make between anyone. So to arbitrarily say that it is Israel's fault solely, or that it's America's own fault what happens because we support Israel is also laughable.

If the Israelis were truly genocidal it would be all over right now. They are nuclear capable. The Palestinians would cease to exist tomorrow. For that matter, so would Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Saudia Arabia, The Sudan..etc..etc.. All of the non-civilized-biblically burdened Arabic countries would be smoldering. On the contrary, I do believe it is the Islamafascists who are calling for the genocidal wipeout of all jews (Zionist or not ROFLMAO..sorry still find that funny). But hey ya know..they'll stop their aggressive ways after Israel and America are wiped out. Oops..no they won't. France will be next, followed by any other country that doesn't make Islam their defacto rule of law.

It all comes down to human nature. I

HKCAVALIER

Tuesday, July 20, 2004 12:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
I just finished watching the first two seasons of 24. That show has US intelligence officers and the President murdering and torturing terrorists and conspirators. Those are the good guys and it seems perfectly acceptable for them to do those otherwise bad acts.

If its acceptable in a fictional setting, why is torture and abuse not acceptable in the real world were the stakes are more...real?

Is there anyone else who finds this question completely disturbing coming from an adult?

Hero, there are some very important distinctions between fiction and reality, that affect the way we solve problems here. In a work of fiction, the artist chooses what's going to happen. People in reality don't always get to choose what happens to them. If the story is any good, it's only gonna have significant detail. The details of the story are gonna add up to a satisfying conclusion. You don't expect that kind of structure from real life, do you?

Look at it in terms of science. In a TV show a scientist discovers what he's looking for because the show's about the discovery, not the generations of scientists who failed before him, or his own 25 years of fruitless experimentation. Only a complete idiot would ask why science can't advance as fast as it can in a TV show. It's a frickin' TV show! Actual reality is endlessly more complex than any TV show could depict.

It disturbs the hell out of me that people like you and like Drakon over in the Demonization of the Opposition thread can believe that this simplistic, black hat/white hat mentality is reflected by the real world.

I didn't think I would ever have to explain this to someone, but the reality in a work of fiction is fundamentally simpler than actual reality and the artist is in complete control of the outcomes. In fiction you can be absolutely certain of the guilt of a criminal, for instance. There's a scene where the criminal does the crime, or there's a scene where the criminal gloats over the crime to his gang. That's when the hero busts in the door and apprehends him. That just isn't how life works.

Hey, I haven't seen the show, but in the episode where the President tortures his victim, is there ANY question of the victim's guilt? Any at all? Christ! The very idea is disgusting. I don't want the President of the United States torturing anyone, thank you. I don't think I'm alone here.

You cannot be anywhere near as certain of just about anything in real life as the characters in a TV show can be.

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
In other words...if you could stop 9/11 by torturing a foriegn terrorist and just maybe arranging for the murder of his family in front of him live via satalite, would it be wrong?

First of all, that is one ginormous IF. How could you ever determine that the torture of a given person was responsible for preventing a terrorist attack from happening? And how would you ever know if there wasn't a far more sane and morally credible way to do it if you did? Or better yet, can you name me a single historical example of it? In reality, it is possible to kill the wrong guy's family. And even if it is the "right" guy, you're gonna kill his whole family?

Is that what 9/11 has reduced us to? If so, then the war is over and they've won.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

DARKJESTER

Tuesday, July 20, 2004 1:12 AM

Quote:
No offense.. I call Bullshit

Our media would be all over that, if that story bore even a smidge of truth. The Arab media would be all over that, not to mention all the other countries in the world for that matter.

Sorry Connorflynn, I disagree. Three separate news sources reporting something (albeit all three quoted on the same web page) is not bullshit. It may be wrong, but it can't be dismissed in such an off-hand and mildly insulting way. Nine months ago, accusations of prison torture in Iraq were regarded as bullshit, too. It took months, but the world press finally got "all over that". It took actual photographic evidence being presented before the media payed serious attention. In the meantime, the accusations remained true. Not reporting an event doesn't mean that the event never happened. Not having worldwide coverage of something doesn't mean that that thing didn't happen. Once a story like this has been verified, then the press will (perhaps) begin a coverage blitz, if it will help their ratings. Until then, it will be the smaller, independent sources reporting on it.

MAL "You only gotta scare him."
JAYNE "Pain is scary..."

CONNORFLYNN

Tuesday, July 20, 2004 12:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DarkJester:
Quote:
No offense.. I call Bullshit

Our media would be all over that, if that story bore even a smidge of truth. The Arab media would be all over that, not to mention all the other countries in the world for that matter.

Sorry Connorflynn, I disagree. Three separate news sources reporting something (albeit all three quoted on the same web page) is not bullshit. It may be wrong, but it can't be dismissed in such an off-hand and mildly insulting way. Nine months ago, accusations of prison torture in Iraq were regarded as bullshit, too. It took months, but the world press finally got "all over that". It took actual photographic evidence being presented before the media payed serious attention. In the meantime, the accusations remained true. Not reporting an event doesn't mean that the event never happened. Not having worldwide coverage of something doesn't mean that that thing didn't happen. Once a story like this has been verified, then the press will (perhaps) begin a coverage blitz, if it will help their ratings. Until then, it will be the smaller, independent sources reporting on it.

MAL "You only gotta scare him."
JAYNE "Pain is scary..."

I still call Bullshit. It's not done in an off-handed way. I don't care if its "mildly-insulting", I call it like I see it. Frankly anyone who can rub 2 braincells together can see right through the crap printed on that website.

Firstly, theres a big difference between prisoner abuses (torture is too strong a word for what was done to those men in Abu Ghraib) and the raping of children. Secondly, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE that at least one noteworthy and reliable news source throughout the world hasn't had the rape of Iraqi children as a major headline. The Anti- American sentiment throughout the world alone would give reason to the exposure of any such criminal acts.

BOING BOING is not a noteworthy or reliable news source. Its along the lines of a "World Weekly News" or "National Enquirer". All BULLSHIT no substance.

WHISPERING

Tuesday, July 20, 2004 1:24 PM

So your saying its ok if Iraq soldiers torture US soldiers and civilians?

CONNORFLYNN

Tuesday, July 20, 2004 1:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by whispering:
So your saying its ok if Iraq soldiers torture US soldiers and civilians?

Eh?! What are you talking about? We aren't the ones running around blowing ourselves up in the name of Allah. These pricks aren't going to tell us any information regarding their cells etc..by being nice to them. For the most part the majority of the people being "Tortured" are wanton criminals who don't deserve anything more then a bullet in the back of the head. They're lucky all we are doing is throwing some panties over their heads or "Pretending" we are going to electrocute them.

People keep forgetting that these animals are the enemy. They aren't good, kind, peace loving namby pamby tree-huggers. We can't reason with them. Being nice doesn't do anything but embolden them.

As a reminder:
Terrorists don't torture civilians..they behead them. They can't seem to get their hands on any soldiers or are too afraid to try. So much for the Geneva Conventions or Moral fibre.

KNIBBLET

Tuesday, July 20, 2004 2:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Connorflynn:
Too many people spout off bullshit about the Geneva conventions without a F***ing clue as to what they are talking about.

What "Constitutional Protections" do our enemies have outside of America? Or were you claiming that your own personal liberties are hindered horrifically by "the Patriot Act"? The only people crying are the ones who have something to hide and their bleeding heart supporters.

Personally, proclaiming yourself a non-Zionist Jew, is pretty laughable. The terrorists don't make a distinction between the 2.

Thank you for explaining my shortcomings to me, ConnorFlynn. I will now do all I can to forget everything I learned about the Geneva Conventions and the Code of Military Conduct that I learned during my 10 years in the Air Force. I'll do all I can to put aside the logic behind protecting the fighting forces of all sides.

I'll try to forget that from day 1, we were taught was acceptable and unacceptable.

Of course, to do the above, I must try to forget that my constitutional right of Habeus Corpus is now ... not so much. I, or anyone deemed an enemy combatant, can be stripped of all rights and identity, held without charge, held indefinitely, held without access to a lawyer or the Red Cross.

Now those 'enemy combatants' are nothing but a convenient dodge around the Geneva Conventions. Bush's lawyers are using the same dodge that Hitler's tried in WWII. -- Before you scream about my comparing Bush to Hitler, look at your history and how the nazis proclaimed airborne commandos to be 'terrorists' and exempt for GC protections -- It didn't work for them and it shouldn't work for Bush.

I don't remember asking your opinion upon being a non-Zionist Jew. I have the perfect American religious background -- Catholic, Lutheran and Jew. Three sets of grandparents telling me three different things. I learned that all religion is a crock of *(*##^ designed to keep the mudders in line.

Holding no respect for Israel's treatment of Palestinians is my option. I firmly believe that if fundamentalist Christians weren't convinced that the second coming of Christ is somehow connected with Israel and Jerusalem, we wouldn't be shoveling money and support into what is going to turn this planet into a glowing nuclear (or is that nukular?) ember.

"Just keep walkin, preacher man."

KNIBBLET

Tuesday, July 20, 2004 2:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by whispering:
So your saying its ok if Iraq soldiers torture US soldiers and civilians?

Yes, he is - although he'll say he isn't. As he's justifying it for one side, he's justifying it for all sides.
He'll probably call you horrible names and treat you like an imbecile in his rebuttal. Remember this simple truth:

What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Mr Both Ways is pouring lots of pain and suffering into the roasting pan.

"Just keep walkin, preacher man."

WHISPERING

Tuesday, July 20, 2004 2:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Connorflynn:
Eh?! What are you talking about? We aren't the ones running around blowing ourselves up in the name of Allah. These pricks aren't going to tell us any information regarding their cells etc..by being nice to them. For the most part the majority of the people being "Tortured" are wanton criminals who don't deserve anything more then a bullet in the back of the head. They're lucky all we are doing is throwing some panties over their heads or "Pretending" we are going to electrocute them.

You cant be serious. These are human beings were talking about. If you want to know what happens when you use torture as a weapon in war, just read what happened in Rwanda, or the current situation in Sudan.

CONNORFLYNN

Tuesday, July 20, 2004 3:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Knibblet:
Thank you for explaining my shortcomings to me, ConnorFlynn. I will now do all I can to forget everything I learned about the Geneva Conventions and the Code of Military Conduct that I learned during my 10 years in the Air Force. I'll do all I can to put aside the logic behind protecting the fighting forces of all sides.

I'll try to forget that from day 1, we were taught was acceptable and unacceptable.

Of course, to do the above, I must try to forget that my constitutional right of Habeus Corpus is now ... not so much. I, or anyone deemed an enemy combatant, can be stripped of all rights and identity, held without charge, held indefinitely, held without access to a lawyer or the Red Cross.

Now those 'enemy combatants' are nothing but a convenient dodge around the Geneva Conventions. Bush's lawyers are using the same dodge that Hitler's tried in WWII. -- Before you scream about my comparing Bush to Hitler, look at your history and how the nazis proclaimed airborne commandos to be 'terrorists' and exempt for GC protections -- It didn't work for them and it shouldn't work for Bush.

I don't remember asking your opinion upon being a non-Zionist Jew. I have the perfect American religious background -- Catholic, Lutheran and Jew. Three sets of grandparents telling me three different things. I learned that all religion is a crock of *(*##^ designed to keep the mudders in line.

Holding no respect for Israel's treatment of Palestinians is my option. I firmly believe that if fundamentalist Christians weren't convinced that the second coming of Christ is somehow connected with Israel and Jerusalem, we wouldn't be shoveling money and support into what is going to turn this planet into a glowing nuclear (or is that nukular?) ember.

"Just keep walkin, preacher man."

Man, you just bounce around without any direction and continue to avoid direct questions.

You spoke of genocide. Now you liken genocide to Israeli disregard of Palestinian rights and their mistreatment.

You speak of knowing what the Geneva Conventions are, yet avoid just a couple simple direct questions regarding them.

I don't believe you have a clue as to what the Geneva Conventions are. If you did, you wouldn't be declaring that we are breaking them. We aren't holding these animals as Enemy Combatants just for the hell of it, as if they don't have anything to do with what is going on. These aren't innocent people who are having their rights stripped. They are dangerous men in one fashion or another with designs on bringing down our country or other free civilized countries. They don't follow conventional war tactics in any form. We can't fight them like we would a conventional war. Surely in your "10 years in the Airforce" you learned those precepts.

Enemy combatant,Illegal combatant (also unlawful combatant) is a term that has been introduced in some countries to refer to a person who carries arms or engages in warlike acts (known as an enemy combatant) in alleged violation of the laws of war. The Geneva Conventions consist of treaties formulated in Geneva, Switzerland that set the standards for international law for humanitarian concerns. The conventions were the results of efforts by Henri Dunant, who was motivated by the horrors of war he witnessed at the Battle of Solferino.
Accusations of violation of the Geneva Conventions on the part of signatory nations are brought before the International Court of Justice at the Hague. The countries do not necessarily consider such persons as lawful combatants. A combatant (also referred to as an enemy combatant) is a soldier or guerrilla member who is waging war.

Under the Geneva Conventions, persons waging war must have the following four characteristics to be protected by the laws of war:

In uniform: Wear distinctive clothing making them recognizable as soldiers from a distance.

Nope..the terrorist shitheels don't do that, unless a Khaffiyah counts.

Openly bearing arms: Carry

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME