jza10304 Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 BJ are you being influenced by those radical left-wing professors in the university system???? Why do you hate America? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 16 2005, 02:52 PM'][i][b]Rick I am concerned about both.....EVen more about the beheading than the Gitmo, however I am not a member of Al Qaeda and I am a member of the U.S. and so I am in a better position to point out the wrong here... as for Al Qaeda not signing it that argument is absurd because they are not a nation and not even eligible to sign it. Also the Geneva convention is not there to ensure some sort of scale where you weigh your behavior against someone elses.... yes as a Nation who agreed to the Geneva convention the US is supposed to follow the terms regardless if we are fighting Satan himself, thus why even Charles Manson in Jail gets his 3 meals a day also. It isn't about picking out legal parts that they don't like.... Hell Al Qaeda doesn't follow the Convention sure they behead people...... but it is not a situation where you cna then say well our enemy isn't complying so we wont..... it is an absolute, that is why it makes it clear that "all persons" .....[/b][/i] [right][post="103840"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] if its so absurd, then why did you use the argument that they didn't sign it, but we did? we are only SUPPOSED to follow it, if they meet certain requirements... we are CHOOSING to ignore that part of it, for the benefit of our own guys... but it sounds to me, that we can give these guys 3 square meals a day, every religious right they have in their own country, and we are still the bad guys... we can't win... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote]BJ are you being influenced by those radical left-wing professors in the university system???? Why do you hate America?[/quote] [color="red"][i][b]I guess so Jza They are doing a terrible thing too: making me read and look at situations outside Nationalistic rhetoric .... those bastard pinko commies [/b][/i][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote]if its so absurd, then why did you use the argument that they didn't sign it, but we did? we are only SUPPOSED to follow it, if they meet certain requirements... we are CHOOSING to ignore that part of it, for the benefit of our own guys... but it sounds to me, that we can give these guys 3 square meals a day, every religious right they have in their own country, and we are still the bad guys... we can't win...[/quote] [i]Rick I am totally lost at what you are trying to say...... We are not supposed to follow it only if they do... it applies to everyone [/i] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 16 2005, 02:59 PM'][i]Rick I am totally lost at what you are trying to say...... We are not supposed to follow it only if they do... it applies to everyone [/i] [right][post="103846"][/post][/right][/quote] a contract or law is only good, if all requirements are met... these guys don't follow any of the requirements of an "army"... your point (a well recieved point) is they didn't sign it and we did, so they are not bound by it, and we are... i am saying that is bullshit b/c if only one side signs something, it is not bound by law... there are rules for a reason... the part of "who is covered under the convention" is there for a reason and can't be ignored... we CHOOSE to follow it, b/c we are a compassionate country, and its the right thing to do... but the part saying they have to be an organized army, is in there for a reason... so what you are saying, is we are bound to the convention, reguardless of who we are fighting, and whether or not they meet the requirements? that is one fucked up law then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [url="http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050616-121815-1827r.htm"]click here[/url] [quote][b]Gitmo called death camp[/b] By Rowan Scarborough THE WASHINGTON TIMES June 16, 2005 [b]The Senate's No. 2 Democrat has compared the U.S. military's treatment of a suspected al Qaeda terrorist at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay with the regimes of Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Pol Pot, three of history's most heinous dictators, whose regimes killed millions. [/b] In a speech on the Senate floor late Tuesday, Minority Whip Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, castigated the American military's actions by reading an e-mail from an FBI agent. [b] The agent complained to higher-ups that one al Qaeda suspect was chained to the floor, kept in an extremely cold air-conditioned cell and forced to hear loud rap music. The Justice Department is investigating. [/b] [b]About 9 million persons, including 6 million Jews, died in Hitler's death camps, 2.7 million persons died in Stalin's gulags and 1.7 million Cambodians died in Pol Pot's scourge of his country. [/b] [b]No prisoners have died at Guantanamo[/b][b], and the Pentagon has acknowledged five instances of abuse or irreverent handling of the Koran, the holy book of Muslims. [/b] After reading the e-mail, Mr. Durbin said, "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners." [b] Mr. Durbin also likened the treatment of terror suspects at the prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's decision to authorize the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.[/b] "It took us almost 40 years for us to acknowledge that we were wrong, to admit that these people should never have been imprisoned. It was a shameful period in American history," Mr. Durbin said. "I believe the torture techniques that have been used at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo and other places fall into that same category." The White House yesterday reacted angrily to Mr. Durbin's remarks. "It's reprehensible, as Defense Secretary [Donald H.] Rumsfeld said, to suggest that the Guantanamo Bay facility is anything like a gulag or a mad regime or Pol Pot," White House spokesman Trent Duffy told The Washington Times. "It is reprehensible, has no place in the current debate, and as we've seen over several years, the detainees in Guantanamo Bay are being treated humanely," he said. "What this is is a disservice to any man and woman serving in the U.S. military who's putting their life on the line each day, [b]because they're trying to paint all military with a broad brush because of the actions of perhaps a few bad apples, who are being punished severely." [/b] At the Pentagon, Rumsfeld spokesman Larry Di Rita said of Mr. Durbin's remarks: "I didn't hear what he said, but any such comparison would obviously be outrageous and not remotely connected with reality." Mr. Durbin did not back off his characterization in a statement to The Times last night. "No one, including the White House, can deny the statement I read on the Senate floor was made by an FBI agent describing the torture of a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay," he said. "That torture was reprehensible and totally inconsistent with the values we hold dear in America. "This administration should apologize to the American people for abandoning the Geneva Conventions and authorizing torture techniques that put our troops at risk and make Americans less secure." U.S. Southern Command, which oversees the Guantanamo prison, is conducting an investigation of complaints from al Qaeda detainees. The Justice Department is investigating complaints from FBI agents who visited the prison. [b]Mr. Rumsfeld in December 2002 approved a list of tougher interrogation tactics for Guantanamo that officials thought fell short of torture. [/b] [b]Some were used on Mohammed al-Qahtani, a would-be hijacker in the September 11 attacks who provided important information on Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda network, the Pentagon says. [/b] Mr. Rumsfeld rescinded much of his interrogation order a month later after some government lawyers expressed doubts about the tactics' effectiveness. President Bush decided not to grant terror suspects prisoner-of-war status under the Geneva Conventions. [b]Instead, the administration designated them illegal enemy combatants, but said they would be treated in accordance with Geneva rules.[/b] [b]Each prisoner has received a review from a prison board, while federal courts sort out their rights under U.S. law. [/b] In using such stark language Tuesday night, Mr. Durbin was repeating a theme that the political left has used in recent months: making "torture" the defining issue in how Mr. Bush is waging the war against Islamic terrorism. Mr. Durbin said, "I am confident, sadly confident, as I stand here, that decades from now, people will look back and say: 'What were they thinking? America, this great, kind leader of a nation, treated people who were detained and imprisoned, interrogated people in the crudest way?' " • Joseph Curl contributed to this report.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote]Instead, the administration designated them illegal enemy combatants, but said they would be treated in accordance with Geneva rules. Each prisoner has received a review from a prison board, while federal courts sort out their rights under U.S. law.[/quote] [b]If Bush thinks he is following the wording then we may be a bigger retard than I thought [/b] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jza10304 Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 16 2005, 03:24 PM'][b]If Bush thinks he is following the wording then we may be a bigger retard than I thought [/b] [right][post="103863"][/post][/right][/quote] don't underestimate yourself....I'm sure he is as much of a retard as you thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whodey319 Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 what would you guys say if every one of the prisoners at Gitmo was forced to pick cotton in a field for 8 hours a day with military personal looking at them and not receive one cent in return? Basically same level as slavery. Everyone would be up in arms about how this is mistreating them and the Bush administration is dumb and evil. According to the Geneva Convention this is allowed: Article 49 The Detaining Power may utilize the labour of prisoners of war who are physically fit, taking into account their age, sex, rank and physical aptitude, and with a view particularly to maintaining them in a good state of physical and mental health. Non-commissioned officers who are prisoners of war shall only be required to do supervisory work. Those not so required may ask for other suitable work which shall, so far as possible, be found for them. If officers or persons of equivalent status ask for suitable work, it shall be found for them, so far as possible, but they may in no circumstances be compelled to work. Article 50 Besides work connected with camp administration, installation or maintenance, prisoners of war may be compelled to do only such work as is included in the following classes: a. Agriculture; B. Industries connected with the production or the extraction of raw materials, and manufacturing industries, with the exception of metallurgical, machinery and chemical industries; public works and building operations which have no military character or purpose; C. Transport and handling of stores which are not military in character or purpose; D. Commercial business, and arts and crafts; E. Domestic service; F. Public utility services having no military character or purpose. Should the above provisions be infringed, prisoners of war shall be allowed to exercise their right of complaint, in conformity with Article 78 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='whodey319' date='Jun 16 2005, 04:06 PM']what would you guys say if every one of the prisoners at Gitmo was forced to pick cotton in a field for 8 hours a day with military personal looking at them and not receive one cent in return? Basically same level as slavery. Everyone would be up in arms about how this is mistreating them and the Bush administration is dumb and evil. According to the Geneva Convention this is allowed: Article 49 The Detaining Power may utilize the labour of prisoners of war who are physically fit, taking into account their age, sex, rank and physical aptitude, and with a view particularly to maintaining them in a good state of physical and mental health. Non-commissioned officers who are prisoners of war shall only be required to do supervisory work. Those not so required may ask for other suitable work which shall, so far as possible, be found for them. If officers or persons of equivalent status ask for suitable work, it shall be found for them, so far as possible, but they may in no circumstances be compelled to work. Article 50 Besides work connected with camp administration, installation or maintenance, prisoners of war may be compelled to do only such work as is included in the following classes: a. Agriculture; B. Industries connected with the production or the extraction of raw materials, and manufacturing industries, with the exception of metallurgical, machinery and chemical industries; public works and building operations which have no military character or purpose; C. Transport and handling of stores which are not military in character or purpose; D. Commercial business, and arts and crafts; E. Domestic service; F. Public utility services having no military character or purpose. Should the above provisions be infringed, prisoners of war shall be allowed to exercise their right of complaint, in conformity with Article 78 [right][post="103881"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] i'd rather have a palenstinian flag wrapped around me, be forced to listen to loud country music, and have to deal w/ differing temperatures, than have to be a slave for the enemy... but i guess we figured out how to take care of these scums... nice find whodey... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whodey319 Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='bengalrick' date='Jun 16 2005, 05:09 PM']i'd rather have a palenstinian flag, be forced to listen to loud country music, and have to deal w/ differing temperatures, than have to be a slave for the enemy... but i guess we figured out how to take care of these scums... nice find whodey... [right][post="103882"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] make em all work out in a field in cuba in the middle of summer for 8 hours a day until they start to talk. If we are going to stick to the exact wording of the geneva convention then i think this is a great idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jza10304 Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='whodey319' date='Jun 16 2005, 04:15 PM']make em all work out in a field in cuba in the middle of summer for 8 hours a day until they start to talk. If we are going to stick to the exact wording of the geneva convention then i think this is a great idea. [right][post="103883"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Then they would be treated like Cuban citizens. The point is that they are being held indefinitely and not even releasing who is in there or what they are in there for. It's like if you are visiting someone's house who is a drug dealer and the house gets raided. You get swept up too, even if you didn't know, but eventually you are released. How many of these combatants are people who someone insinuated that they were combatants or how many were actually aiding and abetting the enemy? No one knows because there is no information available. Many of these people could be "wrong place, wrong time" people or they could be actual combatants. I don't see how you can find detaining someone indefinitely w/o any charges or releasing their name to their country, family is humane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Henrys Dealer Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 Like these 4 Brits who got released. Wrong place, wrong time. [url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4163911.stm"]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4163911.stm[/url] [quote]At-a-glance: Guantanamo Bay Britons Four Britons formerly held in US custody at Guantanamo Bay have been questioned by UK anti-terrorism officers and freed without charge in Britain. Moazzam Begg, from Birmingham, and Martin Mubanga, Richard Belmar and Feroz Abbasi, from London, were returned to Britain on 25 January after being detained in Cuba for nearly three years. US authorities have not brought charges against any of the Britons. Five other British nationals being held in Guantanamo were released in March 2004. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Feroz Abbasi, 24, from south London Born in Uganda, he moved to Britain with his family when he was eight. Feroz Abbasi converted to Islam after a mugging The family based itself in Croydon, where Mr Abbasi attended Edenham High School. After A-levels at the nearby John Ruskin college, he took a two-year computing course at Nescot College in Epsom. According to reports he dropped out of this course to go travelling in Europe. His mother said he converted to Islam after a mugging. He became more fervent, and his family last saw him in 2000, as he was leaving for Afghanistan. He was reportedly detained by US forces in December 2001, in Kunduz in the north of the country. In November 2002 the British Court of Appeal said it found his detention in Cuba "legally objectionable", but stopped short of forcing the government to intervene on his behalf. His mother Zumrati Juma has said she is worried for his mental welfare and has not heard from him since late 2003. Ms Juma, a nurse from Croydon, said he was just one of a number of idealistic young Muslims caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard Belmar, 25, from London Mr Belmar was held by Pakistani authorities before being moved to Cuba. Said by his family to have converted to Islam, he travelled to Pakistan before the attacks of 11 September 2001. It is believed he attended a Catholic school in north London, and converted to Islam in his teens, after his elder brother. His family say he was a troublesome teenager, but after becoming a Muslim was polite and respectful. Reportedly a former Royal Mail worker, he worshipped at Regent's Park mosque, close to his home in Maida Vale, London. Richard Belmar wrote: "I hope everyone will believe in me." The US authorities claim he was captured at an al-Qaeda safe house in Pakistan. His detention seems to have started in February 2002. His Catholic father Joseph Belmar told the Sunday Mirror he believed the authorities were trying to paint his son as a terrorist. "They have said he was in Afghanistan in 1998 studying chemicals at the terrorists' base but I know he was in London," Mr Belmar told the paper. The Sunday Mirror reported Richard Belmar wrote a letter from Guantanamo Bay saying: "I'm still alive. I have done nothing wrong against the US or Britain and I hope everyone will believe in me. "I love you all and hope you will forgive me." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Moazzam Begg, 36, from Birmingham The father-of-four from the Sparkbrook area was detained by the CIA in Pakistan in February 2002. He was moved to Cuba in February 2003. Moazzam Begg ran a book and video store Mr Begg's father, Azmat Begg, has run a high-profile campaign for his son's release and travelled to the US in a bid to free him. His family have been refused permission to visit, although they have been able to write. Azmat Begg says he has not been told why his son was being detained. Moazzam Begg was a law student and ran an Islamic book and video store in Birmingham. Mr Begg said he had urged his son to move to Kabul with his wife and children to fulfil an ambition to build a school and help improve water supplies. Following the American bombings, the family then fled the Afghan capital for Pakistan, where the arrest took place. In a letter sent from Guantanamo Bay, he said he had been tortured, threatened with death and kept in solitary confinement since early 2003. Interviews "were conducted in an environment of generated fear, resonant with terrifying screams of fellow detainees facing similar methods," he wrote. "In this atmosphere of severe antipathy toward detainees was the compounded use of racially and religiously prejudiced taunts." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Martin Mubanga, 32, from north London Mr Mubanga has joint Zambian and British nationality. His family moved to the UK in the 1970s. He is a former motorcycle courier and was raised as a Catholic before converting to Islam in his 20s. Martin Mubanga is a former motorcycle courier He went to Pakistan in October 2000 to attend an Islamic school and visit friends. According to the Daily Telegraph, after the fighting in Afghanistan in 2001 Mr Mubanga told his family he had lost his British passport, but as a dual British and Zambian citizen used his other passport to travel from Pakistan to the Zambian capital, Lusaka, to stay with his sister. Not long after his arrival there he told his parents he had heard news reports that someone with his name had been arrested in Afghanistan and he was concerned an Islamic extremist was using his missing British passport. He was held in Zambia, along with his sister, before the authorities there placed him in the custody of the Americans. His sister was released. According to the Guardian newspaper, Mr Mubanga alleges torture during his detention at Guantanamo Bay. In July 2004 he made two allegations of ill-treatment by the Americans during a visit from a Foreign Office official. He says an interrogator stood on his hair, he was exposed to extreme temperatures and he was forced to clean up his own urine after he wet himself while shackled.[/quote] I gotta admit, if I was held in those conditions for three years and then released with no charges. Mother of God, I would be raising Jonnie Cochrane from the dead to launch the mother of all law suits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='jza10304' date='Jun 16 2005, 04:47 PM']Then they would be treated like Cuban citizens. The point is that they are being held indefinitely and not even releasing who is in there or what they are in there for. It's like if you are visiting someone's house who is a drug dealer and the house gets raided. You get swept up too, even if you didn't know, but eventually you are released. How many of these combatants are people who someone insinuated that they were combatants or how many were actually aiding and abetting the enemy? No one knows because there is no information available. Many of these people could be "wrong place, wrong time" people or they could be actual combatants. I don't see how you can find detaining someone indefinitely w/o any charges or releasing their name to their country, family is humane. [right][post="103886"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] jza, i can follow and agree w/ this argument, but only to a point... we need to try these prisoners... no question about that imo... but we can't try these guys, if they need to pull our guys off the battlefield and testify for/against these guys... we can't hurt our national security to try these guys... i agree to a point though, and don't know exactly what we should do honestly... we need to be told who is there, what they are there for, and what we are going to do to/for them... but we need to keep our soldiers and our security in front of these guys... i am in between on this particular issue... my original point though (b/c the gitmo topic has been discussed else where) but that we have a united states senator that is calling gitmo (zero deaths so far) to nazi german prisons and russian gulags... that is not helpful for anyone imo, and this stupid ass senator should be punished... that comparison is absurd... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [color="purple"][i][b]Bengalrick I think there might be a disconnect between the Geneva convention because you are viewing it as a "contract" under legalistic Western terms where you have 2 agreeing parties.... However it is rather a universal "commitment" by the agreeing nations to uphold certain principles regardless if your enemy does not......[/b][/i][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [b]As for other points: - If they were tried and convicted then hell make them work 8 hours a day for the rest of their life.... I don't mind making them do labor or picking their own food (conditions for their survival).... However blaring music in their ears when they haven't been convicted of anything I have a problem with. - Also to the Senator .... the problem with analogies is there are many kinds... For instance I can someone was killed reminiscent of something else or I can call something something else..... for instance If I make my cat eat a cat you could call it cannibalism reminescent of Jeffrey Dahmer and not imply actual eating of humans..... Do I think this jagoff senators analogy is off .... yes. However I think if worded correctly it would be fair to say that we are "holding prisoners indefinetly just as Stalin did in the gulag" for instance[/b] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [url="http://www.chinaeastwind.com/trailerpark/images/union.mov"]http://www.chinaeastwind.com/trailerpark/images/union.mov[/url] [img]http://www.kaagaard.dk/images/bush3.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oldschooler Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 Here I think some of you people need a refresher course.... This is what these "tortured" prisoners have done or WANT to do... [img]http://www.guinnesspig.net/uploads/personal/september_11.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.breckrowell.com/wtc/victims/victims02.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.breckrowell.com/wtc/victims/victims03.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.breckrowell.com/wtc/victims/victims04.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.breckrowell.com/wtc/victims/victims21.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.breckrowell.com/wtc/victims/victims24.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.breckrowell.com/wtc/victims/victims22.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.breckrowell.com/wtc/victims/victims05.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [i][b]Old, as much as I feel sorrow for the people forced to jump from a building rather than be burned to death... the pictures are anecdotal because of the fact that the enemy also just shows pictures of Iraqi children who have had their limbs blown off and tells their recruits this is what those torturing bastards want to do to us.... and thus they cut the head off the captive journalist with the same amount of anger that I am sure you get when looking at the 9/11 photos. [/b][/i] [b][u]How they View our "Liberation" for Example [/u][/b] [img]http://www.welinske.com/child7.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.welinske.com/torture6.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.welinske.com/torture10.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.welinske.com/child1.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.welinske.com/child2.jpg[/img][img]http://www.welinske.com/child9.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.welinske.com/child5.jpg[/img][img]http://www.welinske.com/child8.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oldschooler Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 Geneva What ? [img]http://hnr.unwissenschaftlich.de/archives/nick-berg.jpg[/img] [img]http://la.indymedia.org/uploads/8dead.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.speaktofrank.com/home/images/news/dead_soldier.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.dexanderson.com/coffins1.jpg[/img] Check this site out... [url="http://www.flashclub.ch/AlJazeera_Video_Stills_Dead_American_Soldiers.htm"]http://www.flashclub.ch/AlJazeera_Video_St...an_Soldiers.htm[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oldschooler Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jun 16 2005, 05:36 PM'][i][b]Old, as much as I feel sorrow for the people forced to jump from a building rather than be burned to death... the pictures are anecdotal because of the fact that the enemy also just shows pictures of Iraqi children who have had their limbs blown off and tells their recruits this is what those torturing bastards want to do to us.... and thus they cut the head off the captive journalist with the same amount of anger that I am sure you get when looking at the 9/11 photos. [/b][/i] [b][u]How they View our "Liberation" for Example [/u][/b] [right][post="103921"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Ummm this was AFTER 9/11...and most of the prisoners at Gitmo are from Afghanistan....and the ones from Iraq that are there are guilty of killing MORE Iraqi civillians than ALL U.S. soldiers COMBINED... Feel sorry for people that would chop your`s and your family`s heads off BJ...if that helps you sleep better... What they are going through is not torture...what they would put any U.S. soldier or even YOU through would be though... [img]http://radiofreeusa.net/newsimages/distraughtsoldiers-med.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 My Goodness! Smackdowns from the fans of a bloodsucker mouthpiece for the usury crowd (the WSJ) and the frontal lobotomy crowd, the Moonies (the WashTimes)! One anecdotal point before my diatribe: My grandfather's cousin had a farm down here in Kentucky during WWII, on which German POWs worked. At the end of the war, many of them didn't want to go back. Must have been the horrible treatment. Oldschooler, the sage of Pointyhead Holler, that place where common sense equals bestiality, claims I hate the Bush admin. That's a strong term and I'm not sure I disagree with him. On one hand, I don't think I hate the individuals; on the other hand, I do think I hate what these folks are doing to this country. The list of policies these folks promote which are inimicable to the long-term interests of this country, and especially the interests of the regular folks who make up the bulk of this country, is pretty long. Leaving the economic rape of my generation, your generation, and the generation of your children to the side for a moment, I'll stick to the topic. Durbin's remarks, which the good man refuses to apologize for, are somehow really, really bad. As if, in this topsy-turvy world of politics as a spectator sport, using hyperbole were actually worse than the actual, real-world events which prompted those remarks. Oh wait, according to some of the chickenhawks, it is worse! This, of course, makes Durbin a disgrace to America, and retarded when it comes to history. Bengalrick, who is a decent fellow, and who I believe is honestly struggling to find reasonable answers, doesn't see that his hyperbole is as egregious as he thinks Durbin's is. Let's prognosticate how history might view aspects of this admin's policy. What judgements will be made in coming decades about what we are living through, right now? 1) Historians will turn up more primary documents which strongly suggest, if not outright prove, that the neocon crowd came into power with the goal of taking down Hussein. They'll conclude that 9-11 was the pretext for pushing a policy that was first put forth publicly in 1992. 2) Political historians will put these events into the category of examples of "When Realpolitick Goes Wild." They'll see our Middle East policy in the context of geopolitics of the Halford Mackinder sort, which gave us such wonderful events as WWI, WWII and the Cold War. They'll conclude that there was a faction of cold-warriors who, having defeated the Soviet Union, would proclaim the "end of history" and that the just reward was world domination via globalization, not the lip-service they offer to liberal democracy. And while historians will castigate the actors who tried to implement their fantasies-as-policies, they'll simply laugh at Francis Fukuyama. 3) Social historians will, once again, resurrect Abe Lincoln's quote as an example of these times: "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time." They'll conclude that mass hysteria in the immediate aftermath of 9-11 allowed some decidedly unhealthy policies to move forward, but that people finally began to calm themselves and to use their minds again. They may even point to the summer of 2005 as being the period in which sanity began to return to our nation. 4) Intelligence historians will explain that the policy of deliberately creating a gray area, where prisoners were neither POWs nor subject to a civilian code, was a creation of top-level strategists inside the administration, with support from like minded-think tanks outside the administration. These historians, being somewhat cynical as a natural result of their chosen speciality, will snidely remark, "Just how long did they think they'd get away with "extraordinary rendering", packing people off to be tortured by a "coalition of willing" abusers of human rights?" They'll say, "Just because some clever dopes in the Justice Department had the bright idea of creating a new category of prisoner, subject not to the rules of warfare--and therefore not POWs, nor to the rules of civilian jurisprudence--and therefore not entitled to legal representation or a statement of charges, doesn't make it right or just to debase even your enemies, especially when such status results in the worst possible kind of negative feedback, in which doing the "right" thing is doing the wrong thing to achieve the goal of a more harmonious and peaceful world." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oldschooler Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='Homer_Rice' date='Jun 16 2005, 05:45 PM'][b]Oldschooler, the sage of Pointyhead Holler, that place where common sense equals bestiality[/b], claims I hate the Bush admin. That's a strong term and I'm not sure I disagree with him. On one hand, I don't think I hate the individuals; on the other hand, I do think I hate what these folks are doing to this country. The list of policies these folks promote which are inimicable to the long-term interests of this country, and especially the interests of the regular folks who make up the bulk of this country, is pretty long. [right][post="103925"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Blah blah blah...how do you type with your head so far up you ass ? [img]http://www.hei.lv/labirints/bildes/head_up_ass.jpg[/img] Hell this "tortured" prisoner looks like some1 serving a DUI charge... [img]http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/040708/040708_gitmo_review_hmed_4a.hmedium.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote]Ummm this was AFTER 9/11...and most of the prisoners at Gitmo are from Afghanistan....and the ones from Iraq that are there are guilty of killing MORE Iraqi civillians than ALL U.S. soldiers COMBINED... Feel sorry for people that would chop your`s and your family`s heads off BJ...if that helps you sleep better... What they are going through is not torture...what they would put any U.S. soldier or even YOU through would be though...[/quote] [i][b]Old I am actually Glad you choose this Answer as your response..... Lets look at your response..... Yes most of the Gitmo Prisoners are from Afghanistan.... many of them are most likely Taliban or Al Qaeda... either way the U.S. funded Al Qaeda to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan and the U.S. put the Taliban government in place years before we then had to go and destroy it. As for the next part about the ones from Iraq being responsible for Killing more Iraqis... I assume you mean Saddam... well Guess what the U.S. backed him too and funded his war against Iran. Many of the same guns we have shot at the U.S. troops now came from the U.S. when we gave or sold them to Saddam or Bin Laden. Also We knew about Saddams gassing off the Kurds over 10 years before our liberation.... we even told the Kurds to rise up and then betrayed them and let Saddam kill more of them. [u]How is it any different to crash a plane into a building and kill 3,000 people in WTC, or drop a bunch of bombs from the sky on iraq and kill over 10,000 people like the US did in Air Raids ????[/u] Answer that to yourself and then you might begin to see the truth..... I sleep fine cause I know there is evil bastards on both sides regardless if they are wearing toilet paper on their head or a stupid tie on their neck.....[/b][/i] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlackJesus Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 [color="blue"][i][b]"You don't automatically become Righteous when you place a red and white flag on your uniform ...."[/b][/i][/color] [color="red"]A death is a death.... and believe me for every person that unfortunatley fell to their death on 9/11 there are thousands of corpses around the world who believe "some justifiably" that they are dead because of America. either bombing them directly, or American support for the dictator that kills and imprisons them [/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.