lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: The Road to Guantanamo
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 05-11-2006, 12:44 PM   #41
Sigundr
Forumite
 
Sigundr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 577
Current Game: JKA
it IS the Anglo-American Dual World Power. America is like the rowdy child and Britain is like the father, keeping the U.S. in check. don't give me that
s#!t, i know what i'm talking about.


"They are minor criminals! Marginal outlaws! You are inept!" ~ Darth Vader
Sigundr is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-11-2006, 02:28 PM   #42
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight:
Oh but you so conveniently missed my point. Here it goes again, you listening?
Actually I'm reading.

And no, I didn't miss anything you posted. It's just that your nod towards the ACLU's involvement in the gun control debate struck me as irrelevant to the discussion. I was replying to your attempt to cast aspersions on the ACLU's character by reminding everyone of the emotive fact that they represented NAMBLA, an almost universally despised organisation. And I reminded you, that if you don't believe in free speech and legal representation for insane, dangerous perverts... you don't believe in free speech and legal representation for yourself or for your Grandma. It's everyone, or no-one. Remember that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight:
The ACLU is willing to go to the extremes with NAMBLA though they don't even support the principle of the 2nd Amendment.
Once again, irrelevant. What's your point here? Because you perceive the ACLU to be pro-gun control, that makes them hypocritical when they leap to the defence of free speech? That doesn't make any sense. Freedom to bear arms isn't remotely comparable to freedom of speech. And FYI, they don't "disagree with the 2nd amendment", they just disagree with your frankly dubious interpretation of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight:
Again that wasn't my point. I was just illustrating that more criticism is leveled on the US government's policies than the Chinese.
Of course it was your point. You referred specifically to the folks in this thread, when you typed: "Why do you care so much about them? Why is it America that you center on? I think your energy can be best spent elsewhere...with real despotic regimes. Of course it's cute when China persecutes people right?" Whenever anyone starts criticising US foreign policy, it's telling that people of your ilk pop up and scream: "QUICK, LOOK AT CHINA, NOT US!"

The Chinese regime's atrocities have been campaigned against by human rights activists for decades. But which country will you see criticised in a thread about Guantanamo? Why, the US of course. If you want criticism of China and a lack of anti-US sentiment, you'll have to start a thread entitled "Maoist evils and anti-western rhetoric of the despotic Chinese Government... And reasons why America is so gosh-darned great."

Then you'll be assured of the response you're looking for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight:
People are more concerned with a Democracy's legitimate fight against terrorism than a dictatorships persecution of free speech.
Its legitimacy is the subject of the debate in this thread. Instead of just jumping in and saying "IT'S LEGITIMATE", try using logic and giving some deeper reasons as to WHY you think treating the men of Guantanamo as prisoners of war without even according them the same rights as real POWs... is "legitimate", in any way, shape, or form. Come now, give us some deeper reasons. Moral reasons. Legal reasons. Anything except Fox News soundbites.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight:
No that's my oppinion, people are biased against the one and only super power.

I said it, that's what I believe. You have your oppinion and I have mine.
Thank you, I did realise that it was your opinion, but here's the thing: opinions should be based on logic, otherwise they are merely insane and random opinions, without worth or relevance. You have given no evidence to support your claim that the only reason anyone EVER speaks out against US foreign policy, is because they are in some way jealous.

-

Quote:
Originally Posted by rccar328:
There also seems to be a discrepancy in thinking regarding the definition of 'inhumane.' Personally, I don't see sensory depravation or sleep depravation as inhumane. I believe we have to do something to extract information from these terrorists, and frankly, asking them nicely isn't going to work. Neither is putting them on trial. Just look at the Moussaoui trial - he turned those proceedings into a circus.

Personally, I think you have too much faith in the court system. I believe that if we do give terrorists 'their day in court', it should be before a military tribunal...too many of our judges have shown themselves to be willing to make rulings based more on their own partisan political beliefs than on the law itself.
Once again, who decided that these men imprisoned in Guantanamo were terrorists? They certainly haven't been legally convicted of any crime in a civil sense, and they're not being treated as POWs ought to be treated under international conventions. So what gives you the right to sit there and pass judgement on them as your military have also summarily done?

Who decides who is and who is not a terrorist? If these shadowy figures decided that I was a terrorist, would that make me a terrorist? Do these people have such a monopoly on the dispensing of absolute truth? Of course not. Nobody does. That's why we have laws, juries and due process.

As a system of law it's not perfect, but it's a damn sight fairer than your preferred method of drumheads and summary condemnation.


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-11-2006, 04:08 PM   #43
Good Sir Knight
Junior Member
 
Good Sir Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: US
Posts: 285
Oooh yes lots of responses, thanks guys. I'm at work right now and this is going to take some time, when I get off I shall respond in kind.

This will be good.
Good Sir Knight is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-11-2006, 06:38 PM   #44
rccar328
Forumite
 
rccar328's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Right where I should be.
Posts: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
Once again, who decided that these men imprisoned in Guantanamo were terrorists? They certainly haven't been legally convicted of any crime in a civil sense, and they're not being treated as POWs ought to be treated under international conventions. So what gives you the right to sit there and pass judgement on them as your military have also summarily done?

Who decides who is and who is not a terrorist? If these shadowy figures decided that I was a terrorist, would that make me a terrorist? Do these people have such a monopoly on the dispensing of absolute truth? Of course not. Nobody does. That's why we have laws, juries and due process.

As a system of law it's not perfect, but it's a damn sight fairer than your preferred method of drumheads and summary condemnation.
Well, first of all, I believe their official classification is "enemy combatant." They are enemies who were fighting our soldiers, but because they weren't fighting in the uniform of a particular enemy nation, they don't classify as POWs. Therefore, they are not afforded the same rights as POWs. That's not me "passing judgment," that's just how it works.

Second, if you went to Afghanistan or Iraq and started shooting at our troops, what would happen to you would depend on whether or not you're a citizen of the United States (I'm not sure where you're from). If you're a US citizen, then you are entitled to certain rights under the US Constitution, among them due process of the law and a trial by a jury of your peers. If you're not from the US, then the US Constitution doesn't apply to you, and you would fall under a different set of rules. By your statement above, you seem to be assuming that the US military is going around rounding up anyone they feel like rounding up...and that seeming assessment is entirely innacurate. These are enemy combatants who were fighting against the United States military. I refer to them as terrorists because many of them use terror tactics to try and drive US public opinion against the war, and many are, in fact, members of terrorist organizations. Maybe under a strict definition they wouldn't classify as "terrorists", but who cares? That's just semantics. Either way, they were captured while trying to kill US soldiers.

Finally, using the US court system to try foreign combatants for attacking our troops makes no sense whatsoever. These prisoners fall under a completely different set of laws. You may not like it, but that's how it works. Not liking it doesn't make it illegal. You wanna make it illegal, start passing the petition around to get it on the ballot. I'm sure you'll find somebody to sign it.


I'd also like to address something you said earlier that caused me to chuckle:
Quote:
Most pundits agree that it's all completely counter to international law, AND US LAW TOO. Illegal.
Here's something about pundits: they can pretty much say whatever the heck they want, and that doesn't mean that it's true. Just because 9 out of 10 pundits agree that something is illegal, that doesn't make it illegal. Only the law can do that. Show me the law that is being violated, and I'll agree that it's illegal.


Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
~John F. Kennedy

True Conservatism

rccar328 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-11-2006, 08:38 PM   #45
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
Most pundits agree that it's all completely counter to international law, AND US LAW TOO. Illegal.
Great Moments In Punditry:


Quote:
Originally Posted by rccar328
Only the law can do that. Show me the law that is being violated, and I'll agree that it's illegal.
While disgusting, that's true. As long as we classify them as "enemy combatants", then the laws concerning the human rights they should be entitled to have not been broken.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-12-2006, 04:59 AM   #46
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
No, rape doesn't make you good just because you didn't commit murder. Osama isn't peachy because he "only" killed 3,000 people...because those acts are already wrong (...)
Which torture isn't. I see.
And just for the record, I'm not talking about sleep deprivation or forced stripping. I'm talking about serious torture. Just so you won't pretend to "misunderstand" me.
Edit: Whoops, just realized you already have:
Quote:
There also seems to be a discrepancy in thinking regarding the definition of 'inhumane.' Personally, I don't see sensory depravation or sleep depravation as inhumane.
Darn it, too late.

Quote:
Also, there is a reason for subjecting these prisoners to sensory & sleep depravation - to get information from them that could save lives (unlike your strawman, in which rape is for self gratifica tion, and Osama did what he did out of hatred).
Can you prove to me that the people at Guantanamo were torturing for information? It seems odd that all the people tortured had information on upcoming attacks on the USA. It also seems odd that in every case of torture, the USA was in a state of 24-style time pressure that made it impossible to employ normal, humane interrogation methods?

Quote:
Why do you care so much about them? Why is it America that you center on? I think your energy can be best spent elsewhere...with real despotic regimes.
"There are worse people than us, so we can do whatever we want".
Please.

Quote:
Again that wasn't my point. I was just illustrating that more criticism is leveled on the US government's policies than the Chinese.
Even if that's so, I certainly critizise the Chinese regime. And it doesn't make the USA more right, so it's irrelevant to this discussion.

Quote:
This is assuming that they have rights under the US Constitution, which they do not. They (the vast majority of them) are enemy combatatants from foreign nations, not US citizens. Any US citizens held in GTMO (if any) are entitled to due process under the law...for the rest of them, an entirely different set of rules applies.
We're discussing ethics, not laws. "It's legal, so it's OK" is another fallacy on the same level as the "others are worse than us, so we rule!"-reasoning you presented above.

Let's make a hypothetical situation here. Do you think it's wrong to torture servicemen who are protected under the Geneva Conventions? OK, let's say the Geneva Conventions were thrown out the window all-together? Would it be OK to torture infantrymen in uniform and others previously protected then?

Quote:
Personally, I think you have too much faith in the court system. I believe that if we do give terrorists 'their day in court', it should be before a military tribunal...too many of our judges have shown themselves to be willing to make rulings based more on their own partisan political beliefs than on the law itself.
Yup. There are diabolical judges, lawyers, attorneys, and juries out there who aren't anyplace near justice. The way certain lawyers treat rape victims in court's enough to make me want to kill (not that I will, of course).

However, if we are to follow that reasoning, we'd have to torture all suspects of malicious deeds. We'd have to torture alleged rapists (nearly all rapists rape again once they've done it once), murder suspects, and so on and so forth. "Can't risk having them go free due to a sick judge/lawyer/jury, so let's beat him up and rape him until he confesses". In fact, by your reasoing we'd have far more of a right to torture alleged homicide perpetrators and rapists as they rape/kill far more people in the US each year than the terrorists.

Quote:
Well, first of all, I believe their official classification is "enemy combatant." They are enemies who were fighting our soldiers, but because they weren't fighting in the uniform of a particular enemy nation, they don't classify as POWs. Therefore, they are not afforded the same rights as POWs. That's not me "passing judgment," that's just how it works.
"It happens, so it's OK" is a fallacious argument.

If someone does something, he does something. For example, if I flame you, I can't say "I'm not insulting you, that's just how it works when you act dumbly" (not saying you are, thou'). Hope you know what I mean.


Last edited by Dagobahn Eagle; 05-12-2006 at 06:09 AM.
Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-12-2006, 07:51 AM   #47
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by rccar328
Well, first of all, I believe their official classification is "enemy combatant." They are enemies who were fighting our soldiers, but because they weren't fighting in the uniform of a particular enemy nation, they don't classify as POWs. Therefore, they are not afforded the same rights as POWs. That's not me "passing judgment," that's just how it works.
Thats not an official classification.. its a made up name used to justify taking them outside of the established scope of the law. Who decides what counts as a uniform? Lots of people fighting in poorly funded, poorly equiped armies fight in their civilian clothing.. that doens't make them any less an army.
AFAIK non of the pepole held in guantanamo was found sneaking around behind our lines pretending to be one of us.
Those that were actually combatants were fighting "out in the open" as part of a milita. The fact they didn't get provided with a nice green berret doesn't affect anything.

Then again... half of those there weren't (or haven't in any way been proven to be) combatants at all. A number of them seem to be being held simply because they were in the country.



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-12-2006, 08:19 AM   #48
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
Then again... half of those there weren't (or haven't in any way been proven to be) combatants at all. A number of them seem to be being held simply because they were in the country.
From 9/11 on, a lot of people were held or deported illegally without trial, lawyer, or contact with the outside world.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-13-2006, 01:38 PM   #49
Good Sir Knight
Junior Member
 
Good Sir Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: US
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
Once again, irrelevant. What's your point here? Because you perceive the ACLU to be pro-gun control, that makes them hypocritical when they leap to the defence of free speech?

Well first of all I didn't bring up the ACLU, I heard people espousing them as righteous and I thought I'd bring up their duplicity.

The simple fact is, you talk to any gun rights advocate and you'll get the real skinny on the ACLU.

Trouble is, people don't care. Personally, for me the 2nd amendment is just as important as the 1st.

The ACLU doesn't see it that way and I think thats wrong. This goes to you too Toms, no right in the constitution shall be infringed regardless of how scary some people might think it.

After all, guns don't kill people....people kill people.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
You referred specifically to the folks in this thread....giving some deeper reasons as to WHY you think treating the men of Guantanamo as prisoners of war without even according them the same rights as real POWs
Well I did, if you were looking. I stated that they do not meet the legal requirements to be treated as POW's. In my opinion our government has the right to do what ever it wants with them yet we still treat them humanely.

As rccar stated, our military should be thanked for allowing them to practice their religion. Oh and we also serve ethnicaly friendly foods too... how cute.

Now 'humane' is different to different people. I accept that my government might have to make them uncomfortable to extract information. This is a war.





Lastly people are giving me some flak about pointing out a bias against the United States.

There are so many other humanitarian causes that people can get behind yet they want to tackle this one. This goes out to Amnesty Intl. who seems to treat Gitmo as some type of gulag WHEN IT CLEARLY ISN'T!

Toms had a good point that Britain was trying to 'fix' the good guys, though I don't think we need more fixing.

I don't think we need a more sensitive military. I think we need a more sensitive foreign policy and I'll take this opportunity to reveal my criticsm of America's foreign policy....*gasp*

I hate what we did with Venezuela...now they hate us.






Oh and thanks for the replys guys, sorry if I didn't get to all of you but I've been busy these days and I hate it!


I'll leave you with a quote from Jakob Kellenberger, President of the Red Cross.


"There is a certain subcategory of individuals who have forfeited their protections under the Geneva Conventions and there is not an obligation to allow access to those individuals."

though he also says


"No matter how legitimate the grounds for detention, there exists no right to conceal a person's whereabouts or to deny that he or she is being detained,"



I disagree with Jakob. If you're not a POW you don't have any rights and that sounds pretty cold but for me, with my family background and the people I know in harms way...it's pretty hard to feel sorry for them.





http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060512/...ross_detainees
Good Sir Knight is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-13-2006, 01:46 PM   #50
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight
Now 'humane' is different to different people. I accept that my government might have to make them uncomfortable to extract information. This is a war.
As I said, that doesn't work. If you put a prisoner in a situation where they have a motive to lie, such as to get out of an "uncomfortable" position, the interrogator is going to hear what he wants to. Not what is the truth. It's much easier for your cause to just make something up and you get the same result at the end. The interrogator thinks he has "extracted information," and yet he has nothing but bull.

This is what McCain has been trying to say. And he's not exactly "liberal."

Plus, going by your thinking, our government should be able to make crime suspects "uncomfortable" to extract information out of them. There is a "War on Drugs" still going on as well isn't there? Hey, it's a war!
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-13-2006, 02:22 PM   #51
Good Sir Knight
Junior Member
 
Good Sir Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: US
Posts: 285
The war on drugs is silly. Would it surprise if you I told you that I'm all for legalizing most drugs?

Furthermore, if torcher didn't work over the last few centuries... why would anyone do it? Just out of malice and spite? Partly.... though it does work for interrogation and militaries around the world specialize in it.

Who are we to say what works and what doesn't in an interrogation scenario? There's guys out there that live that type of thing.
Good Sir Knight is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-13-2006, 05:54 PM   #52
StaffSaberist
DECEPTION IS FINISHED! :D
 
StaffSaberist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The United States of America... and damn proud of it!
Posts: 1,092
If sleep depravation was wrong, all schools in the nation should be banned from giving final exams and long-term projects. Puh-leaze!



Deception, the best SP level-set in the world, is done! Get it here!
"Query: What is it you wish, fat one?" - HK-47 at his best
I have begun modding TSL. Check it out here. and My Fanfic
StaffSaberist is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-13-2006, 06:06 PM   #53
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight
The war on drugs is silly.
Of course it is, but it was just an example. The so-called "War on Terror" is silly too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight
Would it surprise if you I told you that I'm all for legalizing most drugs?
Hey, why not? Legalize ALL drugs if you ask me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight
Furthermore, if torcher didn't work over the last few centuries... why would anyone do it? Just out of malice and spite? Partly.... though it does work for interrogation and militaries around the world specialize in it.
So if it may work, why not do it in all prison situations? Why with just terrorists?
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-15-2006, 06:55 AM   #54
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
The ACLU doesn't see it that way and I think thats wrong. This goes to you too Toms, no right in the constitution shall be infringed regardless of how scary some people might think it.
Except the one about cruel and inhuman punishment. I see.

Quote:
Furthermore, if torcher didn't work over the last few centuries... why would anyone do it? Just out of malice and spite?
For example, yes.

Quote:
If sleep depravation was wrong, all schools in the nation should be banned from giving final exams and long-term projects. Puh-leaze!
You're joking, right? If a student fails to organize his time so that he loses sleep over a project, that's hardly the school's fault. Not even in the same league as the horrors of Guantanamo, where inmates are forced to lose sleep.

And we're still not only discussing sleep deprivation, we're discussing the more severe cases of torture at Guantanamo, too. If you seriously think the worst thing happening at Guantanamo is sleep deprivation, you're more ignorant on the matter than you quite frankly have a moral privilege (sp.?) to be. There are beatings, sexual abuse, attack dogs, and so on and so forth. Focusing on the sleep deprivation is like saying that "all ibn Ladin did on 9/11 was hijack four airliners, how's that so bad?". Maybe that in itself isn't so atrocious, but he also happened to kill 3000+ people by using the planes as missiles.

Quote:
So if it may work, why not do it in all prison situations? Why with just terrorists?
Exactly. I already covered that in last post, but it appears my opponents "missed" it.

As for POWs not being entitled to their rights: Just that you can do something, doesn't mean you're right in doing it or ethically justified in doing it. There was a time when Africans were not entitled to vote, too, you know.

Quote:
This is a war.
Not a good enough argument. Just that you're in a state of war against a hyped-up enemy doesn't make it right to use extreme means.


Last edited by Dagobahn Eagle; 05-15-2006 at 08:50 AM.
Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-15-2006, 09:56 AM   #55
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight
Personally, for me the 2nd amendment is just as important as the 1st.
This is going totally OT but why?

Quote:
I disagree with Jakob. If you're not a POW you don't have any rights and that sounds pretty cold but for me, with my family background and the people I know in harms way...it's pretty hard to feel sorry for them.
Just because you don't have any rights doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T have any rights.

And even if you shouldn't have any rights doesn't mean we should torture you.

And the NOT A POW category is a bit too broad for my liking.. as it includes me, you, aid workers, tourists, journalists, peace campaigners, and practically anyone else you might want to name.

If I had decided to do the same as a number of other peace campaigners and go to afganistan to try and campaign for peace, or show my support for the afgan people and opposition for the war.. and then had been picked up by US troops... (and had a big beard or looked muslim) then i could very well have found myself in guantanamo as one of these spurious "illegal combatants" and i'd have no decent way to prove my innocence.. no day in court.. and if i was eventually released after 3 years of living in a small cage and having sleep deprivation (which can be fatal BTW) torure then i might argue with you about what was right, legal and humane.



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)

Last edited by toms; 05-16-2006 at 12:22 PM.
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-15-2006, 01:42 PM   #56
rccar328
Forumite
 
rccar328's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Right where I should be.
Posts: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by toms
And the NOT A POW category is a bit too broad for my liking.. as it includes me, you, aid workers, tourists, journalists, peace campaigners, and practically anyone else you might want to name.

If I had decided to do the same as a number of other peace campaigners and go to afganistan to try and campaign for peace, or show my support for the afgan people and opposition for the war.. and then had been picked up by US troops... (and had a big beard or looked muslim) then i could very well have found myself in guantanamo as one of these spurious "illegal combatants" and i'd have no decent way to prove my innocence.. no day in court.. and if i was eventually released after 3 years of living in a small cage and having sleep deprivation (which can be fatal BTW) torure then i might argue with you about what was right, legal and humane.
That depends on how you would be 'campaigning' for peace. If you tried to oppose or obstruct members of the military, you could very well end up in GTMO...because you were aiding enemies of the United States. However, while I fall into the "not a POW" category, I have no fear of being hauled off to GTMO because there is no reason for the government to believe that I'm a terrorist or am conspiring to take action against the US or its war effort.

I happen to know some people who are showing support for the Afghan people, not by opposing US troops, but by helping the people of Afghanistan as missionary aid workers. In a nation such as the US with a right to freedom of speech, there are many, many ways to express opposition to the war without ending up in GTMO or any other prison. There are also many, many ways to show support for the people in Afghanistan and Iraq without being dragged off to GTMO. There are proper and improper ways to voice your opinion...and if you express your opposition to the war in an improper way, such as getting in the way of the US military, then you have to deal with the consequences of your decision.


Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
~John F. Kennedy

True Conservatism

rccar328 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-15-2006, 07:43 PM   #57
Good Sir Knight
Junior Member
 
Good Sir Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: US
Posts: 285
Pentagon Releases Gitmo Detainees' Names

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/World/Guantanamo_Detainees


Are you happy now guys?

j/k
Good Sir Knight is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-16-2006, 07:43 AM   #58
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
Personally, for me the 2nd amendment is just as important as the 1st.
I beg to differ.

Quote:
Just because you don't have any rights doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T have any rights.

And even if you shouldn't have any rights doesn't mean we should torture you.
How about this: Since this is the fourth (give or take) time this has been brought up in this thread, it'd be nice if you torture-apologists actually addressed it.

Quote:
I have no fear of being hauled off to GTMO because there is no reason for the government to believe that I'm a terrorist or am conspiring to take action against the US or its war effort.
But they have "reasons" to believe that others are threats when they really aren't.

The Road to Guantanamo is about a goup of people who were brought to the prison camp and tortured simply for being caught in a mosque known to be used for terrorist-recruitment. And that's just one example.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-16-2006, 12:28 PM   #59
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dagobahn Eagle
The Road to Guantanamo is about a goup of people who were brought to the prison camp and tortured simply for being caught in a mosque known to be used for terrorist-recruitment. And that's just one example.
But we all know that all muslims are terrorists so i'm not that worried about that.. they don't really count.



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-16-2006, 07:22 PM   #60
StaffSaberist
DECEPTION IS FINISHED! :D
 
StaffSaberist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The United States of America... and damn proud of it!
Posts: 1,092
Of course, we are also holding everyone we can hostage, and treating everyone like that movie... right, we're just a bunch of Christian Fascists.



Deception, the best SP level-set in the world, is done! Get it here!
"Query: What is it you wish, fat one?" - HK-47 at his best
I have begun modding TSL. Check it out here. and My Fanfic
StaffSaberist is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-16-2006, 08:20 PM   #61
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by rccar328:
Well, first of all, I believe their official classification is "enemy combatant." They are enemies who were fighting our soldiers, but because they weren't fighting in the uniform of a particular enemy nation, they don't classify as POWs. Therefore, they are not afforded the same rights as POWs. That's not me "passing judgment," that's just how it works.
Of course it's you passing judgement, don't be silly. And what is this nonsense "that's just how it works"? What is that supposed to mean? The only reason that this is "how it works", is because your government has just recently decided that it is how it's going to work. And the merit of their decision is the subject of this debate. Do you really believe the US government's actions in this matter were inevitable? Do you really believe that those actions are beyond morality?

As to the more salient aspects of your argument: The shiny new terminology the US government has used when "classifying" these prisoners is an irrelevance. They're prisoners held by your government, and therefore fall under the protection of civil law, or military convention in time of conflict. That means they're either prisoners of the state, or prisoners of war. Your government is affording them the rights of NEITHER. That's illegal. It's illegal because it's counter to both US law and international law. It's counter to international treaties. It's tantamount to terrorism, to be frank. It's similarly illegal, it's similarly amoral, and it's similarly designed to "set an example" to others who would resist a US invasion force.

It's the sort of thing that the bad guys would do.

As to your argument regarding people not being "in uniform", as Toms has pointed out, it's a rather pathetic argument. Shiny mass-produced uniforms with polished buttons are not universally issued to combatants from poorer nations, even when those combatants are NOT engaging in covert manoeuvres. That doesn't mean they're not soldiers fighting in a cause, or for their nation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rccar328:
If you're a US citizen, then you are entitled to certain rights under the US Constitution, among them due process of the law and a trial by a jury of your peers. If you're not from the US, then the US Constitution doesn't apply to you, and you would fall under a different set of rules.
Okay, so I come to America and steal your slice of apple pie... That means I can be imprisoned without trial, does it? Please get off your constitutional horse. There is law and moral obligation above and beyond that which is guaranteed by your US citizenship. And, these are men that have allegedly commited "crimes" OUTSIDE U.S. JURISDICTION. Or is the whole planet merely the fifty-first state?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rccar328:
By your statement above, you seem to be assuming that the US military is going around rounding up anyone they feel like rounding up...and that seeming assessment is entirely innacurate. These are enemy combatants who were fighting against the United States military.
You assert that they were enemy combatants. Then they should be treated like prisoners of war.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rccar328:
I refer to them as terrorists because many of them use terror tactics to try and drive US public opinion against the war, and many are, in fact, members of terrorist organizations. Maybe under a strict definition they wouldn't classify as "terrorists", but who cares? That's just semantics. Either way, they were captured while trying to kill US soldiers.
Most of them weren't even captured by US forces, by all accounts. And you have no evidence to support your assertion that these men were "captured while trying to kill US soldiers." The US has used tactics that could be termed "terror tactics" in the recent engagements. The killing of unarmed prisoners, detention without trial of POWs... Does that make the whole US a "bunch of terrorists"? Of course not. Now start applying the same standards to others, as you apply to yourself.

Now you're admitting to yourself and to us that the detainees couldn't be defined as terrorists in terms of the strict definition of the word "terrorist". Yet you still think it's okay to call them terrorists? So basically, anyone you don't like is a terrorist. That's the inevitable extrapolation of calling people who DON'T qualify as terrorists, terrorists.

You can scream "semantics" all you like, but I call a terrorist a terrorist. Someone who isn't, ain't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rccar328:
Here's something about pundits: they can pretty much say whatever the heck they want, and that doesn't mean that it's true. Just because 9 out of 10 pundits agree that something is illegal, that doesn't make it illegal.
Oh, of course. You'd rather believe your government's illogical propaganda than the considered opinion of independent legal experts who are interviewed and quoted in the media. My bad.

As to "the law", Go and google some articles from experts on US law, international law, even the US supreme court, as I recall. It's clearly counter to law. You just choose not to see it. CHOOSE, mind you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rccar328:
That depends on how you would be 'campaigning' for peace. If you tried to oppose or obstruct members of the military, you could very well end up in GTMO...because you were aiding enemies of the United States.
It's scary that you think this is an acceptable state of affairs. So a Swedish anti-war campaigner that lies down in front of a tank could- in your view- be spirited off to Guantanamo and held indefinitely without trial for "aiding enemies of the US"? Heh. Terrifying.

-

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight:
Well first of all I didn't bring up the ACLU, I heard people espousing them as righteous and I thought I'd bring up their duplicity.
Once again, there is no "duplicity". You're confused. One COULD agree with the right to free speech AND disagree with the right to bear arms at the same time. There would be no hypocrisy there. Or do you regard the US constitution as "holy" in some way, and indivisible? Do you believe that you "either believe in the whole constitution, or none at all"?

Besides, it's a moot point. The ACLU doesn't "disagree with the 2nd amendment". They just interpret it differently to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight:
After all, guns don't kill people....people kill people.
Please stop regurgitating NRA slogans and come up with something original. Here, I'll start the ball rolling by coining a new slogan for you: "Guns don't shoot people, people shoot guns!" Equally meaningless, pseudish and nonsensical as yours, I'm sure you'll agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight:
I stated that they do not meet the legal requirements to be treated as POW's.
And you have no evidence for this claim. Neither does your government. They claim to be "at war" with terrorism, yet they deny the basic wartime rights of people they accuse of being terrorists.

Once again, they're either prisoners of the US state, in which case they should go through the civil court system, or they're captured enemy combatants, in which case they should be afforded the basic rights of any POW under standard military conventions. Pick one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight:
I'll leave you with a quote from Jakob Kellenberger, President of the Red Cross. "There is a certain subcategory of individuals who have forfeited their protections under the Geneva Conventions and there is not an obligation to allow access to those individuals."
That wasn't a quote from Kellenberger! You're fabricating! That was a quote from the US State Department's Sean McCormack! He's a US government spokesman! By god sir, that's a faux pas. Get your references right. Here's proof: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2006/66202.htm

Kellenberger has been firmly anti-Guantanamo across the board, as far as I'm aware.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight:
The war on drugs is silly. Would it surprise if you I told you that I'm all for legalizing most drugs?
It is completely unsurprising to me that as a republican, you are against the legalisation of ALL recreational drugs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight:
Furthermore, if torcher didn't work over the last few centuries... why would anyone do it?
And if burying a potato at a crossroads during a full moon doesn't work to get rid of warts... Why would generations of superstitious fools do it?

These are two questions with one common answer. That answer is one word: ignorance.

Torture does "work" if you're asking a very specific question, like "what is the combination for that safe over there". But as soon as the questions become more general, torture's effectiveness breaks down. The torturer will receive a lot of information punctuated with incoherent screaming babble, and some or all of that information may be completely fabricated by his victim in order to escape any more pain. Regardless of its "effectiveness" however, it's amoral in the extreme.

The dentist scene from Marathon Man illustrates this point beautifully, albeit fictionally.


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-16-2006, 08:58 PM   #62
StaffSaberist
DECEPTION IS FINISHED! :D
 
StaffSaberist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The United States of America... and damn proud of it!
Posts: 1,092
Quote:
Of course it's you passing judgement, don't be silly. And what is this nonsense "that's just how it works"? What is that supposed to mean? The only reason that this is "how it works", is because your government has just recently decided that it is how it's going to work. And the merit of their decision is the subject of this debate. Do you really believe the US government's actions in this matter were inevitable? Do you really believe that those actions are beyond morality?
Look at what you're making a big deal of. Sleep depravation, maybe bathroom denial. That's not very pretty, but it's far from inhumane. I want to get one point through the skulls of you lot: We are *NOT* putting these people on the rack! We are *NOT* cutting them with sharp knives! We are *NOT* shocking them! Until you can find indisputable proof the contrary (and you won't), I refuse to believe what we're putting them through is torture.

Quote:
Okay, so I come to America and steal your slice of apple pie... That means I can be imprisoned without trial, does it? Please get off your constitutional horse. There is law and moral obligation above and beyond that which is guaranteed by your US citizenship. And, these are men that have allegedly commited "crimes" OUTSIDE U.S. JURISDICTION. Or is the whole planet merely the fifty-first state?
Sir, if we get off our "Constitutional horses", then we miss the entire point of this. Isn't this whole thing about, basically, what rights POW's have? Such things are granted by the Constitution and it's amendments over here, last time I checked. POW's are exempt from this. So are illegal aliens. Sorry if that sounds ugly, but it's true. Denying this is stupid at best.

Oh, and yes, if you illegally immigrated and commited petty theft, you'd likely just get deported for illegal immigration. If you legally immigrated, well, I'm too lazy ATM to look up the penalty for petty theft, but it's small -- not that you care. After all, punishing you is inhumane.

Quote:
You assert that they were enemy combatants. Then they should be treated like prisoners of war.
They are. Enemy combatents are interrogated, and sometimes it takes more that the politically correct "ask really really nicely" to get information.

Quote:
Most of them weren't even captured by US forces, by all accounts. And you have no evidence to support your assertion that these men were "captured while trying to kill US soldiers."
Can you prove they weren't? Can you prove that they weren't masterminding attacks, or planning them, instead of the narrow "attacking at the time" view? I thought not.

Quote:
The killing of unarmed prisoners
The B.S. meter is at a 95/100 level, at this point...

Quote:
Oh, of course. You'd rather believe your government's illogical propaganda than the considered opinion of independent legal experts who are interviewed and quoted in the media. My bad.
You are misguided, sir.

1) Propaganda is not illegal. Show me a law that says, in summary, "thou shalt not propagandize" and I'll recant my view on this point.

2) Of course you believe "your" media is flawless, unbiased, always right. But you must realize that correctness in political matters is based soley on opinion and has no weight in any debate worth its salt.

I am having internet difficulties, and cannot finish the reply. However, I will summarize by saying that your incorrect views are understandable, if only by ignorance.



Deception, the best SP level-set in the world, is done! Get it here!
"Query: What is it you wish, fat one?" - HK-47 at his best
I have begun modding TSL. Check it out here. and My Fanfic
StaffSaberist is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-17-2006, 12:13 AM   #63
ET Warrior
PhD in horribleness
 
ET Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Evil League of Evil
Posts: 9,405
LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by StaffSaberist
1) Propaganda is not illegal.
...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
your government's illogical propaganda
Last I heard, the word Illogical was not a synonym for the word illegal.



ET Warrior is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-18-2006, 04:16 AM   #64
ewok mercenary
 
ewok mercenary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northampton, UK
Posts: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by StaffSaberist
Can you prove they weren't? Can you prove that they weren't masterminding attacks, or planning them, instead of the narrow "attacking at the time" view? I thought not.
Can you give me irrefutable proof that you aren't planning a terrorist attack against a US target at this very moment? No? Right, off to Guantanamo with you then.


ewok mercenary is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-18-2006, 07:44 AM   #65
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by StaffSaberist
Of course, we are also holding everyone we can hostage, and treating everyone like that movie... right, we're just a bunch of Christian Fascists.
Edited and quoted for truth



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-18-2006, 11:17 AM   #66
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by StaffSaberist
Look at what you're making a big deal of. Sleep depravation, maybe bathroom denial. That's not very pretty, but it's far from inhumane. I want to get one point through the skulls of you lot: We are *NOT* putting these people on the rack! We are *NOT* cutting them with sharp knives! We are *NOT* shocking them! Until you can find indisputable proof the contrary (and you won't), I refuse to believe what we're putting them through is torture.
Sleep deprivation causes the neurones in the brain to overheat and suffer damage. Minor sleep deprivation can be recovered from relatively quickly, however major sleep deprivation can cause dementia or developent of permanent personality changes within the first few weeks. Sleep deprivation of several months is fatal.



I don't know what the law (international or otherwise) in the USA says about illegal immigrants.. but i can't imagine that if police lined a group up and shot them.. or if a mob decided to firebomb their houses and kill them then it wouldn't be considered murder.

And POWs DO have rights under international law.. that is the point AL was making.. they have rights under one law or another.

Quote:
Oh, and yes, if you illegally immigrated and commited petty theft, you'd likely just get deported for illegal immigration. If you legally immigrated, well, I'm too lazy ATM to look up the penalty for petty theft, but it's small -- not that you care. After all, punishing you is inhumane.
Illegal immigrants who commit crimes are often still jailed as the crimes fall under the US juristiction.. then deported once they serve their sentence.

But supposed crimes commited in a country outside the US don't fall under US juristiction..

Quote:
They are. Enemy combatents are interrogated, and sometimes it takes more that the politically correct "ask really really nicely" to get information.
Which is illegal under international law because enemy combatants DO fall under the geneva convention... which is also the only thing protecting your soldiers when they are captured.
Though if you are arguing that because the bad guys don't always adhere
to the geneva convention then you should pull out of it too then that is a seperate issue.

Quote:
Can you prove they weren't? Can you prove that they weren't masterminding attacks, or planning them, instead of the narrow "attacking at the time" view? I thought not.
: *staffsaberist loses 100 respect points*

Quote:
Killing of Unarmed prisoners -> The B.S. meter is at a 95/100 level, at this point...
ok, here goes:
Quote:
Four soldiers accused of smothering an Iraqi general during an interrogation last fall have been charged with murder, bringing the total number of U.S. troops charged with murder in Iraq to at least 10.
Quote:
The Army gave no details on what the soldiers are alleged to have done. But The Denver Post, citing unidentified military documents, reported earlier this year that Chief Warrant Officers Lewis E. Welshofer Jr. and Jefferson L. Williams slid a sleeping bag over Mowhoush's head and rolled him from his back to his stomach while asking questions. Also charged in the death were Sgt. 1st Class William J. Sommer and Spc. Jerry L. Loper.
Quote:
Four soldiers from Fort Riley, Kan., were charged last month with murder in the deaths of four Iraqi civilians in two incidents. A soldier from 1st Armored Division in Germany has been charged with murder in the fatal shooting of a badly wounded driver for militant cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

Another soldier was sentenced to 25 years in prison last month after pleading guilty to murder in the death of an Iraqi National Guard member. His unit was not identified.

Two other Fort Carson soldiers face courts-martial on manslaughter charges in connection with an unrelated death in Iraq — that of the drowning of an Iraqi civilian in the Tigris River.

Seven members of a separate military police unit face charges in the Abu Ghraib cases, including Pfc. Lynndie England — the female soldier seen in several of the infamous photographs —l who will be court-martialed in January.

In addition to the suspicious deaths in Iraq, the U.S. military is investigating several detainee deaths in Afghanistan.

An official said in September that the military was probing whether American soldiers abused an Afghan detainee so badly that he died last year at a special forces base in southeastern Afghanistan.

The military was already looking into at least three deaths in U.S. custody in Afghanistan, dating back to December 2003. It has yet to release the results of any of the investigations.

But a CIA contractor has been charged in the United States with using a flashlight to beat a prisoner who later died in the eastern town of Asadabad in June 2003.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in645601.shtml
(and thats just the ones they know about/have charged. )
I think this one is different to the ones mentioned above:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english...ent_409155.htm
more on the drowning one: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Jul2.html
and i'm sure a couple of british soldiers have also been charged with murders.

bs meter ok now?

of course, they are also abducting german citizens from abroad and taking them to afganistan to interogate:
http://indiamonitor.com/news/readNews.jsp?ni=11651



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-18-2006, 12:06 PM   #67
ET Warrior
PhD in horribleness
 
ET Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Evil League of Evil
Posts: 9,405
LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by StaffSaberist
I refuse to believe what we're putting them through is torture.
Excellent, so now as long as we don't BELIEVE that it's torture, it isn't? "Yes, I am aware you may think we're torturing you by putting these elctrodes on your testicles, but we don't think so, and we want a confession"

Quote:
Originally Posted by StaffSaberist
Isn't this whole thing about, basically, what rights POW's have? Such things are granted by the Constitution and it's amendments over here, last time I checked. POW's are exempt from this. So are illegal aliens.
Never heard of the Geneva conventions? Or are we exempt from those because we're the US of frickin' A?

Quote:
Originally Posted by StaffSaberist
Can you prove they weren't? Can you prove that they weren't masterminding attacks, or planning them, instead of the narrow "attacking at the time" view? I thought not.
Not a big fan of the "Innocent until proven guilty" idea then? Or is that a right only US citizens deserve? The rest of the world is guilty of SOMETHING at this very moment, unless we can absolutely prove otherwise? I'll be sure to inform my friends in other countries that they are currently guilty of crimes against the United States, and should act accordingly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StaffSaberist
your incorrect views are understandable
I wish I could say the same about yours.



ET Warrior is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-19-2006, 05:46 AM   #68
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
Can you prove they weren't? Can you prove that they weren't masterminding attacks, or planning them, instead of the narrow "attacking at the time" view? I thought not.
There was a case in Norway a long time ago regarding a kid who was put in isolation for 24 hours for carrying a spray can in his backpack. This was during an anti-tagging campaign.

Can you prove he wasn't going to go at some wall with that can? Nope. Should he be put in that cell he was put in? No.

Why not? Because democracy is about proving people guilty, not innocent.

If I carry a knife around in my backpack, maybe I'm going to kill someone - arrest and torture me !

And you still haven't answered my question: Is it OK to apply the same techniques ("guilty until proven innocent", "torture", and "no trial") to alleged rapists, murderers, robbers, and other non-terrorists suspected of having done something seriously wrong?

Quote:
Never heard of the Geneva conventions? Or are we exempt from those because we're the US of frickin' A?
It appears so.

It annoys me no end how the apologists of the Guantanamo torture defend themselves by saying what they're doing is "legal", for then to blatantly disregard the laws and Geneva Conventions in other cases (the bombing of a Pakistani village full of innocents for the sake of killing one single person, for example).

Quote:
Spider Al: Killing of unarmed prisoners
StaffSaberist: BS level is at 95% now
Not at all. Remember the wounded POWs shot in that mosque some time ago?

And you can say that "it wasn't sanctioned or ordered by officers, so what's the point"?

1. US troops frequently does some very nasty things on this level with orders from above.
2. It is highly suspicious and disgraceful that you hear of atrocities from US troops all the time, and nearly never from those of, say Britain, France, Germany, or the UK. It's the same way person after person in the Republican Party is arrested or outed for some kind of corruption. Maybe Bush isn't behind it, but isn't it slightly alarming when a certain party - any party - has a high level of corruption? Especially when said party has a well-deserved reputation for disregarding civil rights, laws, and the Geneva Conventions?


Last edited by Dagobahn Eagle; 05-19-2006 at 05:59 AM.
Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-19-2006, 06:28 AM   #69
Mike Windu
Je suis l'agent du chaos.
 
Mike Windu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Stars Hollow
Posts: 3,562
I love how no torture-apologists addressed Spider Al's "moral law higher than the Constitution" bit...

Quote:
Excellent, so now as long as we don't BELIEVE that it's torture, it isn't? "Yes, I am aware you may think we're torturing you by putting these elctrodes on your testicles, but we don't think so, and we want a confession"
Wasn't there somethingn about women interrogators smearing "menstrual blood" onto the prisoners to make them confess... something that the Islamic faith finds most offensive?

Let me predict a response to this beforehand: "It's not inhumane."

Right. Let me "defecate" and "piss" on you, then. (Sorry, I'm a dude, no menstrual blood available)

Quote:
Never heard of the Geneva conventions? Or are we exempt from those because we're the US of frickin' A?
Amen.

Quote:
Isn't this whole thing about, basically, what rights POW's have? Such things are granted by the Constitution and it's amendments over here, last time I checked. POW's are exempt from this. So are illegal aliens.
I love this logic.

OMG YOU'RE NOT AN AMERICAN! FREE FOR TORTURING! Schweet.

Quote:
Sleep deprivation causes the neurones in the brain to overheat and suffer damage. Minor sleep deprivation can be recovered from relatively quickly, however major sleep deprivation can cause dementia or developent of permanent personality changes within the first few weeks. Sleep deprivation of several months is fatal.
Quoted for truth. A man recently stayed awake for 11 days. On the fourth day he began experiencing delirium and hallucinations.

The body cannot function without sleep, specifically REM sleep. If you don't dream, you go blah, to put it simply. Grouchiness in the first few days, leads to anger, outbreaks, yes permanent personality changes as toms stated, and eventually your brain goes bonk.

By the by...In litigiation regarding the availability of fundamental rights to those imprisoned at the base, the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that the detainees "have been imprisoned in territory over which the United States exercises exclusive jurisdiction and control."[1] Therefore, the detainees have the fundamental right to due process of law under the Fifth Amendment.

In 2004, the Supreme Court rejected this argument in the case Rasul v. Bush brought by the Center for Constitutional Rights, with the majority decision and ruled that prisoners in Guantánamo have access to American courts to challenge the legality of their detention, citing the fact that the U.S. has exclusive control over Guantánamo Bay.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:C...al_cartoon.jpg




That's the last time I buy anything just because it's furry!


Last edited by Mike Windu; 05-19-2006 at 06:55 AM.
Mike Windu is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-19-2006, 08:13 AM   #70
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
The US constitution explicitly states that it isn't a comprehensive list of all rights, and that there are other rights that exist in addition to those mentioned in the constitution.

Usually foreign citizens are subject to the laws of a country they are in. A US citizen who killed someone int he UK would still be charged with murder.. and if a US citizen came to the UK (legally or illegally) and was killed his killer would still be charged with murder.

I agree completely with the courts that Guantanamo is US territory and therefore subject to US laws. To argue otherwise is plainly using weasly words and technicalities to deny the blatant truth.
US army bases and consulates are considered US territory... its onlybecaue the US base in guantanamo is an illegal occupation that they can claim it isn't. That is using one illegality to justify another.

It strikes me that if Russia or China (or saddam!) was abducting foriegn nationals, imprisoning people in inhumane conditions for questioning, holding people for 5 years without chargin them, keeping people in cages and so on then everyone would be up in arms... but because its the US and you are the "good guys" you find spurious ways to justify it.
I bet the Russians, Chinese and Bath party considered themselves the good guys just doing what had to be done to maintain stability and security as well...



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-19-2006, 08:47 AM   #71
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
I bet the Russians, Chinese and Bath party considered themselves the good guys just doing what had to be done to maintain stability and security as well...
...and let's not forget that according to Soviet/Iraqi/Chinese law, torture was/is "humane" and legal.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-19-2006, 09:06 PM   #72
Good Sir Knight
Junior Member
 
Good Sir Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: US
Posts: 285
...Prisoners with makeshift weapons battled guards trying to save a detainee pretending to commit suicide at the U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba....

Once again... I find it really hard to care and I think the UN's time would better be spent unlocking the thousands of political prisoners around the world, not a bunch of people captured on a battlefield without their papers or uniform.

I hope they're real uncomfortable right now as the guards try to find out who planned it.... real uncomfortable. We really should let them have their hunger strikes but instead we treat enemy combatants better than our homeless.


http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/guantanamo_detainees
Good Sir Knight is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-20-2006, 12:45 AM   #73
StaffSaberist
DECEPTION IS FINISHED! :D
 
StaffSaberist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The United States of America... and damn proud of it!
Posts: 1,092
Oh yeah. We try to save somebody from killing themselves (how could they know he was pretending?) and we get attacked. I suppose that makes us the SS...



Deception, the best SP level-set in the world, is done! Get it here!
"Query: What is it you wish, fat one?" - HK-47 at his best
I have begun modding TSL. Check it out here. and My Fanfic
StaffSaberist is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-20-2006, 07:57 AM   #74
Mike Windu
Je suis l'agent du chaos.
 
Mike Windu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Stars Hollow
Posts: 3,562
What the ?

Irrelevant straw man and red herring fallacies?

(reference)
A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:


Topic A is under discussion.
Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
Topic A is abandoned.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
~nizkor.org




That's the last time I buy anything just because it's furry!

Mike Windu is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-22-2006, 09:11 AM   #75
toms
v0.9
 
toms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk swamp
Posts: 3,490
I tell you what, if i had been stuck in there for four years I'd certainly be trying to hit the guards as hard as i could. Good for them.

I'm sure prisoners in chisese gulags occasionally revolt over their treatment.. that doesn't justify their treatment in any way.

Sorry, what was your point again???



Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
toms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-22-2006, 01:24 PM   #76
Good Sir Knight
Junior Member
 
Good Sir Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: US
Posts: 285
Oh no it's not irrelevant, I'm just trying to show how rediculous and pre madonna it is to shout and cry over Gitmo when there are so many people languishing in prison over simply something they said.

Regardless, those folks were caught on a battlefield...not on their computer blogging or holding protests. Many of them swear to continue their jihad and everyone still has oh so much sympathy for them. People still have sympathy for them when they attempt an attack right in the prison:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toms
I tell you what, if i had been stuck in there for four years I'd certainly be trying to hit the guards as hard as i could. Good for them.
People wonder why conservatives in this country often tell some liberals to move to Canada.....I know Toms is in the UK but there are alot of people that share similar feelings here.

Toms, which side are you on buddy? Is your opposition based on the principles of human rights or do you see the prisoners as minutemen defending their theocratic ideology?


Of course the Americans are the new evil empire...oh we'll come an getcha...watch out!
Good Sir Knight is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-22-2006, 02:24 PM   #77
Hallucination
Baron von Sexy
 
Hallucination's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,875
Current Game: HKO closed beta
I'm a little late to be joining in on this debate, but I have a question to those who are for the torturing (or whatever you want to call it): If you crossed the border to Canada and offended the freedom of our country, and we locked you up and tortured you by sleep deprivation and being yelled at and interrogated for hours, would you be glad that we aren't beating you and getting electrodes attached to your crotch, because you're a 'threat to our safety'?


Let's kill ourselves.
Hallucination is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-22-2006, 03:15 PM   #78
Good Sir Knight
Junior Member
 
Good Sir Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: US
Posts: 285
Actually yes I would be. Furthermore the inmates at Gitmo didn't "offend the freedom of our country." Most of them shot at our troops or participated in terrorist actions against coalition forces, including Canadians.

Now...lets just say that I blew a Canadian APC up with an IED and then tried to scurry off and got captured. Well then yes, I would be thankful that you were torchering me with Brian Adams and sleep deprivation rather than electrodes attached to my crotch.

Since I would be an enemy of Canada, I would do anything I could while in prison to hurt Canadians and that includes feigning my suicide to trap a few guards.
Good Sir Knight is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-22-2006, 03:31 PM   #79
Hallucination
Baron von Sexy
 
Hallucination's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,875
Current Game: HKO closed beta
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight
Actually yes I would be. Furthermore the inmates at Gitmo didn't "offend the freedom of our country." Most of them shot at our troops or participated in terrorist actions against coalition forces, including Canadians.
Shooting at troops who are 'defending the free world' seems somewhat offensive to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight
Now...lets just say that I blew a Canadian APC up with an IED and then tried to scurry off and got captured. Well then yes, I would be thankful that you were torchering me with Brian Adams and sleep deprivation rather than electrodes attached to my crotch.
But you would still deserve the right of not getting tortured, as a human. Surely you don't want to get yelled at and suffer from lack of sleep until you suffer a personality change or death?

What? Brian Adams? That really offends our Prime Minister, because we aren't that kind. We'd torture you with Celine Dion and force you to eat poutine, as well. Then put you in a room full of beavers with rabese.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Sir Knight
Since I would be an enemy of Canada, I would do anything I could while in prison to hurt Canadians and that includes feigning my suicide to trap a few guards.
I can't argue with that, except for one thing: This question was directed to you, not what you would do if you were a terrorist.


Let's kill ourselves.

Last edited by Hallucination; 05-30-2006 at 09:44 PM. Reason: weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
Hallucination is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 05-22-2006, 04:01 PM   #80
Mike Windu
Je suis l'agent du chaos.
 
Mike Windu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Stars Hollow
Posts: 3,562
Quote:
Toms, which side are you on buddy? Is your opposition based on the principles of human rights or do you see the prisoners as minutemen defending their theocratic ideology?
In-freaking-credible logic there...

OMG THEY DID SOMETHING BAD SO NOW WE ARE JUSTIFIED IN TORTURE!!!11

...

Come on.




That's the last time I buy anything just because it's furry!

Mike Windu is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > The Road to Guantanamo

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:45 AM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.