It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rumsfeld Defends Guantanamo.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Visiting US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has defended the treatment of detainees at the Guantanamo prison as "professional and humane" and said Washington was not considering closing down the facility.

"I know of no-one in the US government in the executive branch that is considering closing Guantanamo. It is unfortunately something that is necessary in the world we're living in," Mr Rumsfeld told reporters.
"It's something the folks in charge of it are doing in a very professional and humane way," he added.

US Democratic Senator Joseph Biden has proposed the closure of Guantanamo amid charges of improper behaviour by prison guards.

Asked about Norwegian media reports that US aircrafts ferrying detainees to other countries had made stopovers in Norway, Mr Rumsfeld said he had no such knowledge.

"Everything I know is that there isn't an ounce of connection between those aircraft and the department of defence to my knowledge," he said.

Source

Yes Mr Rumsfeld, i believe you. Just one of those things that are 'known unknowns' or perhaps an 'unknown unknown'.

Related thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Sanc'.
edit:link added

[edit on 8-6-2005 by sanctum]




posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Ofcourse he defends Guantanamo!

It was probably his Brilliant Idea in the First Place!

What a Genius!

"professional and humane"?

BwAHAHAHHHWAHHAHhahah!!!



And a Comediant too!

[edit on 8/6/05 by Souljah]



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Ofcourse he defends Guantanamo!

It was probably his Brilliant Idea in the First Place!

What a Genius!



Yes you are right, he is defending his baby after all, Rumsfeld wanted his own private concentration camp and he was granted his wish, occurs it back fire on him.

I wonder if has a collection of tapes depicting torturing.
For his private enjoyment.



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:14 AM
link   
GITMO IS professional and humane. What isn't, is what the
terrorists do to our people and to civilians. Chopping off the
heads of relief workers ... yeah, THAT's humane.
NOT.
Blowing up civilians going to find work in a police station.
Now that's humane.
Executing unarmed American
soldiers (the videos proved it to be true) and gang raping
our female soldiers (Jessica Lynch) while they are injured.

GITMO houses terrorists. They are fed what their religious
diet calls for. They are given their holy books (which they in
turn urinate on and flush down toilets). They are given
prayer mats. They are given their 5 times a day to bow to
Mecca and they are given an authentic Islamic Imam to visit
them. They are given clean clothing and a roof over
their heads. They are given medical care, better than they
have ever received in their entire lives.

When the terrorists start runnning POW camps that give our
people and the Iraqis good food that meets our religious diet
needs (no meat on Fridays during lent for the Catholics)... When
they give POWs copies of the bible and have a priest, minister,
rabbi, (shawman, or whatever) visiting the prisoners on a
regular basis ... When they provide great medical care for our
people - medical care that does NOT include a bullet through
the head or gang rapes ... When they provide good housing
conditions and all the rest that is listed here ... THEN people
can complain about GITMO.



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Rumsfeld wanted his own private concentration camp

Nazi concentration camps were very different from GITMO.
Come on Marg ... 6 million Jews and hundreds of thousands
of Catholics and physically and mentally disabled people were
murdered in them. There wasn't enough food. There was
no medical care. There were no clean clothes. There were
definately NOT bibles passed out to each person. There were
no visits by priests - heck ... there were priests being murdered
in the camps (St. Father Max Kolbe). Nuns murdered too -
St. Edith Stien. The people in the Nazi camps were innocent
civilians. The people in GITMO are terrorists who want to kill
YOU and everyone you know.

There is no comparison. The Nazi camps are the exact
opposite of GITMO.


I wonder if has a collection of tapes depicting torturing ..


A half dozen National Guardsmen took pictures of naked detainees and
had dogs bark at them. That's not torture. That's not right behavior,
but it certainly is not torture.


[edit on 6/8/2005 by FlyersFan]



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:23 AM
link   
I was just waiting for someone to come and defend Rummy and his Gizmo, I mean Gitmo.

Gitmo doesnt House terrorists - it houses MOSTLY innocent people, that were at the wrong place at the wrong time. They have lost the liberties and are as we speak "guilty until proven innocent" for 3 years.

Now I dont call that Professional nor Humane.

There is a special word from History that Fits this International Crimes:

GESTAPO.

[edit on 8/6/05 by Souljah]



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:29 AM
link   
FlyersFan,

Even you, most understand that Giztmo was a mistake, or at least it became a mistake after the first abuse cases were reported.

I honestly believe that the people held in Guantanamo, should be released to their countries where they belong, and be judge under their laws.

As you know many of the countries they come from are not as nice and pleasant as Rumsfeld and Giztmo.

So let their countries torture them at least it will be their own peers.



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Gitmo doest House terrorists - it houses MOSTLY innocent
people, that were at the wrong place at the wrong time.


www.newsmax.com...

Yeah, wrong place at the wrong time. ha ha


Crouched behind a wall in front of American soldiers with a gun
pointed at them, shooting at them and yelling 'death to infidels'
... that's definately the wrong place at the wrong time.

Caught with massive amounts of guns, ammo, explosives and
plans to blow up Iraqi police stations. Wrong place at the wrong time.
ha ha ha

Caught shooting at Iraqi soldiers. Wrong place at the wrong time.
Caught making car bombs to kill Iraqi civilians.
Another wrong place at the wrong time.

These terrorists are not 'mostly innocent'. Not by a long shot.
They are treated WONDERFULLY. They are given rights and
services and goods that they wouldn't dream of giving the
poor relief workers that they murder, the poor Iraqi civilians
that they murder, the American soldiers that they execute and
gang rape.



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Even you, most understand that Giztmo was a mistake, or at least it became a mistake after the first abuse cases were reported.


'Even me'?? Geeeeeze marg. I'm not stupid or blind ya' know.

No. GITMO is NOT a mistake. It's a necessity. Where would you
like to house the terrorists? Florida? NYC? LA? Kansas?

They have to be in prison somewhere. Off shore and under military
security is best. They are the best trained for this. It's their jobs.

You brought up 'absues' again. Marg .. you do realize that the
'abuse' that you are talking about was a few dirty pictures and
a barking dog, right? It was wrong behavior but it was NOT torture.



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:42 AM
link   
FlyerFan, your pro-war republican agenda is giving you a very special aura.

So I guess we wont come any step closer in this debate.

Understand THIS that I am not an American - I see this situation from a third point of view, a very BROAD point of view, much broader than Yours, sorry to say so.

You seem to forget that "terrorists" would not be there if dear ol' Bush and his Corporate Mafia wouldnt not spread "Democracy and Liberty" thruout the Middle East - calling just about everybody a Terrorist and everybody that opposes this carnage of destruction an Islamofascist (just as I have been labeled numerous times).

Hey - I dont mind that, I really couldnt give a dime about what you think about me or about Rummy and his Gizmo. You can even be his son in law and I wouldnt care less.

So please, keep defending him and his so called "professional and humane" prison camps, that are breaing numerous Inernational Laws to start with.

I just remembered the movie Few Good Men and how Colonel Jack Nicholson defended himself - I guess You too NEED Rummy on that Wall huh?

No, You WANT him on that Wall!

[edit on 8/6/05 by Souljah]



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
So let their countries torture them at least it will be their own peers.

That would be wonderful. But there are a few problems.

The few terrorists that are from Iraq -
Iraq isn't up and running on it's own yet. It isn't capable
of housing and putting on trial the terrorists who are
murdering the Iraqi people and causing problems.

The many terrorists that are from Syria -
Sure ... catch them and send them back to Syria.
What would happen? Syria is a terrorist nation.
They'd just release them and next thing you know
the terrorists would be back in Iraq shooting and
blowing up car bombs.

The terrorists from Saudi Arabia - yep. We could and
should send them back to Saudi Arabia. Definately.
Let the Royals deal with the trash they have made.
Of course there is the fact that if we were to send them
back to Saudi Arabia they'd only be in jail for a few years.
The upcoming Saudi Civil war would release them and
we'd be dealing with them again. But that's another issue.

The terrorists from Jordan - Jordan doesn't want them
back. The king of Jordan is a very well educated man.
He understands that having them in his prisons would
just lead to more terrorism and hostages being taken
by other terrorists to get their terrorist brothers out
of prison.



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:48 AM
link   
Hey FlyerFan, did Master Bush teach you your rhetorics, so that you used word TERRORIST TEN TIMES in your last Post?

Nice Work.

What other words have you learned from your Master?



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
your pro-war republican agenda is giving you a very special aura.

your blame-America-first anti-American agenda is giving you one as well.

I see this situation from ... a very BROAD point of view

I know you you are not American. If you truly were looking at this from
an unbiased point of view and if you were seeing things clearly (and
not through anti-American shaded sun glasses), you would be able to
accept the facts that I have pointed out.


"terrorists" would not be there if dear ol' Bush ...

The terrorists that would STILL be there would be Saddam, his sons, and
his henchmen who mass murdered hundreds of thousands, mass tortured,
mass raped, didn't allow true freedom of elections, stole billions from the
Iraqis through the Oil for Food scandal, bought off U.N. Security Council
votes from France and Germany with money stolen from the Iraqis, etc
etc .... THOSE terrorists would still be there if it were not for 'dear ol'
Bush ...


I really couldnt give a dime about what you think about me

Excellent! We have something in common. Because I don't care
what you think of me either.


You can even be his son in law ...

Nope. Not possible. I'm a woman and I'm married.


so called "professional and humane" prison camps

Nothing 'so called' about it. They are professional and humane.
I have given the facts. It is true even though you don't want
to see it. In fact, they are better than professional and humane.


breaing numerous Inernational Laws

No they aren't. And even if they were ... I don't care.
The terrorists are out of the way and can't kill anyone.
They are given good treatment over and above what the
Geneva Convention calls for. Better treatment AND no
laws are broken.

www.techcentralstation.com...


I guess You too NEED Rummy on that Wall huh?

Never saw the movie so I have no idea what you are talking about.
(don't care to either).



[edit on 6/8/2005 by FlyersFan]



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
you used word TERRORIST TEN TIMES in your last Post?

Is that the best you have?


We are discussing GITMO and terrorists. OF COURSE
the word terrorists is going to be brought up in conversation.
That is what is being discussed.



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
A half dozen National Guardsmen took pictures of naked detainees and
had dogs bark at them. That's not torture. That's not right behavior,
but it certainly is not torture.


I am going to disagree here, according to the Islamic faith, any individuals engaging in homosexual behavior are condemned to spend eternity in their own version of hell. Not only was this a humiliating and inhumane practice, it is psychological torture. These men believed they were going to hell for something beyond their control... Its pretty inhumane and mentally torturous if you ask me.



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 09:11 AM
link   
I have nothing more to say to you FlyerFan - keep living in your Perfect Bush Planet and by all means, Kick the Crap out of all Terrorists you meet on the Road to Democracy and Liberty.

You have told me everything with your answers.

Thank You!

Peace be With You!



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainJailew
according to the Islamic faith ...

According to the Islamic faith they aren't supposed to
be killing fellow Muslims. They aren't supposed to be
killing muslim children and civilians. But they are.
So while I understand you pointing out the Islamic
thought process ... it is a non-issue. The terrorists
themselves continue to break Islamic law over and
over again. For them to be upset about naked pictures
because it may break Islamic law .. well... considering
how often THEY break it and in what SCALE they break
it ... they have no case.


this a humiliating and inhumane practice

Humiliating, yes. Inhumane, no. What THE TERRORISTS do
is inhumane. Naked pictures of a few people was wrong.
But it wasn't torture.


These men believed they were going to hell for something
beyond their control...
They would do better to contemplate
what they really could be going to hell for. The things they have done
with full cooperation ... blowing up MUSLIM civilians. Fighting for
Saddam and his government - a government that mass murdered,
tortured, and raped MUSLIMS. If they whine that they might go
to hell because someone took naked pictures of them, then that's
just croc tears ... fake... and meaningless.

Fighting for a man and government that murdered hundreds of
thousands of Muslims vs a dozen or so Muslims getting naked
pictures taken.
They'd best be worried about what they
have done .. not the pictures.



[edit on 6/8/2005 by FlyersFan]



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Thank You!

You are welcome.

Hope that the FACTS were able to give you strength
to remove those anti-American blinders. FACTS are
a wonderful freeing thing, aren't they?



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Flyersfan - what percentage of the "TERRORISTS" (don't you love that word) being held in the American Nazi concentration camps have been proven to be terrorists (oh look that word again) ?



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 01:17 PM
link   
How many has the US found to be innocent? 50 so far? I forget the exact number, but I would imagine that the innocent don't find Gitmo that keen. Last week Time magazine had an article on it. A General even said that they aren't even interrogating the prisoners anymore. They are just hanging out. Pitiful.



new topics




 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join