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.

 

Gitmo: 5 Star Resort

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
Well it's an illegal prison camp

It's not illegal.

but you stick to your ignorance with a passion that is confusing.

Right back atchya'. To call GITMO illegal is ignorant. It sure
is legal. Even by Bill Clinton standards. And it is the right thing to do.




posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 01:27 PM
link   
How is it legal? How do you get legal, from an illegal war? This new math is something else.

The US had no right, or reason to invade a soverign nation. None. The case was built on lies, propaganda and half truths and with recent information all of that was only their "best excuse" to go.

This is illegal, and if there is any justice charges will be laid against those responsible. The sad thing is those that claim to have such a conviction for this thing will end up ratting on everyone if that time comes.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Passer By
How do you get legal, from an illegal war?


This line always makes me laugh.
Like there is a 'legal' war.
Yeah, right.
I suppose you think wars have a central
processing house that determines if it is okay for someone to
start or not. The U.N. perhaps? Oh that's a hoot. The U.N. Security
Council that was taking bribes from Saddam (money that he stole
from the Iraqi people) ... that Security Council is the entity to decide
who is legal and who isn't?
That Security Council was going to
justly and fairly condem Saddam when he was putting billions of
dollars into their pockets?

War is war. There is no 'legal' war ... there is no 'illegal war'.
It's just war.


Man, you guys are a real hoot.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   
A few more excellent quotes making the EMAIL rounds -

"I have a great idea. Let's close Guantanamo and send the prisoners to Massachusetts, Vermont and Delaware. Let Ted, Pat and Joe extend to the prisoners all the courtesy they believe these model citizens should receive." --Livonia, Michigan


"Of course, we could close Guantanamo, but if you actually support the war on terror you must recognize that we would still need someplace like it. A rose by any other name and all that. We can't summarily execute every al-Qa'ida member we capture. Not just because that would raise legitimate moral and legal problems, but because we can't win unless we interrogate these guys. Senator Joe Biden said that while we should close Gitmo and release the occupants, we should also 'keep those we have reason to keep.' Huh? ... Imagine if, instead of Gitmo, the issue was the death penalty. 'The death penalty should be abolished, but let's execute the folks there's a reason to execute.' ... Any new Gitmo would quickly gain the same reputation as the old one because a) al-Qa'ida is under strict orders to allege all manner of abuses for propaganda purposes, especially now that such tactics have proved so useful, and b) because the 'international community' and other lovers of runny cheese desperately want such allegations to be true, regardless of the evidence. That the head of Amnesty International could call Gitmo, where we spend more money on the care and feeding of detainees than we do on our own troops, the 'Gulag of our time' is all the evidence we need for that. Caving into such bullying would send the unmistakable message that America can be rolled. ...[C]aving into a defamation campaign in order to please those who cannot be pleased and aiding those who must not be aided is no way to support the war on terror or prevent more victims." --Jonah Goldberg



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   
FlyersFan:

This line always makes me laugh. Like there is a 'legal' war.


Are you new here? Were you not around when Bush said, "Well we're going in to Iraq whether or not the UN agrees. If Resolution 1441 doesn't pass, we're still going in. Even if it does pass, the wording says "Serious Consequences" and we're gonna take that to mean Armed Military Invasion" . But hey, we need to do this. We are 100% sure he was WMD."

It's illegal. The Iraq War is an ILLEGAL MILITARY ACTION accoriding to the United Nations, which is the only body in the world that can LEGALLY vote for armed conflict. Read something sometime.

Maybe when you're older you'll understand.


jako



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Passer By
How do you get legal, from an illegal war?


This line always makes me laugh.
Like there is a 'legal' war.
Yeah, right.
I suppose you think wars have a central
processing house that determines if it is okay for someone to
start or not. The U.N. perhaps? Oh that's a hoot. The U.N. Security
Council that was taking bribes from Saddam (money that he stole
from the Iraqi people) ... that Security Council is the entity to decide
who is legal and who isn't?
That Security Council was going to
justly and fairly condem Saddam when he was putting billions of
dollars into their pockets?

War is war. There is no 'legal' war ... there is no 'illegal war'.
It's just war.


Man, you guys are a real hoot.


Ofcourse there is legal wars, as for the UN the biggest thing on the UN was the US - that was until the said no to the US because there was no prove of the WMD's and such remember. Which is what lead to everything Jacko just stated.

Hoot huh? I'd like to be with you to show how much of a hoot I can be. It's always usually funny to see how so many that claim to be for this might makes right couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag with a chainsaw and a stick of dynomite.

The only soluton to violence is not to engage in it.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Passer By
Face it brother, you were lied to and you ate it up like candy.


Eat it up? I didnt vote for my President and didnt want us to go to Iraq. But Afghanistan was absolutly the right thing to do and these guys mostly are from there. I also dont need to agree with my president to not believe there is any torture of any kind going on at Gitmo.

These terrorists atre hardcore, and thats the way they need to be treated. They have it far to easy there. They should be fed bread and water and not much else. They should be treated in any mannor that makes them give up information that will save more people. Period.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc

Originally posted by Passer By
Face it brother, you were lied to and you ate it up like candy.


Eat it up? I didnt vote for my President and didnt want us to go to Iraq. But Afghanistan was absolutly the right thing to do and these guys mostly are from there. I also dont need to agree with my president to not believe there is any torture of any kind going on at Gitmo.

These terrorists atre hardcore, and thats the way they need to be treated. They have it far to easy there. They should be fed bread and water and not much else. They should be treated in any mannor that makes them give up information that will save more people. Period.




Skippy, think brother. I agree with you and so does everyone if these people were those that attacked you - but they weren't. At best you can claim that they were attacking American forces while American forces were ingaged in illegal activities(at least as far as Iraq goes). As for Afganni, well, see here is the problem ....

While I think most agree that those accountable(Who ever they may turn out to be) for 911 should be persued they are being let go because of this crap in Iraq. As an American citizen it is up to you to try and bring this back into focus, and yet many Americans who probably beleive as you just stated, aren't, and as such those that may have reason to be in prision cells(Although they still have to be charged and tried, until then it is still nothing but a horrid example of power corrupts) are now sharing them with detainee's from other countries for other reasons....

Surely as a free thinking American you can see how the war in Iraq had nothing to do with 911. What are the nationalities of those in the camp? How many taken from Iraq? Stand up and show the world that America is still worth fighting for.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Little "light" Gitmo commentary with a humerous twist

Stole this from IMAO:

Kwazy Kafir Kaos!
Posted by Frank J. at 11:22 AM | TrackBack (0)
I did some more research on Gitmo, and I found some activities that do seem a bit culturally insensitive to the murderous terrorists. This should probably stop, but, then again, it was their culture that led them to this point so maybe we should break it down.

CULTURAL INSENSITIVITY AT GITMO

Read More »

* Fake Koran that, when you open it, squirts pig blood in your face.

* Sign to pray towards Mecca actually pointing towards Graceland.

* Rap music blared at detainees to help in interrogations are produced and preformed by Orthodox Jews

* Throwing cups of pee at detainees (I think there's something in their religion about not getting pee thrown on you).

* Not allowing the detainees a short "Michael Jackson Was Found Not Guilty" party.

* Forcing the detainees to go a whole month without being able to do some mindless act of violence.

* Having a non-Muslims touch a Koran - especially while beating a detainee with it.

* Mocking the detainees' religious beliefs such as asserting that murder is wrong.

* No dessert until the detainees eat all their pork chops.

* Displaying more than a fourth grade education in front of detainees.

* Adjusting the AC to extremes not allowed in the Koran.

* Shaving the detainees' beards but leaving a soul patch.

* Allowing unveiled female soldiers around detainees - who beat them up.

* Not allowing detainees their nightly naked pyramid




[edit on 20-6-2005 by skippytjc]



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Yo Skippy:

You're a goofball. What's up with the link to gaming tee shirts? Ever LARP?



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by pandoras_box
Yo Skippy:

You're a goofball. What's up with the link to gaming tee shirts? Ever LARP?


#1 "You're a goofball" falls under personal attack in the TOS. I however don’t call people names on these boards and simply ignore such adolescent statements directed at me. Name calling is a sign of unintelligence.

#2 I dont LARP. Now THATS a goofball activity. (had to Google it to even know what you were talking about)



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
#1 "You're a goofball" falls under personal attack in the TOS. I however don’t call people names on these boards and simply ignore such adolescent statements directed at me. Name calling is a sign of unintelligence.


I think he was playfully calling you a goofball, like "you so crazy" or something like that. I googled LARP as well, not my cup of tea, a little too out of touch with reality.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
#1 "You're a goofball" falls under personal attack in the TOS. I however don’t call people names on these boards and simply ignore such adolescent statements directed at me. Name calling is a sign of unintelligence.


I think he was playfully calling you a goofball, like "you so crazy" or something like that. I googled LARP as well, not my cup of tea, a little too out of touch with reality.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Yep... glazed chicken for dinner and extensive medical and
dental care (something that previously many of these people
never had their entire lives) is now 'torture'.


Giving the terrorists everything they need to practice their
faith of choice - including Qurans, prayer mats, etc at
US taxpayer expense - is 'torture'. These same people
who are on a life-mission to murder infidels are provided
their religious 'needs'. Whereas all they would do to
others is kill them for worshipping God differently.
Some torture!


No those are simple rights every person has, oh and BTW dont try the "They would do worse" approach it doesnt work, why?
Because we are supposed to be better than them.


The prison in Iraq had a half dozen National Guardsmen
taking pictures of naked terrorists and had a dog bark at
them. That's not torture. GITMO doesn't torture either.

Oh I disagree, that is torture.
Its physco warfare, it scares the men.
Its an effective tactic, why?
Because it means they dont know what to expect next BUT that doesnt justify it.



Even if they did, I wouldn't care.

Then you have no right talking about morals.


But the fact is, they
aren't being tortured. The terrorists are telling lies,
as always. Murderers do that, lie, even while being
fed glazed chicken and being given better medical
care than many Americans.
[edit on 6/20/2005 by FlyersFan]

Your definitio of torture is diffrent from others, some of these methods are not extreme at all and are very effective BUT the fact remains not all of them are guilty but hey who cares if its friend or foe.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 07:56 PM
link   
DW please our techniques are perfectly legal psycho warfare is legal so are certain interrogation techniques.

Now legal and right/moral are two different things, if you have a problem with it being right or morally right then that is you problem. However if something is illegal under a cetin law then you have a point. If its just your own self conscience that's telling you its illegal then you have no point.



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 12:24 AM
link   
.
Still no takers? . . .

I have my saddistic torture combat boots ready to stomp on any willing heads? . .

How can you pass up an offer like that? I would love to crush some head like an exploding watermellon.

How full of BS do you have to be to call Gitmo a resort?

What it is, is a resort of a police state to indeterminate imprisonment for people who have never been charged with a single crime. They were sold to the stupid US military for 5000 dollars a head, 80% of them have zero connections to Al Qaeda, But guess what!? They now hate the US with a blind passion and are willing to fight and die in that effort.

Is it possible that stupid people create more enemies than they ever conquer? Looking at Gitmo, the answer is a Big Fat YES!

Guess what!? There was a first Soviet Gulag too.
Question will we make this the last American Gulag?
Keep in mind the undisclosed internment camps around the Globe the US uses for torture and murder that never make it into the news.
.



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The prison in Iraq had a half dozen National Guardsmen
taking pictures of naked terrorists and had a dog bark at
them. That's not torture. GITMO doesn't torture either.

They were not all terrorists, at least one of them was merely arrested for driving the same type of vehicle that was often used for suicide bombings and kept for interrogation. That is the amount of "evidence" it takes these days to be held indefinitely in inhuman circumstances by the US. There was also at least one detainee BEATEN TO DEATH in the showers in Abu Ghraib and had a picture of his dead body on ice with a smiling soldiers thumbs up taken. The latest rightwing apologism is pretending that all they did was pile up naked terrorists a little and scare them somewhat with dogs. This is NOT TRUE.



The US released afterwards a lot of prisoners from Abu Ghraib, they wouldn't do that if they were all terrorists, now would they?
A number of them were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time, or driving the wrong type of car.

[edit on 21-6-2005 by Simon666]



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Guess what!? There was a first Soviet Gulag too.


This is nothing close to a gulag this is a prison camp with facilities for its inmates and policies written to keep them from being systematically tortured. Now a few cases where interrogators have gone to far against policy makes it a gulag and illegal?


Question will we make this the last American Gulag?


There is no gulag so his question is irrelevant.


Keep in mind the undisclosed internment camps around the Globe the US uses for torture and murder that never make it into the news.


Please can you back this up? Its easy to open your moth and say unconfirmed things like speculation, theories but another thing to back them up with facts and proof.



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 06:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
It's illegal.

No it's not. There is no such thing as a 'legal' war
or an 'illegal war'. War is war.


The Iraq War is an ILLEGAL MILITARY ACTION accoriding to the United Nations, which is the only body in the world that can LEGALLY vote for armed conflict.

yeah right. They can claim that all they want to. You can believe
it all you wish. Truth is, they do not have any authority to say when
war is 'legal' or 'illegal'. Besides having no authority (and being a sick
joke), they are corrupt to the core. The Security Council was bought
off with billions stolen by Saddam from the Iraqi people.

I repeat - there is no such thing as a 'legal' war or 'illegal' war.


Read something sometime.

Right back atchya'. You'd best read up on what the U.N. REALLY is.
Best read up on what war is also.



Maybe when you're older you'll understand.

Yep. You are a hoot.
I'm 43 and MUCH better read than
you are obviously. Lemme' guess .. you are in your early to
mid twenties. Your lack of understanding about the nature of
war and the U.N. betrays your age (and mentality).



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 06:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Passer By
The only soluton to violence is not to engage in it.

Okay kiddo ... Hitler could have been stopped with daisies
and rose peddles. Everyone could have just sat around
and sang love songs ....
The Emperor of Japan would
have responded well to being invited for tea and a chat
in the Rose Garden as well ....




top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join