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.

 

Soldier Sues Over Guantanamo Beating

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 06:22 AM
link   
Last time I checked, this thread was about a soldier being beaten to a pulp during a training excersize while training commanders didn't see a need to stop the actions of the MP's when it was clearly going to far.

Now, how exactly does that have anything to do with Slovakia?

/me hits the report button to get this thread back on track ...




posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by thematrix
Last time I checked, this thread was about a soldier being beaten to a pulp during a training excersize while training commanders didn't see a need to stop the actions of the MP's when it was clearly going to far.

Now, how exactly does that have anything to do with Slovakia?


Let's stay on topic please.

Also (for reference) my previous post.



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

Originally posted by thematrix
Now, how exactly does that have anything to do with Slovakia?

Sorry Mate,

its SLOVENIA, not Slovakia.

Just to get that Straight.

And you are Completly Right - shouldnt have let mister X to divert me from the original topic.



[edit on 21/6/05 by Souljah]



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 07:33 AM
link   
Lol, sorry dude, didn't mean disrespect. I always mix the East European country's names.

Anyways, I stand with my views on this. If training commanders didn't see it needed to stop the beating, then the question comes to mind if its normal to beat someone to a pulp over there.

I've heard people use excuses on police and military brutality, claiming that if these soldiers and officers are attacked, they have the right to hit back untill they aren't under attack anymore.

While this is correct, normaly police and military personel should be trained and kept updated in fields of personal defence and martial arts, making them able to subdue any assailant with minimal force and maximum speed.

Most of the people in my squad are deskjockeys and computer geeks, but still we require them to keep their personal defence skills at a high level.

So, what happend to that? Can cops and soldiers just go mideval on someone as long as he can stand, or shouldn't they use standard procedure and take down the assailant as fast as posible with as litle damage as posible?



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by thematrix
So, what happend to that? Can cops and soldiers just go mideval on someone as long as he can stand, or shouldn't they use standard procedure and take down the assailant as fast as posible with as litle damage as posible?

I dont know - I mean do we live in Middle Ages?

I did not Expect the Spanish Inquisition!

But I think thats what we are getting.

And as the Reports show, its gettin worse by the Minute.

Damn, I thought We have Rooted out this Nazi Military Mentality in the World War 2.

Guess not....



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 12:01 AM
link   
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Sorry....
I couldnt resist and honestly Im surprised no one beat me to the punch on this one.

On topic though I dont know what to say anymore and I havent known for a while now. I mean there's no convincing the internet thugs of the wrongness of violence so there's no point in even trying all we can do is stand fast to our morals and hope the tide turns.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by boogyman
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Sorry....
I couldnt resist and honestly Im surprised no one beat me to the punch on this one.

MAN, I was WAITING for this Punchline!

Where were YOU?





On topic though I dont know what to say anymore and I havent known for a while now. I mean there's no convincing the internet thugs of the wrongness of violence so there's no point in even trying all we can do is stand fast to our morals and hope the tide turns.

I Completly Understand You.

Its like This, Right?

But that wont stop Me - I will open a Thousand More Guantanamo Threads, if it will just Help a little....

PEACE with your Brother!

[edit on 22/6/05 by Souljah]



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
I Completly Understand You.

Its like This, Right?

But that wont stop Me - I will open a Thousand More Guantanamo Threads, if it will just Help a little....

PEACE with your Brother!



Oh man, I've been tempted to post that picture in so many threads up to now but was always able to hold back and now you did go do and done it XD



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
funny how souljah never posts anything about the massacres in slovenia,
Hypocrisy at its greatest, souljah.


No, what's funny is how people always try to discredit the messenger in stead of trying to understand or reflect about what his message is...



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by thematrix
Oh man, I've been tempted to post that picture in so many threads up to now but was always able to hold back and now you did go do and done it XD

Sorry Mate!

I think that Posting this picture would Result in Censorship - thats why I only posted a Link and not the entire Image.

It hits the Spot, doesnt it?



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Xsizer: yeah, and theres certain people on these boards that are specialized in attacking people's caracters instead of actualy defending the subject itself. Many discussions about this have been held and none have ended in a solution because (you guess it) the persons in questions started attacking the person of the thread creator ..)

Souljah: that picture has been around the net for years now and is dead on target with what it sais, but unfortunatly, its usualy removed due to sencors.

When I think about it, its actualy an insult to retarded/handicaped people.
They are born with their defects, but live with it to the best extent they can.

People arguing and flaming for arguments sake online, instead of discussing the topic at hand with interesting and on topic comments and information, are born with every ability to act normal and have a normal discussion, but they choose to act retarded.

Then again, on topic.
In the other thread about the exact same subject, I've posed the same questions about military and police training normaly including heavy training in personal defence, hand to hand combat and quick takedown technique's.

Yet instead of agreeing that the soldiers in that training excersize totaly reamed the complaining soldier against their normal training and better judgement. They attack the complaining soldier with the following types of comments:

- The soldier probably did something bad, like stealing or do drugs, while the official chain of command didn't punish him directly, the other soldiers punished him by beating him up. Then to cover this up, the chain of command relieved the complaining soldier from duty under the premisis of a training accident(Yeah right, I don't think even Super Mut can fetch that far ...)

- The complaining soldier has no right to sue the US govt, since he waived the rights to do so when signing up ...(might be, but only exclusivly during the time he was in the military, wich this guy isn't since he was relieved of duty on medical grounds), but its his duty as a citizen to report misconduct in both military and police and since the misconduct of others had the result of him having lasting braindamage, being out of job and being unable to do any other job, hes in his full right to file a lawsuit against the US Govt and the soldiers that put him in this situation.



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
..................
Clearly you did not read mister Rummy's statement below, so let me say that again: "The Geneva Convention makes it Illegal for Prisoners of War to be shown and pictured and humiliated. And its Something that USA does NOT DO!"


According to the Geneva convention those fighters who do not follow the rules of war have no standing as "prisoners of war" and are not subject to the rulings of the convention.

You could try to pass this as the truth with someone that doesn't know and hasn't read the chapters dealing with prisoners of war....




Article 4

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.


3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.

4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model.

5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.

6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units,rovided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.


Excerpted from.
www.unhchr.ch...

Do note that it says in order for such people to be considered prisoners of war they have to at all times show their weapons, have distinctive signs that would separate them from civilians and respect the laws and customs of war....none of which the insurgents fulfill. Hence they are enemy combatants and not prisoners of war....





[edit on 28-6-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Only those caught red handed, not those SUSPECTED of being insurgents or terrorists. The Geneva Conventions also say that when their is doubt over their status, they are entitled to the protections associated with POW status until a competent tribunal determines their status.

[edit on 28-6-2005 by Simon666]



posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 09:13 PM
link   
i wasn't aware that a person in the military can sue the military. I thought that when they signed on the dotted line and swore their allegiance that they then forgo all steps against the government.

maybe im wrong i thought i did that when i joined the air force in '78.

maybe im just to old to remember.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Well, lets not blame the Marines who beat the Crap out of him, for they were only following orders - but the Officer who told this Policeman to wear an orange jumpsuit and portray an uncooperative detainee.



I'd like to know where in that article it says that Marines had anything to do with this incident.

[edit on 2005/6/29 by GradyPhilpott]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join