It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


WAR: US suspected of keeping secret prisoners on warships: UN official

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 04:15 PM
The UN has brought to light an allegation the the US is secretly keeping suspects aboard prison ships. These ships rumored to be located in the Indian ocean area were brought to light by UN's special rapporteur on terrorism, Manfred Nowak. Nowak stressed that these were rumors at this time, but the seriousness of them merited additional investigation. Expert feel that if true, it would allow interrogation of suspects in international waters, outside the boundaries of US laws.
VIENNA (AFP) - The UN has learned of "very, very serious" allegations that the United States is secretly detaining terrorism suspects in various locations around the world, notably aboard prison ships, the UN's special rapporteur on terrorism said.

While the accusations were rumors, rapporteur Manfred Nowak said the situation was sufficiently serious to merit an official inquiry.

"There are very, very serious accusations that the United States is maintaining secret camps, notably on ships," the Austrian UN official told AFP, adding that the vessels were believed to be in the Indian Ocean region.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

How much do you want to bet that the AG Gonzales signature is at the bottom of that memo as well? I for one have always been uneasy about the Gitmo base from the simple standpoint that no charges have ever been brought against alot of the people. I do understand that intel has to be generated and this requires interrogation of prisoners, but the floating gulag concept really bothers me.

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 04:23 PM
It bothers me that the attribution for these "rumors" is the UN.

If these allegations are true, then they would be serious.

Who has made these allegations, though? Not the "raportuer," apparently; he is just rapporting what he has . . . what, overheard in the hallway? Or from a speaker on the floor of the general assembly? Read from a fortune cookie? Or maybe posted on a conspiracy web site? Or something he heard when he played "stairway to heaven" backwards?

I heard a rumor, too. It's that the UN is making **** up about the Bush administration, as a payback for uncovering the oil for food scam.

This is kind of like saying, " I hear that you beat your wife."

Even if you are not married, everyone starts looking at you a bit funny.

Still, you never know.

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 04:31 PM
What I want to know here is who voted "No: Bias" on this story? Where exactly is the Bias here. The news source may be but the write up is not

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 04:43 PM
Not me there FredT, One of my biggest complaints is the "No: Bias" vote. I would love to see it a requirement that either a posting added to the thread (anonymous of course) or there was a way for the voter to put something in the vote box to explain the why.
As to the article, I also have grave reservations on this as it is only based on rumours

"They are only rumours, but they appear sufficiently well-based to merit an official inquiry," he added.

What is his gauge for "well-based" are there any radar contacts or satellite photos etc to substaniate the claim?

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 04:46 PM
No doubt but even the UN official said it was rumors only and meerly called for investigation on the matter. I would expect no less than the same if say China or NK was holding US citizens on some fishing trawler for the same reason.

If this is a politcal move, the downside of not proving it to the UN is pretty bad.

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 04:52 PM
The voting system is being manipulated. It doesn't matter if it's bias, repeat, source, etc. there's no requirement to prove any of those things and your story will get voted into oblivion without an overwhelming number of 'yes' votes.

I think it's time that votes were logged and tracked so we can identify who's casting false votes.

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 04:53 PM
There is a problem though..... what if there are no ships? Do you think that it would stop the suspicion? With all of the yellow journalism that has been perpetrating itself as investigative, if you took every single naysayer to everyship belonging to every nation, provided satelite photos, etc, It would not deter them in beleiving that the US is just playing a shuffling game.
It is a sad turn of events when even the more respected investigative agencies such as amnesty international will only base their "facts" on rumors and once called upon, their response is "prove us wrong".
What a wicked web we weave.

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 05:50 PM
" only worry is that we wake up one morning and we're even nastier than they are....." (Keith Mallory 1943)

We are in the midst of the first struggle where major US civilian casualties sparked the military efforts in which we are involved.
The inhumanity exhibited rivals that of our prior great opponents, the Nazi German and Imperial Japan, neither of whom achieved such a successful American civilian casualty rate.

I realize there is much dispute in this website of the worthiness of the current military efforts. To question the military's approach is valid, to question the reasons for it is at this point in history damned dangerous.

In the interests of self-preservation, American is going to be compelled to conduct very questionable efforts. I don't know if we have the stomach for it.

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 05:53 PM
Prison ships eh? Sorry but I've never heard of these prison ships they are talking about. I've had to catalog different ships from different countries. Now other countries ship maybe but i doubt it. But there is no ship that I know of in the US Navy that can hold a mass amount of suspects. Like a few people said, it probably to draw attention away from the UN scandal. I hate politicians.
Oh unless you count hospital ships. But i'm sure they are already full up with the wounded from Iraq


[edit on 28-6-2005 by Azathoth]

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 06:09 PM
From the original link provided:

Nowak said the prison ships would not be "floating Guantanamos" since "they are much smaller, holding less than a dozen detainees."

I think this kind of allegation would be exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to prove. But it should be checked out, all the same.

"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster." - Friedrich Nietzsche

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 06:54 PM
If it's true it shouldn't be a "shock". There are probably alot of Al Qaeda types we would like to keep under the radar untill they can be fully interogated. I don't think this should be used to bash the war against terrorism, keeping high profile detainees in secret locations makes sense given the importance of keeping new intel on terrorists from leaking. The Allies did this sort of thing all thru WWII. It's kind of necessary.

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 07:56 PM
When at first you don't succeed blah blah..

Could this be a second attempt to rekindle the "Gitmo abuse" mentality.
I mean..Now that Gitmo is known to NOT be a Gulag..The US must be mistreating
prisoners elsewhere...In a ship, somewhere, where we'll never find it..right?

Although if THIS story is proven to be wrong as well, look for a future story on a secret MOON base..after all..In Space, No one can hear you scream.

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 08:15 PM
The U.N. may be basing its allegations on flimsy evidence (so far), but the sad thing about this story is that the U.S. has even less of a case in its defense. If only we had closed down Gitmo a long time ago, and released the secret prisoners in jails across the country, the U.S. could hope to be believed when it denies these sorts of allegations. But we continue to throw our credibility as regards treatment of prisoners and respect for due process down the drain.

BTW- I've gotten No: Bias for every story I've putten up. I think if you posted a story saying "the sky is blue" you'd still get that one No: Bias vote.

-koji K.

posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 12:39 AM
Some official at the UN says something unsubstantiated
against America. Gee .. what a surprise.

Considering that the UN is up to it's collective eyeballs in
lies, corruption, and general muck I don't buy anything they
say about anybody. If they want to waste money (something
they are very good at) on checking out every anti-American
fictional tale ... I guess that'll keep the imps busy so they
can do less damage elsewhere in the world. Chances are that
they are the ones that made up the rumor so I guess they
won't have to look far for more 'information'.

Even if America DID have a prison ship .. so what. There
is no difference with having a POW ship than a POW
prison camp.

(BTW - I didn't vote on this, I rarely vote on any of these)

posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 02:58 AM
If there is suspicion or allegations of this practice then it requires investigating.

I'm not sure as to why the UN would look bad if they didn't find anything, they'll just be doing their required job.

I'm not sure that if found to be true anyone would be held to account anyway. I have a vague recollection of the US claiming that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction, on which was based an invasion and the mass destruction of civilians. I have yet to see justice served for this inappropriate action.

And for those that seem to live on the planet US, Gitmo is a prime example of how human rights are ignored by use of a technicality regarding the Geneva convention.

Lets not pretend that these things do not and cannot happen just because we make claims we are a democracy.

Wake up and smell the oil.

posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 03:11 AM
The Gitmo camp is now known NOT to be a humanrights black hole? Says who? American officials? Thats kind of like allowing you to be your own juror.

Let International inspectors in. Americans demand international inspection of every other country, why are they exempt? Above the law?

Also I was under the impression that military property is not outside US Law. It is under military law's jurisdiction. So if any abuse is taking part on these ships and its reported to the military police then they can do something about it. Its not "outside US law".


posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 03:16 AM
hey do anyone remember on 9/11 when all the planes were landed and no planes were allowed in air space, they started to search for other suspicious things, and I remember very clearly the news were reporting two ships in international waters which did not respond to any type of communication attempt and they were thinking of them being loaded with great amount of explosives or nukes etc. they also mentioned the possibility of an operation to these ships, but I never ever heard of those ships again, not in news not in 9/11 info and conspiracy sites, nada. maybe this was the case.

posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 03:17 AM

Originally posted by subz
Also I was under the impression that military property is not outside US Law. It is under military law's jurisdiction. So if any abuse is taking part on these ships and its reported to the military police then they can do something about it. Its not "outside US law".

Yeah you are right about that. I doubt that a US sailor or marine would have a get out of jail free card. The article mentions warships, but it would make more sence if the CIA had its own SS Gulag floating around.

posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 08:39 AM
UN employees have been spotted spending too much time on the Staten Island Ferry and other means of aquatic conveyance in/around NYC.

They claim to be in pursuit of a mysterious prison craft making endless voyages around Manhattan Island and pausing to snap surveillance pictures of the UN building at specific intervals each day.

Film at 11.

posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 12:19 PM
What a great idea!!!!

Cruise around out in international waters in a ship with lets say a Panamanian or Pakistaini flag.

No rules, No Laws.

Keep you captured AQ leaders out in international waters, invite onboard a few jewish interorgators from a middle eastern country and serve only pork products for meals.

Hey, when you send in kids loaded with C4 onto a bus or into a resturant to blow themselves up, I have no need for them.

And if you want to talk about rights.

What about the rights of the men and women killed in Iraq by Homaside bombers each day in Iraq.

The men and women lined up in Bagdad to get jobs blown to bits by these cowards. Who is protecting their rights?

What about the rights of the children killed in Israel by Hammas bombers.

What about the rights of women in Afganistan during the Taliban rule.

What about the rights of the men and women killed on September 11th.

I say lets build a fleet of these ships, and play the Late Night Game Show sensation, Will it Float.

new topics

<<   2 >>

log in