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.

 

NEWS: Leaked Emails From Prosecuters Claim Guantanamo Trials Rigged

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I dare you to show me a government with a better human rights record than America.


Just look a little to the north.


We're so damn PC.




posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   
The only thing that concerns me is ABC news got hold of it

and the ABC is government run.......

Yet the rest of the mainstream is sweeping it under



[edit on 1-8-2005 by Mayet]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
The only thing that concenrs me is ABC news got hold of it

and the ABC is government run.......


Just because they're funded by the government doesn't mean they can't fall for a bad story.

It's happened to the BBC plenty of times...


[edit on 8/1/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Au contraire, mon ami. First of all, I don't consider our political leaders "overlords," which really betrays a very strong anti-American bias on your part and I don't dismiss the fact that sometimes government lies.

Dont try and label me "anti-American" because I criticise her current government. Your generalisations and attempts to discredit me like that will not wash with me.


Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
However, I have been around long enough to take everything with a grain of salt. Just because the individual who has sent these emails is a Captain doesn't really say a whole lot. Maybe he's honest; maybe he has an ax to grind.

Maybe, maybe not. Atleast view it with an open mind instead of just relying on faith that your government can do no wrong.


Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I don't deny that abuses occur. They do, but I know that when they do occur and the information comes to light, people are held accountable. That's how America works.

I guess you never saw the interrogation techniques approved by the Defense Secretary then. They are contrary to the Geneva conventions and constitute cruel and unusual punishment. I'd say they are inhumane and a breach of detainees human rights.


Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I dare you to show me a government with a better human rights record than America.
Pfft. Whats that going to prove?

Iceland. Feel better now? Going to show me how great America acted in the past and how this some how exempts them from any wrong doing today? I should start copying and pasting these replies. The arguments that necessitate them are posted so frequently.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
subz - isn't that part of the problem though? The inmates aren't classed as prisoners-of-war...and thus aren't covered by the protection of the Geneva Convention?

(As appalling as that is, it might be the legal loophole being used, correct?)

I thought part of AI's beef was because they weren't afforded the protections therein; because they've never been given POW status?

(I could be wrong. Help? Anyone?)


I hear that argument a lot, but I always wondered about something.


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.


The USA was found on a set of principles, applied to everyone. Our founding fathers didn't write about only United States citizens. They believed everyone, every human being (albeit they only meant white males, but of course, we've expanded that include all humans) had certain rights that cannot be denied, rights given by God.

Regardless of who signed the Geneva Convention or not, our country was founded on the idea rule of law, of due process, of transparency in government. Our founding fathers did not create these principles for US citizens, they believed that God gave everyone these basic rights.

I agree with them, and I believe that the whole Gitmo situation is an abomination to everything that the US stands for.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 04:43 PM
link   


I don't deny that abuses occur. They do, but I know that when they do occur and the information comes to light, people are held accountable. That's how America works. I dare you to show me a government with a better human rights record than America.



He's as biased as you are, therefore you are in no position to chide; however, regardless of this, bias simply mains a slanted opinion, in one direction or another, and in debate, used cordialy and approached with factuality, finds credence in argumentation.

As for goverments which may not hold as much credence as America in regards to Human rights, I believe you to be using your bias without factual proof. Canada, for one, is a country whose human right record is much more cleaner, the least to say, than that of your own country; and, it should also be noted, more importantly, that the leader of your country, chosen through a democratic process and by virtue of his moral edifice, is also well associoated with the Monarchy which presides in Saudi Arabia, as they have dealt with the Taliban, now, we all know the human right record achieved by them do we not?

Luxifero



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 04:45 PM
link   
Curme, those don't even apply to legal residents, for the most part...only citizens.

Prisoners of war don't have a hope in the proverbial hot melty place.

With regards to human rights - there are literally a thousand sources able to list various human rights violations from virtually every nation on the planet.

US Human rights issues

Though the US is obviously by no means the worst....it's nowhere near the best, either.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Curme...
What did you or your unit do with the enemy combatants of POWs when you where in Iraq on your tour there?

Where were they sent?
What would you have done with those who are enemy combatants and/or POWs?
Those who are deemed such at Gitmo are getting far, far better treatment then they would from their own governments if they were sent to them, you know it, I know it, and alot of people know it. I would be interested in reading your replies to the above though.....




seekerof



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Those who are deemed such at Gitmo are getting far, far better treatment then they would from their own governments if they were sent to them, you know it, I know it, and alot of people know it. I would be interested in reading your replies to the above though.....

I honestly do not understand this logic.

What does it matter what other countries behave like? Is the United States supposed to set its behaviour at the lowest common denominator? Why is this cop out used as an excuse?

The Japanese in WW2 gave a single bowl of rice to American PoWs. Should the Americans have given the Japanese PoW's a bowl of rice + an extra grain of rice so they can claim to treat their prisoners better than theirs are being treat?

Its ludicrous and the United States shouldnt justify its injustices and human rights violations on the fact that other countries do it too. Thats insane.

Other countries dont give women the vote. Should America only give white women the vote? Afterall its better than those countries who dont allow any women the vote. Its the same when you apply the same logic to the treatment of peoples human rights.

Yes terrorists are evil and vile people. That doesnt mean we should all stoop to their level and act in the same manner.

Hows the old saying go? "Lie down with dogs and you'll come up with fleas"?

[edit on 1/8/05 by subz]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   


Those who are deemed such at Gitmo are getting far, far better treatment then they would from their own governments if they were sent to them, you know it, I know it, and alot of people know it. I would be interested in reading your replies to the above though.....


That's a very noble and gracious statement by you, Seekerof. You seem to be quite potent in this field, however, it's nothing but subjective. Those who were arrested without charge and put into Gitmo come from various 1st world countries including Australia and Britian, now, Seekerof, do tell me, of these countries, how many have illegal institutions as such? You're assumptions are beside the fact that they are still stripped of thier basic human rights and deemed non-combatant criminals without charge; you've forgone this fundamental principle to many a times, i'm begining to believe it to be on purpose.

What you believe matters not when what your country has done is contrary to your belief.

It should also be noted that the United States has sent suspects to countries such as Syria for interogation purposes, why is that, Seekerof? Maybe Syria treats prisoners of war better than the United States, maybe.

Luxifero



[edit on 1-8-2005 by Luxifero]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Perfectly said, subz.



Being the lesser of two evils isn't a good thing.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by subz
What does it matter what other countries behave like? Is the United States supposed to set its behaviour at the lowest common denominator? Why is this cop out used as an excuse?


Allow me to refresh your memory since you, as with a few others, were the most outspoken when the topic came about: the topic was that the US was considering sending/relocating many of the Gitmo detainees to their respective countries of origin. Thats why I said what I said, and apprently, it went right over your head because you had forgotten those number of past ATS topics on the US considering such. And as such, you, as with others, vehemently opposed to the US from doing so. You see, if the US had done so, Gitmo would be a paradise when compared to the conditions and treatments they would have recieved.

Now that the US has not done that with most, now its back to business as usual and the damning of how Gitmo is a gulag and those enemy combatants and POWs are being treated as if they were being held by the North Vietnamese or the North Koreans, etc. Interesting, no?

Gitmo is called ClubGitmo for a reason. Other than a few documented cases of violations, all in all, those being held at Gitmo are being treated quite well.

Btw, is it not interesting that ATS has made this such a big headline news alert, and yet, no mention of it by many of the leading media TV outlets in the world? This bit on the two emails did not even merit attention on ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, CNN, etc. TV and cable networks?

Oh my..... but it sure is being blown out of proportion here, isn't it? :shk:





seekerof

[edit on 1-8-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Curme...
What did you or your unit do with the enemy combatants of POWs when you where in Iraq on your tour there?

Where were they sent?
What would you have done with those who are enemy combatants and/or POWs?
Those who are deemed such at Gitmo are getting far, far better treatment then they would from their own governments if they were sent to them, you know it, I know it, and alot of people know it. I would be interested in reading your replies to the above though.....

seekerof



The only POW's I ever came in contact with were at Camp Cropper, near the airport. I was in communications. My team would be tasked to provide comms for different units. Medics, artillery, tankers, etc. I was providing comms for Camp Cropper for a while. I actually saw a prison riot, it was pretty unsettling. What would I do with POWs? Not torture them and give them due process. You know, American stuff. I would lead by example, and treat prisoners the way I would want my fellow soldiers treated if they were captured. I would hold myself to a higher standard, and I would make myself accountable to oversight, to insure that higher standard is being maintained.

All this POW talk is moot. We don't even know who, or what these people did, much less the people the government holds and don't tell us about. First, let's try to figure out who is the terrorist, then we can hash out the details on how the terrorists should be treated. At this point, they are just people the US kidnapped, people accused of a crime.



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Curme

What was your primary weapon?



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Seekerof,

'Club'Gitmo holds suspects without charge and strips them of thier basic human rights, or are you going to forgo this aspect again and again?

Just a reminder, old freind.

Luxifero



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by curme
What would I do with POWs? Not torture them and give them due process. You know, American stuff. I would lead by example, and treat prisoners the way I would want my fellow soldiers treated if they were captured. I would hold myself to a higher standard, and I would make myself accountable to oversight, to insure that higher standard is being maintained.

So, your allowing the actions of a few dictate how the military is handling things, Curme?
We are leading by example. The few do not represent the majority.
POWs are not entitled to due process till after a 'war' is over, Curme. You being past military should know that, correct?
Again, you are simply allowing a few occurances to represent the majority and that, coming from a ex-military man such as yourself, despite your predisposition to this war, should know better, but hey, thats just my opinion and take. You do have the right to continue on in how you feel and percieve things.




seekerof

[edit on 1-8-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Luxifero
Seekerof,

'Club'Gitmo holds suspects without charge and strips them of thier basic human rights, or are you going to forgo this aspect again and again?

Just a reminder, old freind.

Luxifero


And your another that holds and percieves what are a small number of isolated cases as representing the whole.
Human rights are granted and observed.

And that is just a reminder my friend.





seekerof



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
And your another that holds and percieves what are a small number of isolated cases as representing the whole.
Human rights are granted and observed.

And that is just a reminder my friend.





seekerof


Do we have a number of inmates at this institution?



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Allow me to refresh your memory since you, as with a few others, were the most outspoken when the topic came about: the topic was that the US was considering sending/relocating many of the Gitmo detainees to their respective countries of origin. Thats why I said what I said, and apprently, it went right over your head because you had forgotten those number of past ATS topics on the US considering such. And as such, you, as with others, vehemently opposed to the US from doing so. You see, if the US had done so, Gitmo would be a paradise when compared to the conditions and treatments they would have recieved.

Can you refresh my memory some more because I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here.


Originally posted by Seekerof
Btw, is it not interesting that ATS has made this such a big headline news alert, and yet, no mention of it by many of the leading media TV outlets in the world? This bit on the two emails did not even merit attention on ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, CNN, etc. TV and cable networks?

Oh my..... but it sure is being blown out of proportion here, isn't it? :shk:

So its not news because its not in the TV media? It was a story from the NY times and the ABC (Australian Broadcast Corp.). They arent exactly backwater, non-entities. There is definately a storm brewing with regards to Guantanamo Bay and this story is being made important on ATS because it actually is.


Originally posted by Tinkleflower
Perfectly said, subz.

Thanks


[edit on 1/8/05 by subz]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Curme

What was your primary weapon?


We had five people on our team. One M-249, me, one M-203, and the rest regular M-16's. I didn't want to 249 because it is a pain in the neck to carry around, but I was the only one who actually knew how to use it (I was a 249 gunner in a previous unit) so I volunteered for it. I didn't want some kid trying to figure it out for the first time when it really mattered.




top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join