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: U.N Rights Workers Veto Camp X-Ray Open Day Offer.

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   
The United Nations human rights workers assigned to tour Camp X-ray in Guantanemo Bay have said they cannot accept the invitation made by U.S officials unless they are permitted to interview detainees and question them about the treatment they have received since being detained. The US administration took four years to approve and extend an invite to the workers after the UN told the Pentagon that they wished to see for themselves the treatment of the detainees in the camps. The rights workers have also said the one day offered to them is not enough and the US administration continues to refuse access to the detainees for individual interviews.
 



www.abc.net.au
The Pentagon approved the visit last Friday, nearly four years after it was first requested, because it had "nothing to hide".

Although they could question US military officials, the envoys would not be allowed to speak to any of the some 505 detainees, the Pentagon said, adding that was the role of the International Committee of the Red Cross.

In a statement, the three envoys said; "We cannot accept the exclusion of private interviews with detainees... this would not only contravene the terms of reference for fact-finding missions... but also undermine the purpose of an objective and fair assessment."

Human rights activists have criticised the United States for the indefinite detention without trial of the detainees at the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Interesting developments. Good move by the UN workers. I really believe that they should have access to interview detainees otherwise this whole open day is a farce.

[edit on 31-10-2005 by Mayet]




posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 03:04 PM
link   
Demanding to interview detainees is stupid.
They are murderous terrorists and liars.

What does the world expect them to say? We all know it'll
be 'oh poor me. I did nothing to deserve being here.
The evil non-muslims put me here. I was just minding my
own business, blowing up infidels and Iraqi citizens.
booo hoooo'.

What they SHOULD say if they told the truth -
'oh yes, it is wonderful here. I am treated far better than
I deserve. The food is great. I'm grateful to be alive here
and I deserve much worse. God (or Allah) bless America.'

The UN has been offered more than they deserve - a day to
look inside the camps. If they don't take it, then too freak'n bad
for them. The US and the UN both know exactly what the
terrorist captives will say to the UN and the press. They both
know it would be full of lies - lies that the UN would love to use
to further it's euro-centric anti-American 'cause'.

The US is smart for not allowing access. It would be ignorant
to believe anything that could come of such a meeting.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Demanding to interview detainees is stupid.
They are murderous terrorists and liars.


Really?

How do you know they are?
Are you a judge?
Member of the Jury that put this people in prison or involved in the trial?

Oh wait...scrap the last bit.

Do you have access to restricted information on these people or just what the media tells you?

Something you might wish to learn, it is innocent till proven guilty in my line of work - which is the legal system. However, if you wish to live in a system of guilty till proven innocent, have fun.


Because boy, from my history classes those days were not fun for the average person.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 04:18 PM
link   
News Updates on Gunatanemo Bay and the Un Visits

Lawyers protest over Guantanamo detention conditions

www.abc.net.au...
Lawyers staged a protest outside the US Justice Department in Washington to condemn conditions at Guantanamo, where most prisoners have been held for more than three years without charge.
Tina Foster of the Guantanamo Global Justice Initiative, part of the Centre for Constitutional Rights (CCR), which has organised legal representation for several detainees, denounced the lack of contact with prisoners.
She says there are "horrible, horrible abuses" at Guantanamo.
US military authorities say there have been 36 suicide attempts at the facility.
But up to 200 inmates are reported to have taken part in a rolling hunger strike since July to protest conditions at the prison.
The military says there are still 27 on a hunger strike and 24 are being force-fed.
Ms Foster says 130 men at the camp are on hunger strike.
CCR says some inmates have said they are ready to die.
UN request
The United States has turned down a request by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights to provide information about Guantanamo, as well as detention centres in Afghanistan and Iraq, a report says.
The committee, made up of 18 independent experts elected by the UN General Assembly, in July 2004 pressed the US for information about its overseas military detention centres.
The Bush administration has declined to include information on detention facilities outside US territory, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights applies only to US territory.
The United States said last week it would invite three UN human rights experts to visit Guantanamo.
On Monday the experts, who are not part of the UN committee, said they would go on the proposed December 6 visit only if they have free access to the prisoners


The U.S continues to thumb it's nose at the international community as it repeats request for access to information about the facilities at Guantanemo Bay.

US declines UN request for information on Guantanamo

www.abc.net.au...
The United States has turned down a United Nations human rights panel's request to provide information about its detention centres in Guantanamo Bay, as well as Afghanistan and Iraq, a report reveals.
Washington declined to include information on detention facilities outside US territory in its report submitted to the UN Human Rights Committee, according to the document.
The committee, made up of 18 independent experts elected by the UN General Assembly, in July 2004 pressed Washington for information about its overseas military detention centres.
However, the US response late last month says these fall outside the committee's remit because they are "governed by the laws of war".
Like the other 153 signatories of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the United States is bound to submit regular reports to the committee on its implementation of what is the UN's core human rights accord.
Washington reaffirmed its stance that the covenant only applies on US territory - something the committee has disputed in the past.
"The obligations assumed by the United States under the Covenant apply only within the territory of the United States," said the report.
"The United States has sought to respond to the Committee's concerns as fully as possible, notwithstanding the continuing difference of view between the Committee and the United States concerning certain matters relating to the import and scope of provision of the Covenant," it added.



Rumsfeld denies UN access

www.news.com.au...
US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld today refused UN experts access to detainees at a military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, dismissing a hunger strike there as a publicity stunt.
The Pentagon last week invited three UN human rights experts to "observe" operations at the Guantanamo detention center but the officials have said they will go only if they are allowed to interview prisoners privately.
In rejecting that, Mr Rumsfeld said the International Committee of the Red Cross already has "complete and total access".
"And so we're not inclined to add the number of people that would be given that extensive access," he said.
The ICRC as a matter of policy does not make its findings public in order to preserve its access to prisons that might otherwise be closed to them.
The UN special rapporteurs, on the other hand, would be expected to report what they see or hear while visiting Guantanamo.
The Pentagon's invitation last week came in the midst of a three-month-old hunger strike that defense lawyers say has involved as many as 200 detainees in protest over their indefinite detentions.
"I suppose that what they're trying to do is to capture press attention, obviously, and they've succeeded," Mr Rumsfeld said.
He said giving the UN special rapporteurs access to the detainees would not set to rest concerns about their treatment.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
How do you know they are?


Hello? They are caught with their guns shooting at Iraqi
citizens and our soldiers. They are caught with stockpiles
of explosives and terrorist plans. They are terrorists.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan


Hello? They are caught with their guns shooting at Iraqi
citizens and our soldiers. They are caught with stockpiles
of explosives and terrorist plans. They are terrorists.


In all fairness some of the prisoners came from Afghanistan, however they were still shooting at Americans or perhaps turned in by informers.

I agree with your basic premise though



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   
How do you know they were shooting at your soldiers? Were you there? What happend to innocent until proven guilty? These people are not in jail, they are awaiting a military tribunal. There is a difference if you care to have any respect for the rule of law and due process. It beggars belief that some of you can be so cavalier with such an important human right as due process.

[edit on 1/11/05 by subz]



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 02:22 AM
link   
Okay the U.N have an outside source. Somebody is a sleeper. There is gonna be one person (the mole) who is going to go in and ask one of them how they are doing. The prisoner is gonna say how much he misses his (the mole told him to say this)family. Causing suspicion or whatver. Then the U.N Mole is gonna steal information, vital to the cause of why the prisoners are there in the first place. Little do the rest of U.N know. He (the Mole)is going to try to run for it and put the evidence on TV. They won't make it and will be secretly shot.

Reminds me of a Threshold episode.



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 02:28 AM
link   
Flyers fan... reality check time. .. bah I really couldn't be bothered because I just know you won't listen.

Your blinded by bias and blinkers and corners and angles of dark places that you do not want to see. Your fear must be great for you to not want to see or acknowledge those angles, shadows and dark places.

Hate and anger .......fire consumes.. I only hope you get in touch with your feminine side before it eats you completely

Flyers Fan...find your inner child...






[edit on 2-11-2005 by Mayet]



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 02:31 AM
link   
But I will say one thing. Your comment that they were caught with explosives... Do you wish for just the USA to have explosives? Do you wish to take all the explosives off everyone else in the world and keep them for your own country only?



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
Hate and anger .......fire consumes..

You don't know me at all, but thanks for the good
wishes and the 'concern' anyways.

My main point ... interviewing detainees will do no good.
They can't be trusted. The US and the rest of the world
already know exactly what they will say ... 'boooo hoooo,
poor me. I don't belong here. It's all those big bad infidels
faults that I'm here. I take no personal responsibility for
shooting and blowing up innocent Iraqis and Afghans, and
it isn't my fault that a loaded gun was in my hands and it
was shooting at Americans ......'

Exactly what will be accomplished by interviewing them?
Nothing good. They would just be used as props for the
euro-centric anti-American UN.

IF the UN was smart ... which it isn't ... it would have taken
the opportunity to go into GITMO. They whined, so they lost
the chance.



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
Do you wish to take all the explosives off everyone else
in the world and keep them for your own country only?


ha ha. Big difference.


They were caught planting explosives, and planning to plant
explosives, that would kill innocent civilians and freely elected
government officials (of Iraq and Afghanistan). The explosives
that the terrorists were using, and were planning to use, were
to murder those who were going to free elections, and to disrupt
the economies of the countries by destroying infrastructure and
goods (oil pipelines).

Any explosives used by America in the region were to kill the bad
guys before they killed innocent people.... before they assassinated
leaders who were freely elected by the Iraqis and Afghans.



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
I only hope you get in touch with your feminine
side before it eats you completely


Whats the matter? I'm not girly-girl enough for you?
Truth is truth. Sometimes it's manly-man brutal.

Don't let the fact that a girl can speak brutal truths
be a challenge to your masculinity. Or, if you are a
female, let me invite you to come in out of the last
century. Women CAN and DO have political opinions
and we can now express them!



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Demanding to interview detainees is stupid.
They are murderous terrorists and liars.

Hello? They are caught with their guns shooting at Iraqi
citizens and our soldiers. They are caught with stockpiles
of explosives and terrorist plans. They are terrorists.

Ah yes.

And ALL of them were caught right in the Moment, when they were pressing the trigger to blow themselves up, huh?

What about the Innocent People who were KIDNAPPED from their Countries - such as Italy, Sweden, Germany - under a "Terrorism" SUSPICION? Not a Criminal but a SUSPECT? You know whats a suspect, right? That's the guy, that is not Guilty until proved otherwise. ž

BUT,
They were all "Evil Muslims", and should be Treated Accordingly, right?

Geneva Convention Rings a Bell?



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by subz
How do you know they were shooting at your soldiers? Were you there? [edit on 1/11/05


Oh Pleasze Subz, spare everyone your sarcastic remarks. :shk:

It is a known fact many at camp Xray were captured with guns during fire fights.
Some were even captured twice after they were released from xray


In the example below he was not captured but killed right back in Afganistan where he was captured the first time.


A prominent Taleban commander who was killed last week in southern Afghanistan had rejoined the militants after being released from the U.S prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The news injects a new element into the debate over whether and for how long the United States can and should hold people it considers "enemy combatants."
Taleban Leader Killed in Afghanistan was in Guantanamo Bay Prison




These people are not in jail, they are awaiting a military tribunal.


Hmmm sure looks like a jail to me
The prisoners are the ones in red and the guards are in uniform with a big fence around them


www.amnestyusa.org..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>


And no I was not there however many of the major news media were.

Are you suggesting that all media reporters are liars?

When being held as an unlawful combatant (not prisoners of war) for a military tribunal innocent until proven guilty does not apply because they can be detained for the duration of the conflict.











[edit on 11/2/2005 by shots]



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
And ALL of them were caught right in the Moment,
when they were pressing the trigger to blow themselves up, huh?

Sarcasim will get you nowhere. They had stockpiles of explosives.
They had them and they had plans. They were caught before they
could murder innocent people and/orr they were caught after they
murdered some and before they could murder others. That's just a fact.


What about the Innocent People who were KIDNAPPED
from their Countries - such as Italy, Sweden, Germany - under
a "Terrorism" SUSPICION? Not a Criminal but a SUSPECT?

I have no idea what you are talking about. Do YOU know what you
are talking about? Provide some links to credible news sources so
everyone here will be able to follow what you are trying to say.

If terrorists in countries other than Afghanistan and Iraq are caught
with terrorist plans, explosives, poisons and/or poison gasses ...
if there is evidence that they have attended terrorist training camps
in Afghanistan or Iraq ... then they deserve to be at GITMO.


You know whats a suspect, right? That's the guy,
that is not Guilty until proved otherwise. ž

You do know what a terrorist criminal is, right? That's a guy
with a gun pointed at innocent Iraqis and/or Afghans. That's
a guy who pulls the trigger killing them. That's
a guy (or girl) who plows into innocent children on the street
corner, killing them all, simply because they are talking to an
American.


They were all "Evil Muslims", and should be Treated
Accordingly, right?

They are all innocent and harmless and should be allowed to
wander freely around the planet awaiting trial - (and blowing
up things and murdering innocent people all the while), right?

Pathetic. You don't know me at all. Worse, you still think the
terrorist insurgents are 'freedom fighters'. Take off the
anti-American blindfold and take another look.


Geneva Convention Rings a Bell?

Sure. Why don't you go over to Afghanistan and Iraq and
remind the insurgents about it? Teach UBL's thugs about
it. They reaaaaaaaaaaaally need someone to teach
them what it is because they have NEVER followed it.



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by subz
How do you know they were shooting at your soldiers? Were you there?

How do you know man walked on the moon? Were you there?
How do you know that the battle happened at the Alamo. Were you there?
How do you know that Mt. ST. Helens blew up in the '80s? Were you there?
How do you know ......


It would be absolutely useless and a money drain for America to go
around and grab innocent people off the street and lock them up for
an unspecified amount of time. That takes MONEY. Money that could
be used for other things. (like giveaway programs to buy votes -
something politicians are very good at doing).

There would be no reason to mass lock up innocent people off the streets.
There would be no reason to use up all that money and all the resources
involved. There could be no possible benefits to make it worth while.



[edit on 11/2/2005 by FlyersFan]



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 12:50 PM
link   
FlyersFan, your argument seems to be based on the idea that we have 'seen' them do such things? However many of the arrests in Afghanistan were by the Northern Alliance and not the United States Armed Forces.

You also seem to make out as though nobody in the Armed Forces would lie or do something wrong - I wish this was the case, however we take nothing that the Police, Military or Goverment say at face value. It is up to a Judge/Jury to decide if they are innocent or not. Not for a soldier - this isn't their job.



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 11:52 PM
link   
Flyersfan, we can't just put any terrorists we find in the guantanmo place. The United States has no right policing the world. Our constitution and our laws do not apply to other countries. Like for an example, if someone took away freedom of speech on this website it wouldn't count toward our constitution because this is an international website. It lives by its own rules. (Except for some laws) Anyway the terrorists that are at guantanimo are put there wrongly. Though they deserve it, they should not be there

P.S: I like Philadelphia flyers too. But my main team is the San Jose sharks. But still the flyers are one of the only other teams I like.



posted on Nov, 3 2005 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
You also seem to make out as though nobody in the
Armed Forces would lie or do something wrong -

Oh .. not at all. Of course people in the military can lie and/or
do things wrong. What I'm saying is that it wouldn't be on such
a grand scale and for no REASON. It would be a total waste of
money to do all this for no reason. Just to take innocent people
off the street and run them into a concentration camp with no
benefit for this country .. it is a waste of resources without a
benefit at the end. If you could show me a financial benefit
that outweighs the cost of running such an operation .. I might
buy into the conspiracy angle of it all. But there is no feasible
financial benefit that outweighs the costs .


It is up to a Judge/Jury to decide if they are innocent or not.
Not for a soldier - this isn't their job.


Gotta disagree with ya'. This is a war, not a police action. Soldiers
make judgements in the field all the time. They have to. When they
see people with guns pointed at them, with explosives and plans,
and so on ... the battle field judgement must happen. It IS their
job during war to make judgments. It is then the job of the people
at GITMO to further make judgements as to the status of the person
incarcerated. Some of the GITMO people have been released, only
to show up on another battle field and get caught and sent to GITMO
again.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join