More than 60 children reportedly held at Guantanamo Bay

Originally posted by niteboy82
You're right, we shouldn't take the side of those that advocate Human Rights.
This is not a good defense.

If those that advocate human rights told the truth I would not have a problem with them.

The exception I takes is what they define as cruel and unusual torture. Just because someone locks you up in solitary confinement or gives you the silent treatment is not cruel and inhumane as far as I am concerned. Nor does it bother me that they would make them listen to music they do not like or put a bra on their head. Humiliating yes; but cruel, no way.

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by niteboy82
You're right, we shouldn't take the side of those that advocate Human Rights.
This is not a good defense.

If those that advocate human rights told the truth I would not have a problem with them.

The exception I takes is what they define as cruel and unusual torture. Just because someone locks you up in solitary confinement or gives you the silent treatment is not cruel and inhumane as far as I am concerned. Nor does it bother me that they would make them listen to music they do not like or put a bra on their head. Humiliating yes; but cruel, no way.

You should spend a couple of months in Segregation. I'm sure that would change your views on "solitary". Seasoned inmates have a hard time with that type of treatment, let alone regular people or kids.

Originally posted by shots
If those that advocate human rights told the truth I would not have a problem with them.

The exception I takes is what they define as cruel and unusual torture. Just because someone locks you up in solitary confinement or gives you the silent treatment is not cruel and inhumane as far as I am concerned. Nor does it bother me that they would make them listen to music they do not like or put a bra on their head. Humiliating yes; but cruel, no way.

I personally believe that indeed there is something cruel about blasting music at high decibel levels around a kid in the dark with a bag on his head. Yep, think that's cruel. The roughest and toughest can't handle isolation chambers for long, how would a kid fare. And is this really effective in stopping terrorism? Creating hatred? All we are doing is cementing the viewpoints put into this child's head about what type of people we are. Seems like we would be trying to counteract the problem instead of making it more concrete.

I think that Guantnamo is only a piece of beef jerky for the public to chew on.

Like us here - debating it until Judgement day.

The problem is, that there are SEVERAL MORE similar camps like Gitmo scattered around the globe: in Eastern Europe, North Africa, Middle East and elsewhere we have no idea. And we sure ain't Never gonna find out what goes on in there.

And even if these Children are "Guilty" - they should be Prosecuted as soon as possible.

They should be treated according to the Law.

But since they are not, this entire situation makes United States look just as bad as the Enemy they are Fighting.

In the end,

World's poor and disadvantaged pay price of "war on terror".

So - everything is going according to the Plan of the Globalist Elite.

Smart Plan I must admit...

[edit on 29/5/06 by Souljah]

Originally posted by niteboy82

I personally believe that indeed there is something cruel about blasting music at high decibel levels around a kid in the dark with a bag on his head. Yep, think that's cruel.

First I made no mention of any bags over heads so kindly do not try and imply that is what I meant. All I said was play music they did not like, there is a big difference. As for being loud I really got a chuckle out of that. No doubt you have never walked by a teenager on the street with a walkman have you? Now you probably want to know what point I was trying to make. My point is clear I said play music they dislike.


With that said knowing you think or I should say is you consider it as cruel and unusual treatment, why then didn't you or the human rights groups speak up when Arafat was block-aided a few Years ago?

Originally posted by Souljah

And even if these Children are "Guilty" - they should be Prosecuted as soon as possible.

They should be treated according to the Law.

Oh you mean like release them as we did several others only to have them go back and start killing/fighting all over again? The Us learned its lesson the first time that is not the right thing to do.

As for the Amnesty International link

You have to be kidding, They are only in it for the money. Also you cannot hold the US or the world for that matter responsible for all the poor and hungry in the world.

Why doesn't Amnesty International go to those spots and stop the rioting etc with the donations they get? My guess is like the Red Cross they are squandering their money on themselves. Yah thats it they are just like the corporate world only in it for what they can get. Imagine that :shk: :shk:



[edit on 5/29/2006 by shots]

Originally posted by shots
First I made no mention of any bags over heads so kindly do not try and imply that is what I meant. All I said was play music they did not like, there is a big difference.

With that said knowing you think or I should say is you consider it as cruel and unusual treatment, why then didn't you or the human rights groups speak up when Arafat was block-aided a few Years ago?

Sorry I was not specific enough on that one. That was not intended to make a play on your words. My bad.

I have spoken up on the Arafat issue many times when it was going on, alas, I was not a member of a website to do so.

I hope that clears things up somewhat.

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by niteboy82
You're right, we shouldn't take the side of those that advocate Human Rights.
This is not a good defense.

If those that advocate human rights told the truth I would not have a problem with them.

The exception I takes is what they define as cruel and unusual torture. Just because someone locks you up in solitary confinement or gives you the silent treatment is not cruel and inhumane as far as I am concerned. Nor does it bother me that they would make them listen to music they do not like or put a bra on their head. Humiliating yes; but cruel, no way.

You should spend a couple of months in Segregation. I'm sure that would change your views on "solitary". Seasoned inmates have a hard time with that type of treatment, let alone regular people or kids.

So shots, have you decided to NOT address the issue that I brought forth? Why? Does it not conform to your preconceptions?

Originally posted by intrepid

So shots, have you decided to NOT address the issue that I brought forth? Why? Does it not conform to your preconceptions?

I did not respond to it because you did not put it in the form of a question, that is why. Now just so I do not get a oneliner rephrase your statement and make it into a question

[edit on 5/29/2006 by shots]

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by intrepid

So shots, have you decided to NOT address the issue that I brought forth? Why? Does it not conform to your preconceptions?

I did not respond to it because you did not put it in the form of a question, that is why. Now just so I do not get a oneliner

rephrase your statement and make it into a question

[edit on 5/29/2006 by shots]

Semantics are a crutch for a week arguement.

by me

You should spend a couple of months in Segregation. I'm sure that would change your views on "solitary". Seasoned inmates have a hard time with that type of treatment, let alone regular people or kids.

OK, the question..........

Do you NOW think that this is cruel punishment?

Originally posted by intrepid
Do you NOW think that this is cruel punishment?

Tsk tsk you really should issue yourself a warn for excessive quoting j/k

Now answer to your question. No I do not think it is cruel punishment because if you got it you deserved it. That practice has been used trough out the world for years with no problem at all, well that is until now, when the so called human rights activists opened their mouths that is.

[edit on 5/29/2006 by shots]

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by intrepid
Do you NOW think that this is cruel punishment?

Tsk tsk you really should issue yourself a warn for excessive quoting j/k

Now answer to your question. No I do not think it is cruel punishment because if you got it you deserved it. That practice has been used trough out the world for years with no problem at all, well that is until now, when the so called human rights activists opened their mouths that is.

[edit on 5/29/2006 by shots]

"If you got it you deserved it"? Man, do have room for meals with all the rhetoric you're swallowing? Look at what I pointed out. Lifer's have a hard time with Seg but it's OK for kids? You say OK. Think about that for a minute. You say that isn't cruel. To subject a kid to something that an inmate(adult) is accustomed to and has a hard time with. Sounds cruel to me.

Let me ask shots, do you consider this cruel? From FOX news

I thought I'd cut out the middle man and not put a source there that you could diss.

Originally posted by Souljah
The problem is, that there are SEVERAL MORE similar camps like Gitmo scattered around the globe: in Eastern Europe, North Africa, Middle East and elsewhere we have no idea. And we sure ain't Never gonna find out what goes on in there.

If we have “no idea” how do you know about them? Where is the evidence that allows you to make these claims? Please now, extraordinary claims require strong evidence, so don't give me you expected and usual lingo. And did you miss the EU’s report on these infamous prisons in Europe and “elsewhere”? Besides, what entitles you to know what goes on in these alleged prisons?

EU Chief: No Proof Of Secret Prisons

“Professionally, in the role I have now in the European Union, I have no information whatsoever that tells me with certainty that any of the accusations, allegations, rumors that have taken place in the last period of time are true.”

Link

Originally posted by Souljah
And even if these Children are "Guilty" - they should be Prosecuted as soon as possible.

They should be treated according to the Law.

Let me clarify that this is not a civil issue, its not a law enforcement issue, its a military one, as such, rules and laws are different. People who are captured on the battlefield are not usually given a trial right away, nor are they treated as civilians, they are treated as soldiers, as such they are detained until the war/conflict is over. Then we either let them go, or try them. Since we are still fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, I think these guys are right were they should be. And when Al-Qaeda surrenders come let me know, k?

One more thing, if they are not US citizens then they do not get the same rights as me. Its nice and dandy to apply our high morals to the enemy but it can, and in this case does, cost us US lives, given the nature of the enemy they will take anything we give them and use it against us.

Originally posted by intrepid
To subject a kid to something that an inmate(adult) is accustomed to and has a hard time with. Sounds cruel to me.

That's fine you are allowed to have your opinion just as I am.

Let me ask shots, do you consider this cruel? From FOX news

What you just posted in that link is child abuse by parents they are not the same at least as I see it they are not.

Remember, We are talking prisoners here who where confined for committing an illegal act.

[edit on 5/29/2006 by shots]

Originally posted by WestPoint23

One more thing, if they are not US citizens then they do not get the same rights as me. Its nice and dandy to apply our high morals to the enemy but it can, and in this case does, cost us US lives, given the nature of the enemy they will take anything we give them and use it against us.

You have voted WestPoint23 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have used all of your votes for this month.

[edit on 29-5-2006 by XphilesPhan]

originally posted by WestPoint23One more thing, if they are not US citizens then they do not get the same rights as me. Its nice and dandy to apply our high morals to the enemy but it can, and in this case does, cost us US lives, given the nature of the enemy they will take anything we give them and use it against us.

what about the british and australian prisoner, apparently they have similar rights in those country's but are being denied them by US. I agree that if they are enemy combatants then they should be held in POW camps, Humanely. But there has been no evidence supplied yet that this is what these guy's are. As for treating minors as adult's in these camps that is just WRONG! No amount of rhetoric can change that fact. To truly be a respected power i would have thought rising above cheap tricks and pyschological torture (like those of terrorists) would make more sense.

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by intrepid
To subject a kid to something that an inmate(adult) is accustomed to and has a hard time with. Sounds cruel to me.

That's fine you are allowed to have your opinion just as I am.

Let me ask shots, do you consider this cruel? From FOX news

What you just posted in that link is child abuse by parents they are not the same at least as I see it they are not.

Remember, We are talking prisoners here who where confined for committing an illegal act.

[edit on 5/29/2006 by shots]

Thank you shots, you just condemned the last of your credibility.

Job done. Ignorance HAS been denied. Too bad you will never see what you have done. I appreciate it none the less. Most others will though.

Originally posted by WestPoint23


If we have “no idea” how do you know about them? Where is the evidence that allows you to make these claims? Please now, extraordinary claims require strong evidence, so don't give me you expected and usual lingo. And did you miss the EU’s report on these infamous prisons in Europe and “elsewhere”? Besides, what entitles you to know what goes on in these alleged prisons?


One more thing, if they are not US citizens then they do not get the same rights as me. Its nice and dandy to apply our high morals to the enemy but it can, and in this case does, cost us US lives, given the nature of the enemy they will take anything we give them and use it against us.

Excellent points Westpoint. For that you get a way above.

You have voted WestPoint23 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

You darn well deserve it

p.s. don't hold your breath for proof

[edit on 5/29/2006 by shots]

Intrepid, I never really agree with you, but I'm with you all the way on this one.

There was a study done by Harry and Margaret Harlow on social deprivation in rhesus monkeys. They found that juvenile monkeys failed to develop normal social and sexual behavior if they were isolated from other monkeys at a young age.

So, not only do juvenile rhesus monkeys have issues with solitary confinement, but HARDENED CRIMINALS do so as well. Yet, you can get on here and run your mouth about how it's OK if kids are treated this way (not to mention torture).

Congratulations! You've shown me that not everyone can see through the obvious propaganda we, the US public, are being fed.

Originally posted by shots
Oh you mean like release them as we did several others only to have them go back and start killing/fighting all over again? The Us learned its lesson the first time that is not the right thing to do.

Several Others? You mean those INNOCENT ones, that were captured in their field, taking care of the crops? Or do you mean those 4 english students that went to Pakistan for a wedding and ended up in Gutantanamo? Well I am somehow skeptic that the Majority of this prisoners is actually Hard-Core-Well-Trained-Killers - since there is actually - let me say that out loud - NO EVIDENCE presented against them. And how do YOU Know that they are this terrorists, that will start killing Americans the second they come out?

Bush told you that? Rumsfeld? Cheney? Fox News? Any other Neo-Con?

As for the Amnesty International link

Just shows your Selectivness and totally narrowminded way of thinking and looking at things.

You have to be kidding, They are only in it for the money. Also you cannot hold the US or the world for that matter responsible for all the poor and hungry in the world.

THEY ARE ONLY IN IT FOR THE MONEY!



You HAVE to be KIDDING!

And Your precious President is in for what? Glory? Democracy? Freedom? Justice?

All of the Above?

None of the Above?

OH yeah, let me Enlighten you - HE IS IN FOR THE MONEY TOO!



But I hardly think that AI are doing anything for the Big Nasty Bucks they will earn!

Why doesn't Amnesty International go to those spots and stop the rioting etc with the donations they get? My guess is like the Red Cross they are squandering their money on themselves. Yah thats it they are just like the corporate world only in it for what they can get. Imagine that :shk: :shk:

OK, let me Enlighten you once again:

About Amnesty International

Amnesty International (AI) is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights.

AI’s vision is of a world in which every person enjoys all of the human rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights standards.

In pursuit of this vision, AI’s mission is to undertake research and action focused on preventing and ending grave abuses of the rights to physical and mental integrity, freedom of conscience and expression, and freedom from discrimination, within the context of its work to promote all human rights.

AI is independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion. It does not support or oppose any government or political system, nor does it support or oppose the views of the victims whose rights it seeks to protect. It is concerned solely with the impartial protection of human rights.

AI has a varied network of members and supporters around the world. At the latest count, there were more than 1.8 million members, supporters and subscribers in over 150 countries and territories in every region of the world. Although they come from many different backgrounds and have widely different political and religious beliefs, they are united by a determination to work for a world where everyone enjoys human rights.

AI is a democratic, self-governing movement. Major policy decisions are taken by an International Council made up of representatives from all national sections.

AI’s national sections and local volunteer groups are primarily responsible for funding the movement. No funds are sought or accepted from governments for AI’s work investigating and campaigning against human rights violations.

But seriously - you have created a very nice diversion.

I must say I have fallen for it.

You are a smart cookie for a Gaijin.