Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Woo-Hoo! Pictures of terrorists in transport

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 06:55 AM
link   
www.artbell.com...

I have no idea how Artie-Baby got these pictures. I'm sure the sniveling human rights advocates will have a field day with these.

(Not that human rights is a bad idea! But for violent prisoners of war-action...)

[Edited on 8-11-2002 by William]




posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 07:10 AM
link   
Held without charge, without name disclosure, and without a time for realease.

Sorry but I don't want my government to have the power to do that to anyone, because it would give them the power to potentially do it to me.

Snivelling? I'm sorry, but this is just another baby step to totalitarianism.



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 07:13 AM
link   
Do you realize who these people are?



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 07:41 AM
link   
"Do you realize who these people are?"

no. do you?

oh hang on, I get it, you've decided they're evil terrorists based on....er.....um......well they look foreign

fact is these people could be anyone, could be innocents like the 5 who were recently released from camp X-Ray recently because it turned out they were just civillians regardless of the fact that they'd been held in conditions like these (which btw violate the geneva convention) without trial since 2001.



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 08:04 AM
link   
the title of the page even says "pictures inside a C130 transporting POWs". POW = prisoner of war /= terrorist. that's assuming that these are:

a) not faked.
b) actual POWs and not random foreigners.

another point: why is it necessary to blind people during transport? they're tied up. well tied up. why not just have then strapped into seats, able to look around them?

- qo.



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 08:12 AM
link   
its called hooding Q.O.
as you know full well.
Its an intimidation and torture device outlawed by the U.N and the U.S. because of the cruelty.

see, in the case of the war against terrorism we no longer have to behave like a civilised country we're pretty much doing what the hell we want.



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 08:33 AM
link   
oh, i see.

*grabs baseball bat and beats the sh!t out of an undergratuate*

well, i've got a decade or two to catch up on then ....

- qo.



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lupe_101
"Do you realize who these people are?"

no. do you?

oh hang on, I get it, you've decided they're evil terrorists based on....er.....um......well they look foreign

fact is these people could be anyone, could be innocents like the 5 who were recently released from camp X-Ray recently because it turned out they were just civillians regardless of the fact that they'd been held in conditions like these (which btw violate the geneva convention) without trial since 2001.


HAAAAA!! Dude, you are SO predictable, and, as I have had the pleasure to point out here on many occasions, are DEAD WRONG AGAIN!!! The pics are not faked, and they are on the first leg of their journey to Gitmo! HOO-FUKIN-RAH!

The conditions at Camp X-ray ARE in accordance with the Geneva Conventions. But then, you are the expert on all things in the universe, so please, bless us with your wise wisdom, and tell us WHY the conditions, in your opinion, do not meet the requirements of the Geneva Conventions. Come on now, don't be shy...


Now, on a personal note, don't ya just LOVE the way those herky-birds look on the inside? Rough, tough, and ready for action!!!



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 08:42 AM
link   
*grabs baseball bat and beats the sh!t out of an undergratuate*

LOL
you missed Roger and I renacting Tiananmen Square in Battlefield 1945



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 08:53 AM
link   
Hooding isn't totally outlawed. Nor can you assume from the picture these people haven't been charged, names disclosed, etc. We're all jumping to conclusions. Even if a friggin' luxury Gulf Stream business jet was chartered for the terrorists, Champaign and all, someone would get their panties in a ruffle. These people dont looks that bad off to me either. Whats the big deal? Al Qaeda prisoners were reported to have wanted to go to Gitmo because they knew they would receive better medical treatment. Health wise these people are all better off since being captured receiving medical treatment that otherwise they would have gotten.



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 09:02 AM
link   
"Nor can you assume from the picture these people haven't been charged, names disclosed, etc. " absolutely, this lot could easily be baby eating mass murdering psycho #wits. but they could also be the local librarian.....hell they could even be the baby eating mass murdering psycho #wit local librarian.

the point is that we can't conclude a person is a terrorist just by putting them in the prison position and fatigues.

as the arrests made right after Sep 11 clearly demonstrated.



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 09:17 AM
link   
I find it hard to believe that anyone could defend that kind of treatment from a "civilised" country.Everyone remember the arguments for the US having Weapons of mass destruction because they are "civilised".
This treatment is against the Geneva convention.You know.The convention "civilised" countries signed up to.



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lupe_101

the point is that we can't conclude a person is a terrorist just by putting them in the prison position and fatigues.

as the arrests made right after Sep 11 clearly demonstrated.


Ok, so what would you have us do, not arrest any suspects? Do you think the police just get a list of suspects and then do nothing about it? No, they round them up, question them, arrest them if need be, and do their investigation. If the person is not considered a suspect after this, they are REALEASED!!! Just like those who were arrested after 9/11. Nobody's rights are being violated. Those in Gitmo are NOT suspects, they are POW's!!! The procedures and rights of POW's are different, and those in Camp X-Ray are being treated VERY well, and TOTALLY within the rules of the Geneva conventions. The USA has always adheared to the conventions, as do many other countries, as the fear of reciprocity is always there. Afganistan is not a signator of the conventions...do you think THEY would treat our soldiers with as much kindness as we are treating theirs??? Don't believe it for a second. Just ask the wife and children of the USAF Pararescue man who lay helpless on the ground surrounded by Taliban and Al Qaeda soldiers. Did thy take him prisoner and give him the protection of the Geneva convention? No!!! While his comrades watched helplessly, they hacked him to death. Nice people, huh?



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Its tricky John, the whole problem seems to be that we can't define wether this is a war or not, it gets especially sticky if we go into Iraq.

Americas justified its treatment of civillians and combatants by claiming that this isn't a war in the accepted definition, these are terrorists not Prisoners of war and as such are not subject to the geneva convention.

Legally (however much I deplore this twisting of words) they can pretty much do what they want (including shipping them off to countries where torture is an acceptable way to gather intel)

The real problem I have is that this further diminishes our moral high ground, say we manage to kill a # load of terrorists, so what if our methods make us as deplorable as those we are attempting to subdue.

The hypocracy in this war is reaching disgusting levels.



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lupe_101
Its tricky John, the whole problem seems to be that we can't define wether this is a war or not, it gets especially sticky if we go into Iraq.

Americas justified its treatment of civillians and combatants by claiming that this isn't a war in the accepted definition, these are terrorists not Prisoners of war and as such are not subject to the geneva convention.

Legally (however much I deplore this twisting of words) they can pretty much do what they want (including shipping them off to countries where torture is an acceptable way to gather intel)

The real problem I have is that this further diminishes our moral high ground, say we manage to kill a # load of terrorists, so what if our methods make us as deplorable as those we are attempting to subdue.

The hypocracy in this war is reaching disgusting levels.


The hypocracy in YOUR POSTS is reaching disgusting levels!!! You say you hate the twisting of words??? Dood, you are the KING of twisting words!!! HA! Damn, yer funny!!! And oh, by the way, the Gitmo Guys are being treated BETTER than the Geneva Conventions require.


What a numb-nut...



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Well they are treated way better than they treat us.Rember the Rangers in Somalia,or Daniel Pearl,or 9/11,the USS COLE?



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lupe_101

Americas justified its treatment of civillians and combatants by claiming that this isn't a war in the accepted definition, these are terrorists not Prisoners of war and as such are not subject to the geneva convention.


Actually, you're wrong. Any foreign party attacking the sovereign territory of a country is considered a "Foreign Combatant" under accepted international law. And as such, must be treated as Prisoners Of War. The conditions in the photo are for prisoners considered to be of a violence and security threat, such treatment is also allowed for this type of prisoner under the Geneva specifications.

It's wonderful for us to sit here in our safe warm offices/homes, far from harms-way and examine these photos objectively. In reality, I still have very strong memories of when these combatants attacked my city and killed members of the families of people I know. These people coordinated an attack. Their treatment, even in these pictures, is exemplary given the historical record of the treatment of similar combatants by other countries.



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lupe_101
its called hooding Q.O.
as you know full well.
Its an intimidation and torture device outlawed by the U.N and the U.S. because of the cruelty.

see, in the case of the war against terrorism we no longer have to behave like a civilised country we're pretty much doing what the hell we want.


It's called preventing POW's from seeing their captors so they can't spit or bite, and they can't see or hear other POW's, so they can't communicate with each other. Not only is it for the safety of the soldiers but is also for the safety of the POW's. This way, they can't get the idea to do something that'd get them dead.



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fantastic_Damage
Held without charge, without name disclosure, and without a time for realease.

Sorry but I don't want my government to have the power to do that to anyone, because it would give them the power to potentially do it to me.

Snivelling? I'm sorry, but this is just another baby step to totalitarianism.


Yup. I'm surprised we survived WWII, considering the number of POW's taken during that war. You'd think that when they were taking in that many POW's that they'd have taken the opportunity to intern all the residents of Ohio! *Whew!* We got lucky back then!



posted on Nov, 8 2002 @ 02:13 PM
link   
www.chron.com...

Photos of terrorism suspects cause stir

Pentagon investigating who took, released pictures

Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon today was investigating to find out who took and released photographs of terror suspects as they were flown in heavy restraints...





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join