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.

 

Guantanamo Detainees Are Not Human Beings

page: 6
7
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 




You complain about the NWO, and folks other than the US Government actually running things, yet you want to give up sovereignty, and have an external force that doesn't have US interests at heart be the arbitrator?


Not an external force as in some shady clandstine organization, but an international tribunal. US interest are irrelevant to the ideals of truth and justice. If US interests were in fact in accordance with such ideals, there wouldn't be anything to talk about here.

What needs to happen is something along the lines of a jury system. Many countries coming together to decide. The US Supreme Court is not the master of the world, yet. This is not about the US Supreme Court giving up anything. The fact is that their ruling clearly shows that they do not have the authority to hear this case, and they know it. It must be heard before an international tribunal to determine if in fact the US is guilty of perpetrating crimes against humanity.



Getting back to your point though- I as a US citizen, don't want a foreign organization deciding US policy.


We are not talking about some specific foreign power dictating US policy. This is about US policy acting in accordane with international law and the rights of humanity. If US policy acts contrary to the rights of humanity and contrary to the ideals on which the US was founded, your not wanting the US to be held accountable is simply blind patriotism. You are not loyal to the ideals of truth, justice, and humanity. You are loyal to the hidden forces which have subverted America and who do grave damage to her reputation.



It wouldn't be doing a very good job for its citizenry if the interests of other nations were a higher priority.


The only priority for the US Supreme Court should be thier integrity in the interests of truth and justice. It is to the detriment of US citizens if they neglect their duty to the ideals upon which this nation was founded.




posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


What you would end up with is a Kangaroo court where it'd be a court of public opinion. I don't believe in criminalizing difference of opinion.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


By that logic, would you agree then that the Nuremburg trials were a kangaroo court, and that the difference of opinion between the Nazis and the rest of the world should not have been criminalized?



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


That's not even the same thing. If the USA had concentration camps, and was exterminating millions of people, and was responsible for a war where 50-70million people had died, that would be a little bit different than the reality we see today.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 




That's not even the same thing. If the USA had concentration camps, and was exterminating millions of people, and was responsible for a war where 50-70million people had died, that would be a little bit different than the reality we see today.


How do you think that all ended up happening in Germany?

EDIT to add:

I suggest you read "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich." Particularly the "rise" part.




[edit on 1/17/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


Bush has had 8 yrs, and I still have my freedom of movement/speech, no property has been confiscated, I can do pretty much anything I want(within reason), there's no massacres going on of unpopular/undesirable classes/races of people. I think you're trying to find similarities at all costs.



[edit on 17-1-2008 by BlueRaja]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 




Bush has had 8 yrs, and I still have my freedom of movement/speech, no property has been confiscated, I can do pretty much anything I want(within reason), there's no massacres going on of unpopular/undesirable classes/races of people. I think you're trying to find similarities at all costs.


Well I have been forced to take off my shoes at the airport, had an embarrising bag search incident in the subway, and was beaten up and repeatedly tased by polic in my own home. So I suppose our points of view are bound to be a little different.

As far as massacres, Hitler didn't start out by turning on the ovens either.

And don't try to sell no boogy-woogie on the king of rock n' roll either. If you want to talk similarities, talk to my grandmother and her whole side of the family who were in Germany. Her brother was a German soldier at the fall of Berlin.

Now go read the book.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 



Lucky you. Most citizens of Germany could say the same thing back in '40s. Even while the holocaust was happening.


As long as you "fit" into the right mold.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


I'm in the military, and I've had to go through the same security checks when flying that you have. Would you prefer that they don't do security checks, and your plane gets hijacked/blown up?

What were the circumstances where you got tasered? Did the cops just show up, kick in the door and taser you for general purposes, or was there more to the story?

Can you cite examples of folks who didn't belong to extremist organizations, or weren't involved in some disorderly conduct, who've been rounded up by the police for no reason, and shipped off to all these FEMA camps that CTers are worried about?

If you lead a normal life(i.e. go to work, participate in whatever recreational activities you enjoy(that aren't illegal), hang out with friends/family, etc..) you're never gonna have any issues from law enforcement. If you participate in disruptive, violent, illegal activities, you may have some issues from law enforcement(and I'll support them).
There are responsibilities that come with freedom. There is no such thing as absolute freedom, as your personal freedom stops as soon as it encroaches on my personal freedom.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 



Would you prefer that they don't do security checks, and your plane gets hijacked/blown up?


I would rather take the risk. I am not fearful of terrorists. I am leary of the government which tries to instill and perpetuate fear. Do you really think the next terrorist attack is going to be a shoe-bomb?

You failed to mention bag searches in the subway. Un-Constitutional. If you say that shredding Constitution is the price of security, then the terrorists have already won because America does not stand for anything. And if you try to argue that it is not unconstitutional because you don't have to submit to the search by leaving the subway station, then the whole point of having bag searches obviously has nothing to do with stopping terrorism.



What were the circumstances where you got tasered?


I made a wise-crack about the size of their department. They were investigating a broken window in the neighborhood. I was standing on my own front porch, with my girlfriend and another friend. Two neighbors across the street heard and saw the whole incident, but no one would take a statement from them. The matter is still pending.



Can you cite examples of folks who didn't belong to extremist organizations, or weren't involved in some disorderly conduct, who've been rounded up by the police for no reason, and shipped off to all these FEMA camps that CTers are worried about?


Not yet. And they don't have to if they turn the whole country into a prison. That's why I am not really worried about the camps at this point, and don't think too many are actually being built.



If you lead a normal life(i.e. go to work, participate in whatever recreational activities you enjoy(that aren't illegal), hang out with friends/family, etc..) you're never gonna have any issues from law enforcement.


I do not participate in illegal activity and wore a shield to work everyday, and obviously I now have a very serious issue with local law enforcement. Therefore, you are wrong.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


What you're saying is that travel on public transportation is a constitutional right. It's a privelege, not a right- you're in a public place, and your rights end where the rights of others begin. You're saying that your convenience is more important than someone elses safety. I suppose they should take metal detectors out of schools too, and let gang violence run amok, since violating their 4th Amendment rights is unacceptable.



posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


Since when has freedom of movement become a privilege? Why not just lock everyone in their homes so everyone is nice and safe?

And this has nothing to do with my personal convenience. It's about freedom. Something that people such as yourself are all to eager to relenquish in the name of "safety." Checking my bags in the subway station is not going to stop a terrorist attack.



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady
This is just so sad and hopeless. These poor prisoners have been rotting in Guantanomo since 2001 and they have never had a trial, sentencing or investigation of any kind into their "alleged" crimes - in fact, they've never been charged with ANY crime and so their crimes aren't even alleged.

This is totally against all things that the U.S. stands for.


Excuse me? The US is at WAR with these people! They are prisoners of WAR! They are NOT entitled to a trial in the civilian sense. In fact read the Geneva Convention, the part that explains how combatants NOT in uniform are to be considered spies, and can be killed on sight. Poor prisoners! You are clearly dangerously naive, and thank god you are in no position to protect the rest of us.

[edit on 27-1-2008 by teeceenj]



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by teeceenj
Excuse me? The US is at WAR with these people! They are prisoners of WAR! They are NOT entitled to a trial in the civilian sense. In fact read the Geneva Convention, the part that explains how combatants NOT in uniform are to be considered spies, and can be killed on sight. Poor prisoners! You are clearly dangerously naive, and thank god you are in no position to protect the rest of us.


Is this your justification for torture ?

With your impression of the geneva convention you can kill any one without a uniform on the spot ?

And i am very glad you are not in a position to rule over us.

"clearly dangerously naive"



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 02:54 PM
link   
The worst part of it, is that not only are these prisoners treated as "less than human," but also that they are not even considered to be animals.

If you treated an animal as prisoners are treated at Guantanamo, you would be arrested and put in prison. Think about it.

[edit on 27-1-2008 by SkipShipman]



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by teeceenj
 


If you are so concerned about international law, perhaps you care to explain how the US gets away with an illegal invasion.

Bush to rush bill to get Warcrime Immunity
US quietly demands Iraq give defense contractors, US military immunity from prosecution

Futhermore, we have no way of knowing if these people even are enemies of war or not. Especially since many have been released without charges. For all we know these people were goat herders. So why would they even have a uniform?



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by bigbert81
 


Damn right!

Criminals are not human beings.







 
7
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join