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.

 

Report: Exams reveal abuse, torture of detainees

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZindoDoone
And so, because these very savy jihadists know how to manipulate our press, we should bow down and kiss they're behinds??? Maybe you should talk to some of our men and women who have to deal with them. I have, and the story they tell is much differant from what you read from these links you've given us. Do we use torture? Yes, but its not for punishment. Its for obtaining vital information. Its not done for amusement. Don't bother bringing up Abu Graib, That was NOT torture. Maybe you need to talk to someone like Marcus Latrell who was tortured for 15 hours straight, by Afgan's Mujahadine just for fun. You think we should treat these people with kid gloves? Fine. When they are out on bail, and they soon will be, let them live in your house.

Zindo


Ok, breath for a second and think about what you're saying. The reason we have laws against this sort of thing is because we want to set an example, at least that's what we're told. We cannot achieve a moral high ground in any conflict if we don't actively pursue morality. This also sets a precedent:

If we allow Habeas Corpus to be violated, the Bill of Rights violated, and the Geneva Convention to be violated in the name of protecting America from terrorists, what happens when the threat changes? What happens when the government decides that the threat is internal now? And that we have to take appropriate measures?

Who would that extend to do you suppose?

The American people. And that is NOT an America I want to live in. That is what this is about. Secondly, not all of those people are terrorists, and to keep potentially innocent people in prison indefinitely is just wrong. Secondly, Innocent until proven guilty has flown out the window. It used to mean something no matter what crime you are suspected of committing. Now you're guilty until proven innocent. And that is wrong. These people could be put to death without ever seeing the evidence against them, or even a court date to challenge why they are in prison for years on end.

Those are fundamental rights that were granted even to Nazi World War 2 criminals. And it worked. Why can't we give people we know nothing of, that we are holding indefinitely in our prisons, the right to at least make a case for themselves in court, and let a jury decide. Like it was meant to be.

[edit on 24-6-2008 by projectvxn]




posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 07:48 PM
link   
OK, I would like to be enlightened as to one..just one combatant that was tried in any civil US court before the engagemet was finished without a signed surrender. And I believe habeus corpus only extends to US and Federal civil courts,not military tribunals till this last case. The SCOTUS has erred in a drastic way by considering the use of our civil courts in the manner they have. Its going to be nothing short of a media circus and no one is going to be fairly tried. Its a political football that never should have been allowed. And for just that reason.

Zindo

[edit on 6/24/2008 by ZindoDoone]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZindoDoone
OK, I would like to be enlightened as to one..just one combatant that was tried in any civil US court before the engagemet was finished without a signed surrender. And I believe habeus corpus only extends to US and Federal civil courts,not military tribunals till this last case. The SCOTUS has erred in a drastic way by considering the use of our civil courts in the manner they have. Its going to be nothing short of a media circus and no one is going to be fairly tried. Its a political football that never should have been allowed. And for just that reason.

Zindo

[edit on 6/24/2008 by ZindoDoone]


There never will be a formal surrender! Don't you listen to the President? He said so himself. So what do we do exactly? Keep them in prison forever without ever finding out what they were put in prison for in the first place? Without actually confirming that they are, indeed, enemy combatants?

The only two exceptions to Habeas Corpus mentioned in the Constitution are Rebellion and Invasion. Neither of these two conditions have been met. Therefore Habeas Corpus Applies.



new topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join