It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Mos Def force fed under standard Guantánamo Bay Procedure

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:20 PM
reply to post by iwilliam

Our duty to feed them is rather obvious; if they die, it will cause an international scandal and make America look like the bad guy. All in all, it's just PR. Aside from this, as they are our prisoners, we must look after them. Finally, they are people, and their lives must be valued.

Also, you can't legally kill yourself, especially if you're detained. We have suicide watch for a reason, and while you may call it torture, it is rather self warranted. Stop trying to kill yourself and you'll be granted some liberties back, such as clothing and a bit of privacy. Similarly, stop trying to starve yourself and you won't be painfully force fed through a straw. It's not exactly rocket science.
edit on 9-7-2013 by DestroyDestroyDestroy because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 08:26 PM

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy

Originally posted by TheMagus

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
What a pansy. Not to say that this is an ethical practice, but it's not a formal form of torture by any means, nor is the intent to torture. Mos Def lasted like 10 seconds.

I agree that Guantanimo should be shut down; however, while it's open, the inmates don't leave us with much choice but to force feed them when they go on hunger strikes.

in case you didn't know
this used to be done to women
during the early 20th century [force feeding ]

their "crime" was demanding the vote for women

but i guess enabler's will always be fine with torture if it's for their benefit, economically or otherwise

you have only the word of known psychopathic liars and killers
that the people locked up in gitmo ever hurt anyone.

but don't let me get in the way of the Two Minutes Hate

and pay no heed to my words as I Am quite "Insane"

So, what do you suggest, that we let them starve to death? Did you think I'm ignorant? Did you read my post? It was a rather short post, I assure you. Perhaps reading before you reply would help.

I don't blindly put faith in government, if that's what your suggesting. I wrote that I think Gitmo should be closed down.

HOWEVER, for the second time, while the inmates are on a HUNGER STRIKE, we have a duty to FEED THEM.

glucose via IV?
and if you're unable to see this constitutes CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT [i.e TORTURE ]...

posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 11:06 PM

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
So in all honesty...What do we do in an unwinnable situation like this?

lo rabbit.

There is a subtle difference to what you're saying now, and what you were saying in your original post.

If they want to die, let them. Help them. Make it as easy as humanly possible for them. If they really want to die by starvation? Good. It's a hard hard way to die and I can think of few better men in the world to suffer that specific fate than those who remain in that place now. Who are we to "violate" them by keeping them alive?

However, they want to force release? Well... There is a way out of Gitmo. Find a fence and climb. The Machine guns will bring escape before climbing will but one brings the other without all that discomfort of starving.

I can seriously imagine a tyrant saying the words above sincerely about innocent people.

I don't know each of the individuals in gitmo, but if they do starve to death I wouldn't want the words from your posts above representing my feelings about it. Perhaps you can't change your own feelings about it ... but my feelings aren't of gloating enjoyment or self righteousness.

Even if every single person in gitmo deserves to be there, how is the following 'okay' for Americans?

On October 12, 2008, Kohlmann ruled that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and his four co-charged, should be provided with laptops, so they can work on their defenses.[113]

On December 8, 2008, Mohammed and four co-defendants sent a note to the military judge expressing their desire to confess and plead guilty.[114]

Following the election of President Barack Obama in 2008, his administration undertook a review of the Guantanamo cases to determine how to pursue them. In November 2009, according to an Administration official, Mohammed was being transferred from Guantanamo Bay to New York to face a federal trial.[115] Four other detainees will be facing trial in front of civilian federal court, as well.

On January 22, 2010, the Pentagon officially dropped military charges against Mohammed and the four other alleged conspirators, clearing the path for likely transfer from Guantanamo to a location in the United States to face charges in a civilian federal court.[116]

On August 22, 2012, the government said that the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his four co-conspirators will not be televised and may not begin for another four years.[117]

Captured 2003.

Confesses 2007 (multiple times)

Charged 2008.

We're ongoing in 2013.

No matter how evil the persons are, I just think Americans could do better.

posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 02:54 AM
reply to post by Pinke

As it happens, these are the last and worst of the worst. The review processes as efforts to release all who can be have been frequent and really energetic. They have tried to clear Gitmo and close it. In having followed this closely, I will grant them that. However, these that are left are the hard core fighters that were, generally speaking, really picked up in battle or were known people for specific reasons. They are the reason that place was built now that they've gotten rid of the goat herders and villagers who'd pissed someone off. All those types who never should have been arrested in Afghanistan, let alone on the US bounty program that was running at the start of things.

You still hadn't really answered my question tho? If they are determined to go on a Hunger Strike to death as I believe a couple have actually done to prove the point, we need to feed them by convention and international laws if nothing else, right? Well.. If the courts are saying we cannot force feed them ..and they will starve themselves to death otherwise ... Where are the options? That's what I meant by unwinnable situation.
edit on 10-7-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 07:03 AM

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Pinke

As it happens, these are the last and worst of the worst. The review processes as efforts to release all who can be have been frequent and really energetic.

Am not educated enough to know the prisoners in gitmo, so it's not a debate I can have. I can only trust you know that the innocents / undeserving have been cleared out ... but still, I think 10 years awaiting a trial that for crimes that you're willing to confess to is utterly crazy.

You still hadn't really answered my question tho? If they are determined to go on a Hunger Strike to death as I believe a couple have actually done to prove the point, we need to feed them by convention and international laws if nothing else, right?

Several are on hunger strike because they want to die. The force feeding is likely a political thing.

They want to die because they've been in captivity for a decade without trial, and several of the persons in there have actually stated they want to be martyrs. I personally think that this nonsense is political river dancing by the United States.

The US don't want to give the dastardly persons who planned 9/11 a trial because they would have to execute them or ask the American people to support mercy. They can't execute them because they would be martyrs, they can't let them off or hold them forever because New Yorkers would beat Obama to death with his own shoes, so they hope perhaps to drag it out as long as possible.

I don't really feel sorry for a Democratic government charges a group of persons for a crime, has some of them confess, and then holds them for 4 - 5 more years for the sheer fun of it. It's not justice, and it doesn't matter how evil they are.

I'd like to be wrong about most of the above, or there to be some deep and interesting reason for this, but it appears to be a self inflicted wound by the USA.

posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 06:32 AM
reply to post by WaterBottle

I can't believe the people defending this practice and defending the fact that these men have been held for a decade or more with no REAL due legal process: without trial, without even any real evidence of wrong doing, and 86 of the current 166 have been cleared for release, with many of them acknowledged by the US government to be innocent of their initial purported offenses, i.e. they weren't terrorists, but handed over to the US under false pretenses.

Deny Ignorance? Forget about it!. This is ATS, where I've never encountered so much ignorance and willful hate on the internet. It's absolutely stunning what people think.

<< 1  2   >>

log in