NationStates Jolt Archive

** C E N S U R E D ** original title was Bush: "tell me or I Menstruate your face"

Nice edit.. :)

off the topic but..

You know a union might help you...

why didnt you ask before locking the thread?
what? we dont get a warning anymore? are you the Busshie MOD?

<<<<<<<<<<here is your link.<<<<<<<<<< http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/smh43.html

and then some more links http://www.google.com/search?q=+Habib+menstruated&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:officia

Kat: ALL YOU NEED TO DO IS ASK ONCE...
First, Katganistan requested a second opinion from me and took action on your other topic based on my recommendations. So, I am (indirectly) the Moderator who handled this case.

Second, I based my recommendations on the the observation that you posted a rather shocking story, but did not provide a direct link to a news source. This lead me to believe that you may have invented the story merely to provoke emotional responses; this falls under the operational definition of "trolling". This was my primary motivation for locking the topic instead of asking for a link to a source. Since you have provided a link, that suspicion is now allayed.

Corollary to the second point: When posting an article excrept, it is your responsibility to post a link to the news source you got it from, not the readers responsibility to look it up in a search engine. Your linking to a Google search command seems to imply that you think otherwise. Since the implication may be unintentional on your part, I'm going to overlook this.

Third, NationStates Moderators do not make judgments based on a political bias.

I'm allowing this topic to remain open. Carry on.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

....
Third, NationStates Moderators do not make judgments based on a political bias.

My comment was uncalled for...i went bananas
My mistake. :(

I take it back...

Nice edit.. :)

off the topic but..

You know a union might help you...
Hi buddy...WOW that was fast...

you would love someone like me in your union, dont you?
you are ready to forgive me?
You are ready to welcome me with open arms?
Even after i tried to torpedo your fine organization... :(

including being tied to the ground while a prostitute menstruated on him,
"Menstruating on him?" What's that mean?

Sounds like bullshit I dont think woman can just menstruate on demand like that.


And the guy should of just confessed to what he knew.

Sounds like bullshit I dont think woman can just menstruate on demand like that.

Yeah, but it could have been overnight or something.


And the guy should of just confessed to what he knew.

What if he was innocent?

Nice edit.. :)

off the topic but..

You know a union might help you...

Ill tell you what, you have earned my respect...

Im going to *sign*
...one thing: I dont ask for promises and I dont give...(Im a lone Wolf)

im going to save my original sig here, in case I cant adapt to the Union life.

_________________
<><><><><><><><>
FOX-fair'n'Balanced (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=391642)
Sex Ed.101 (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7606022&postcount=15)
Political Sci.101 (http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=392&row=0)
GitmoRessort (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7912151&postcount=24)
I swear OD, one more wise crack out of your smart ass mouth, and you'll see how angery I can get....:D Go ahead kid, do the "angery" thing...see if I care.Ocean, You are so intolerant and insensitive, I tells ya! :(

sig test...

Sounds like bullshit I dont think woman can just menstruate on demand like that.
Maybe not, but they were probably looking for a woman who was about to menstruate... :hmm:

Maybe not, but they were probably looking for a woman who was about to menstruate... :hmm:they can Fly a (soon to menstruate) woman from Miami in les time than what it takes my to change my sig.

they can Fly a (soon to menstruate) woman from Miami in less than time than it takes my to change my sig.
There are 3 minute supersonic flights from miami to X-Ray?

There are 3 minute supersonic flights from miami to X-Ray?

Well what about all those secret underwater bullettrains that go through atlantis with the help of the aliens. *does shifty eyes* everyone get your tinfoil hats so the government can't read your thoughts.

There are 3 minute supersonic flights from miami to X-Ray?
It was figurative speech.
how long is the fligth? 20 min? 30?

It was figurative speech.
how long is the fligth? 20 min? 30?
lol, I was joking :)

lol, I was joking :) :D :mp5: :sniper:

:D :mp5: :sniper:
http://img86.exs.cx/img86/1377/Jetv2.gif

Something tells me his accusation is ridiculous.

Since we have no real evidence of what's going on at Gitmo, anyone there could assert that the US military did anything - anything at all.

"They brought in this gray looking alien with big eyes, and they used their psionic powers to humiliate me, and then they inserted metal probes into my abdomen, and threatened to impregnate me with an alien fetus"

Yeah, right. I don't believe a word of it. Tortured, perhaps. Sexually abused, perhaps. But the military isn't going to pay prostitutes to do it - the prostitute is hardly someone with a security clearance who would keep her mouth shut.

Please make up something else more credible. Every party to the torture would have to be someone with a Top Secret clearance. No prostitute could ever get one.
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost....17&postcount=62

...How is Bush...in anyway involved.

In the days of sanity...there was a Presidential Ban on torture...

For that to be reversed...Bush had to approve the lifting of the Ban.

If there is any justice...Bush and all involved need to burn in hell.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050128/GUANTANAMO28/TPInternational/Americas

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/nation/10752493.htm?1c

http://www.theage.com.au/news/War-on-Terror/Translator-corroborates-Guantanamo-sex-tactics/2005/01/28/1106850088186.html?oneclick=true

She wasn't a prostitute, as alleged.
She didn't menstruate on him, as alleged. According to the last link, she rubbed red ink on him and told him it was menstrual fluid.

Technically, this is not a violation of the Geneva Conventions.

http:/www.genevaconventions.org

Convention I, Article 2:

Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

(This means that the US should apply the Conventions if the "said Power" accepts and applies the provisions - which al-Qaeda and the Taliban do not).

He is not protected, therefore, this whole discussion is moot.

AP[ THURSDAY, JANUARY 27, 2005 11:18:09 PM ]

SAN JUAN: Female interrogators tried to break Muslim detainees at the US prison camp in Guantanamo Bay by touching them sexually, wearing skimpy clothing such as a miniskirt and thong underwear and in one case smearing a Saudi man's face with fake menstrual blood, according to an insider's written account.


A rough manuscript obtained by The Associated Press is classified as secret pending a Pentagon review for a planned book that details ways the US military used women as part of tougher physical and psychological interrogation tactics to get terror suspects to talk.

It's the most revealing account so far of interrogations at the secretive detention camp, where officials say they have halted some controversial techniques.
be careful, if you dont post a link the Mod is supposed to lock your ass (for Trolling or something like that)

be careful, if you dont post a link the Mod is supposed to lock your ass (for Trolling or something like that)

take a look at the links in the post before yours.

be careful, if you dont post a link the Mod is supposed to lock your ass (for Trolling or something like that)

WOW you were reading my mind !! :D

Katganistan,

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=8058732#post8058732

Thread deleted by Katganistan
Reason: Duplicate thread: Perhaps the fact that the title has been twice changed should be a hint?

What rule are we talking about? :mad:

Katganistan,

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=8058732#post8058732


Thread deleted by Katganistan
Reason: Duplicate thread: Perhaps the fact that the title has been twice changed should be a hint?



What rule are we talking about? :mad:

You locked a perfectly legal Trhead and I had to create a second one(this one)

You changed the legitimate title of this one(Bush has killed The Presidential Ban on Torture)
...and I cannot change it back.

so I Created a Thread with the Legitimate Title...and you have vanished that thread.

what is ther problem?

First, Katganistan requested a second opinion from me and took action on your other topic based on my recommendations. So, I am (indirectly) the Moderator who handled this case.

Second, I based my recommendations on the the observation that you posted a rather shocking story, but did not provide a direct link to a news source. This lead me to believe that you may have invented the story merely to provoke emotional responses; this falls under the operational definition of "trolling". This was my primary motivation for locking the topic instead of asking for a link to a source. Since you have provided a link, that suspicion is now allayed.

Corollary to the second point: When posting an article excrept, it is your responsibility to post a link to the news source you got it from, not the readers responsibility to look it up in a search engine. Your linking to a Google search command seems to imply that you think otherwise. Since the implication may be unintentional on your part, I'm going to overlook this.

Third, NationStates Moderators do not make judgments based on a political bias.

I'm allowing this topic to remain open. Carry on.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

why was the name of Bush taken away from the Title, and why did Katganistan put the prefix "alleged"...

This Title manipulation not what I expect from a unbiased mod.

GodDamit :mad:

I feel like Sigourney Weaver in the Aliens Movie:

'in space, nobody can hear you scream'

signs off.

*tired, mumbles Rollings Stones Tune* ..ican get no...Satisfaction...

"Alleged" means that someone is "saying" that he was mistreated.

No one has proven anything.

Here is a much more reliable and accurate article on the same subject, from AP. Yes, this shit really did go down.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20050128/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/guantanamo_sex_vs_faith

The problem as I pointed out in the links before (to the AP story from three different sources) is that he alleges that a "prostitute" tortured him, and the US apparently did not use a prostitute.

Prostitutes do not possess security clearances. Female interrogators who work for private contractors do have security clearances.

Additionally, he alleges that she menstruated on him. According to the woman, she poured red ink on him and told him it was menstrual fluid.

Other inmates have alleged that women had sex with them, and the memo seems to imply that women behaved in a seductive fashion but did not have sex.

So all of these are allegations. Until they are proven, that's all they are.

I could allege anything I like if I had been at Gitmo. Whether or not I could prove it is something else.

Yes, the woman in question WAS a female interrogator dressed as a "prostitute". And yes, the fluid was in fact, ink. But that doesn't change the tactics involved.

Maybe you don't understand the signifigance of the menstruation thing. The detainee was praying and calling on God to give him strength through the horror of imprisonment and the psychological warfare put against him during the interrogation process. Under Islamic (and for that matter, Old Testament) law, women who are undergoing menstruation are unclean and should be avoided. Actually having the stuff on you yourself makes YOU unclean, and unable to approach God in prayer. After the incident, the prisoners water was shut off so he could not wash his hands.

In other words, this was a direct attack and slight against the detainees religion in an effort to break him down and get him to confess. Psychological torture.

GodDamit :mad:

I feel like Sigourney Weaver in the Aliens Movie:

'in space, nobody can hear you scream'
Unless it's an anime or Hollywood blockbuster :p

I suggest you read the Geneva Conventions, Convention I, Article 2.

By the Convention, he is detained by the military (not by a law enforcement agency), so the Convention holds sway, not local criminal law.

So this is not a criminal investigation. It is a military interrogation.

According to Article 2, he is a member of an opposing force that is a non-signatory to the Conventions.

Since that organization is a non-signatory, it must indicate that it is willing to abide by the Conventions, and must in fact abide by such.

Killing civilians on TV, taking hostages, etc., is not generally considered to be evidence of "abiding", and no al-Qaeda personnel have announced that the organization will abide by the Conventions.

Therefore, anyone detained fighting on their behalf (and this is a military determination without hearing - not a criminal accusation that can be defended by examination in court), can be tortured, shot, or otherwise abused, because they do not have the benefit of protection under the Conventions.

Nor do they have the right to any trial whatsoever. They are military detainees - enemy combatants.

"Alleged" means that someone is "saying" that he was mistreated.
.About the War...most "BreakingNEWS"...are Alleged.

Every single AP/CNN/Aljazeera wire should start like this:

"Allegedly the Marines have found ..."
"Allegedly 500 militants have..."

and 90% of the Title in the Forums would have to be Mod-tagged with the "Alleged"...

So what's the deal. We can't blindfold or undress them, that's apparently bad form. Now the interogators undress for them and let them watch and that's no good either???

I must be a bigger hardass than I knew. None of this would make me give up any state secerts. I'm attempting to set up additional reseach on this subject over the weekend.

I might break if they put on a 3-way girl on girl show...

I could allege anything I like if I had been at Gitmo. Whether or not I could prove it is something else.Indeed, you could allege that there is no Women or Clindren POWs.

You could also allege that Bush never allowed the kill of the Presidential Ban on Torture.

Indeed, you could allege that there is no Women or Clindren POW.

Read the Geneva Conventions for yourself. It is not an allegation that the Taliban and al-Qaeda are not "High Contracting Parties".

Nor is it an allegation that they have never announced that they intend to follow the Conventions.

Nor is it an allegation that they have kidnapped civilians and killed them on television. (We've seen the tapes)

Nor is it an allegation that Osama ordered the 19 hijackers to fly hijacked civilian airliners into the WTC (Osama has admitted this on tape).

So all of these are allegations. Until they are proven, that's all they are.

I could allege anything I like sure...You can allege Iraq has WMD and can Attack us with them...and afterwords you can Allege that you never alleged that in the first place. :D

Nor is it an allegation that they have never announced that they intend to follow the Conventions..
is it an allegation that Wasingtown announced that they intend to follow International Law?

I suggest you read the Geneva Conventions, Convention I, Article 2.

By the Convention, he is detained by the military (not by a law enforcement agency), so the Convention holds sway, not local criminal law.

So this is not a criminal investigation. It is a military interrogation.

According to Article 2, he is a member of an opposing force that is a non-signatory to the Conventions.

Since that organization is a non-signatory, it must indicate that it is willing to abide by the Conventions, and must in fact abide by such.

Killing civilians on TV, taking hostages, etc., is not generally considered to be evidence of "abiding", and no al-Qaeda personnel have announced that the organization will abide by the Conventions.

Therefore, anyone detained fighting on their behalf (and this is a military determination without hearing - not a criminal accusation that can be defended by examination in court), can be tortured, shot, or otherwise abused, because they do not have the benefit of protection under the Conventions.

Nor do they have the right to any trial whatsoever. They are military detainees - enemy combatants.

keep alleged-ing...

http://www.google.com/search?q=geneva+gitmo&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

http://www.google.com/search?q=geneva+guantanamo&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

Most of the World disagrees with you...

http://www.google.ca/search?q=geneva+gitmo&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

http://www.google.com/search?q=geneva+guantanamo&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official


You should read the Conventions yourself. Read the whole thing. Then show me where it defines a Prisoner of War, and defines who is protected by the Conventions.

You'll find that the prisoners at Gitmo are easily exempted.

You'll find that the prisoners at Gitmo are easily exempted.you can allegde that all day, and so can American Military Lawyers...

But your interpretation, is so far fetched that it does not stand a chance in the eyes of the World.

U.S.: Geneva Conventions Apply to Guantanamo Detainees

(New York, January 11, 2002) -- Human Rights Watch questioned Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld´s statement today that captured fighters from Afghanistan shipped to Cuba were “unlawful combatants” not entitled to protection under the Geneva Conventions. Human Rights Watch also criticized the reported use of chain-link cages to confine the detainees.

“The Secretary seems unaware of the requirements of international humanitarian law,” said Jamie Fellner, director of Human Rights Watch´s U.S. Program. “As a party to the Geneva Conventions, the United States is required to treat every detained combatant humanely, including unlawful combatants. The United States may not pick and choose among them to decide who is entitled to decent treatment.”

http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/01/us011102.htm

is it an allegation that Wasingtown announced that they intend to follow International Law?

U.S. Violates Geneva Conventions
On January 11, 2002, the United States announced that it was refusing to abide by the 1949 Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war. The Third Geneva Convention, which provides specific guidelines for treatment of prisoner combatants, is a part of the "law of nations" and is a mainstay of international humanitarian law. The United States explained that the prisoners taken in Afghanistan and Pakistan were not actually prisoners of war, but were in fact "unlawful combatants."
http://baltimorechronicle.com/geneva_feb02.shtml

If you read the whole Convention, you'll find that the US is right about who is, and who is not, a prisoner of war.

They would have to be members of an official military, in a uniform, with a uniform method of identification (i.e., dog tags, id card, etc.). They would have to wear a universally recognizable symbol if they did not have a uniform (something pinned to their cap or uniform).

They would have to have a public, orderly chain of command.

Also, their side would have to be signatories to the Conventions, or alternatively, have publicly declared their intention to abide by the Convention AND have shown their intention by action.

It's all in there. Anyone who says that they are "Prisoners of War" are wishful thinkers who don't want to read the Conventions.

If they were "Prisoners of War", yes, by all means the US would be violating Convention III provisions.

But you should read Convention I, Article 2. They are not even members of a signatory, nor are they part of a party that has announced that it is willing to abide by the Conventions, nor has their side shown by their actions that they are willing to abide by them.

Why don't you want to read the conventions? Or are you really afraid that you'll really be wrong?

If you read the whole Convention... Would you allege that you have?

I can certify that I have, on many occasions. I am also very familiary with US military case law concerning violations of the Conventions, and familiar with historical precedence in other countries concerning the Conventions.

And familiar with the assertions made - that somehow the US is violating the Conventions. It most certainly is not. You would have to make two logical leaps: 1) that al-Qaeda is a "High Contracting Party" or has announced that it will abide by the Convention, and 2) that members of al-Qaeda are part of an official military of a nation state, in uniform or wearing a recognizable symbol, and therefore defined as "Prisoners of War" by the terms of the Convention.

If either one is not true, then they are not subject to the protection of the Conventions. Some nations extend this protection even though the Convention does not. We are merely abiding by the letter of the Conventions.

As have many nations in the past. Including every European nation. Including Canada.

Technically, it would be permissible under the Conventions (but not under the UCMJ) to shoot these people on the spot. There is a vast amount of historical precedence to support that action.

I suggest that you go to http://www.genevaconventions.org and have a good read.

I can certify that I have, on many occasions.
The US puts Talibans POWs in Containers, and seal the Containers!!

Dozens die cos they cant Breath...

Would you Allege that you can find a Genevaconvention loophole to exclude those killed

The US puts Talibans POWs in Containers, and seal the Comtainers!!

Dozens die cos they cant Breath...

Would you Allege that is not a GenevaC. Violation.
When did this happen? Not that I'd mind if it did.

When did this happen? Not that I'd mind if it did.During the War on Terror.

During the War on Terror.
I've never heard of it. Thailand did that to some rioting muslims a couple of months ago, but I never heard of the US doing that.

I've never heard of it.Assume for a second it happened. would it be a War crime?

Assume for a second it happened. would it be a War crime?
Yeah, I guess so, but for the taliban I can't be bothered to care.

Assume for a second it happened. would it be a War crime?
actually this question is more for the self-proclaimed Geneva expert.

Yeah, I guess so, but for the taliban I can't be bothered to care.what has the Taliban ever done to you?

what has the Taliban ever done to you?
Their harboring of a terrorist organization that attacked my country is one thing.
Their treatment of women, homosexuals, and those who beleive differently offends me.

I'm waiting to see how rubbing red ink on someone and lying to a prisoner on what that red ink constitutes a breach of the Geneva convention. Also you can get all the groups you want to say George Bush is breaking the rules of the GC when anyone who reads the GC sees exactly what constitutes a POW or not.

Furthermore the Convention makes no mention of being screwed with as you pray. Female contractors who dress up as prostitutes arent a bad idea either..these folks come from a culture who if a woman shows her face she gets stoned. Its clever. But again point to me in the GC where it says "You can not disgust your enemy."

Their harboring of a terrorist organization that attacked my country is one thing.
When are we attacking the UK, and spain, and Saudi arabia?
and several other countries

Assume for a second it happened. would it be a War crime?

Well I'd like evidence that anyone actually died in the containers or they were put in said containers. If you put someone in a container and they dont die its not a warcrime. But if you have any credible evidence as to this happening please share.

I'm waiting to see how rubbing red ink on..How do you know its red Ink, did yo taste it?

When are we attacking the UK, and spain, and Saudi arabia?
and several other countries

The Taliban wasnt going to turn over Osama. The UK and Spain are at least actively attempting to get their terrorists as for Saudi Arabia..well they are just lucky to have something every country on the planet needs.

We should trear our prisoners like our enemies treat their prisoners, and vice-versa. So if they see us torturing our prisoners, they should be allowed to do the same. Why not? Our country does it. Also, if they torture their prisoners, we should torture ours. :headbang: maybe someday, this whole stupid ordeal will be behind us...

How do you know its red Ink, did yo taste it?

How do you know its menstral fluid? You seem pretty certain yourself. But I know women..I've got a family full of them..I've dated several women..I cant possibly imagine a woman menstrating on anyone at will. Unless they get it really bad..in which case its not like the woman is going to be up for dressing in skimpy outfits and terrorizing others. I know when my mother gets it bad she calls in sick because the cramps hurt so much..so I'm having extreme problems believing its actual menstral fluid.

We should trear our prisoners like our enemies treat their prisoners, and vice-versa. So if they see us torturing our prisoners, they should be allowed to do the same. Why not? Our country does it. Also, if they torture their prisoners, we should torture ours. :headbang: maybe someday, this whole stupid ordeal will be behind us...

Well I mean..by that logic we put their POWs on TV demand the enemy to stop and then chop off the heads of their POWs while screaming Bush is great, God is great...we get no info, and it gives OD more to bitch about.

When are we attacking the UK, and spain, and Saudi arabia?
and several other countries
The UK, Spain, and even the fucking Saudis arrest and punish terrorists when they find them. The taliban helped terrorists.

Well I'd like evidence that anyone actually died in the containers or they were put in said containers. If you put someone in a container and they dont die its not a warcrime.
I dont have any evidence, I just have a link...what (lately) the ModFathers consider "just an Allegation".

anyways here read the article and...spin...deny....deform...or whatever Bushies do

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/dec2001/pows-d13.shtml
More evidence of US war crimes in Afghanistan
Carlotta Gall in Shibarghan
Wednesday December 12, 2001

Dozens of Taliban prisoners died after surrendering to Northern Alliance forces, asphyxiated in the shipping containers used to transport them to prison, witnesses say.

The deaths occurred as the prisoners, many of them foreign fighters for the Taliban, were brought from the town of Kunduz to a prison in Shibarghan, north-west Afghanistan, a journey that took two or three days for some.

General Jurabek, the commander in charge of some 3,000 prisoners being held in the jail said that 43 prisoners had died in half a dozen containers on the way, either from injuries or asphyxiation. Three others died from their wounds after arrival, and were buried at the town of Dasht-i-Laili, he said.

But the number of deaths may be much higher. Omar, a pale and slight Pakistani youth who clutched a blanket round his head and shoulders, said through the bars of his prison wing that all but seven people in his container had died from lack of air. He estimated that more than 100 had died. Another Pakistani said that 13 had died in his container, and that the survivors had taken turns to breathe through a hole in the metal wall.

One prisoner, Ibrahim, a 30-year-old Pakistani mechanic interviewed in the presence of Gen Jurabek, said he thought that about 35 people had died in his container. "No oxygen, no oxygen," he said urgently in English. The general said only five or six had died.

Hi buddy...WOW that was fast...

you would love someone like me in your union, dont you?
you are ready to forgive me?
You are ready to welcome me with open arms?
Even after i tried to torpedo your fine organization... :(

Absolutely! :) Welcome to NS 8976 Brother Ocean! :fluffle:

Absolutely! :) Welcome to NS 8976 Brother Ocean! :fluffle:Hey what took you so long :D

Mass graves raise questions in Afghanistan
How did Taliban prisoners die, and who knew?

August 29, 2002 Posted: 6:21 PM EDT (2221 GMT)
An unknown number of Taliban fighters were dumped in mass graves last year.

MAZAR-E SHARIF, Afghanistan (CNN) -- In the stifling desert of northern Afghanistan, lying as still as the air, is evidence of the gruesome fate that met hundreds of Taliban fighters late last year.

The discovery of numerous mass graves, filled with bones and skulls, raises questions about exactly what happened to prisoners after they were captured last November in the northern city of Konduz by the U.S.-backed forces of Northern Alliance Gen. Adbul Rashid Dostum.

The ground around Mazar-e-Sharif offers abundant evidence of mass death. In May, investigators with the Boston, Massachusetts-based group Physicians for Human Rights examined a grave in Dasht-e-Leili and said hundreds of victims had been dumped there.

But how and why the men died is still uncertain.

Human-rights groups have accused Afghan forces of suffocating hundreds of Taliban fighters by locking them in unventilated steel shipping containers after their capture. The captives were taken to a prison in Sheberghan, some 200 miles from Konduz.

Not all of them were dead on arrival. Many are still behind bars at Sheberghan, where they told CNN of their surrender and the aftermath.

They said they were packed tightly into trucks and shipping containers for the trip to the prison, and that many of their Taliban comrades did not survive.

"We don't know how many people died," one prisoner said. "We know that we were about 12,000 people, and now there is only 4,000 or 3,500. We don't know where are the other people."

U.N. investigators hope to unlock the mystery, and outside Mazar-e-Sharif, they are standing watch over a patch of desert where as many as 1,000 Taliban fighters may be buried.

Initial findings appear to support the contention of human-rights groups -- that the men were suffocated in shipping containers, then dumped.

Dostum admits as many as 200 captives died en route to the prison. But he would not elaborate on how much the United States knew or approved of his treatment of the war prisoners.

He is adamant, though, that U.S. forces were not present when the prisoners were loaded into shipping containers.

Gen. Tommy Franks, the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, has said he supports an investigation into the deaths of the Taliban fighters.

I could care less if they had killed every last living thing in Afghanistan after 9-11. We should have used nuclear weapons.

That way, no one could have even gone there and counted what was left.

Hey what took you so long :D

I have a job.. :cool:

You know..I looked at the website, and then saw..World Socialist Website..I asked for credible evidence and you gave me a highly biased anti-everything right of their view website..but I figured I'd go on. Despite the fact they used inflammatory language and didnt provide any clear basis of fact. They report on the Prisoner uprising in Mazar i Sharif as a massacre even though they managed to kill a CIA Agent and take over the prison itself. There was video footage of the gunbattle on TV..but that seemed not to make much of a difference to them..but the main issue is the US involvement in the containers..

They never once make a direct claim the US was involved in any of the incidents except to say "Turn a blind eye". The Northern Alliance may not be the best folks to have allied with, but they were considerably better than the Taliban. Why? Because the Northern Alliance said they would at least make an effort to give us Osama Bin Laden. Keep in mind this was also a brutal civil war which had gone on for about 7 years with both sides committing attrocities. If this story is as bad as this website makes it out to be then its just another in a long road of crap done by both sides.

However, as I look further back into their website I see no mention of these actions. I do however see a website with a clear Anti-Bush, Anti-US 'imperialism' agenda. I know to keep an open mind in my sources..but honestly now, do you think anyone in the middle is going to believe such an extreme source as this?

I could care less if they had killed every last living thing in Afghanistan after 9-11. We should have used nuclear weapons.

That way, no one could have even gone there and counted what was left.
yea killing innocent oppressed civilians is a really good way to combat terrorism

Well I'd like evidence that anyone actually died in the containers ...
"allegedly" hundreds were sent to death by suffocation...
"allegedly" the General will not to say how much the United States knew or approved of his treatment of the war prisoners.

And then you give a CNN article, which states its unclear how those bodies got there. Why those bodies were put there. For all you know it could be a grave site dug by the Taliban. You take the uncertain and jump to conclusions based upon your own pre-established prejudices.

"allegedly" hundreds were sent to death by suffocation...
"allegedly" the General will not to say how much the United States knew or approved of his treatment of the war prisoners.

If your gonna keep like that instead of putting up an "actual" debate then you've got a problem. Go take it up with the mods and get your affairs in order. Then come back and try actually try a defense of your standpoint with something more credible than a socialist website.

.. website with a clear Anti-Bush, Anti-US 'imperialism' agenda. would you say Wikipedia hates you too?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dasht-i-Leili_massacre

Dasht-i-Leili massacre
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The Dasht-i-Leili massacre occurred in December 2001 during the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan where between 250 and 3000 (depending on sources) Taliban prisoners were shot and/or suffocated to death in metal truck containers, while being transferred by U.S. and Northern Alliance soldiers from Kunduz to Sheberghan prison in Afghanistan.

The controversy surrounds the accounts of two individuals, filmmaker Jamie Doran and writer Robert Young Pelton who was traveling with the U.S. Special Forces attached to Abdul Rashid Dostum’s forces. Doran blames Dostum’s forces for the deaths of the Taliban prisoners. Pelton, on the other hand, completely disputes Doran’s claims.

Doran’s documentary Afghan Massacre: The Convoy of Death documents the evidence based largely on the work of award-winning Afghan journalist Najibullah Quraishi, who says he has seen video evidence of the survivors of the convoy being executed in the desert under supervision of US soldiers, but claims the video was stolen from him. Doran himself admitted in an interview with Stefan Steinberg that he in fact had absolutely no evidence that American troops were involved in the alleged shootings , but believes his sources as to the validity of the massacre charges.

with something more credible than a socialist website.are you allegeing that CNN Guardian and Wikipedia are socialist websites?

would you say Wikipedia hates you too?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dasht-i-Leili_massacre

Dasht-i-Leili massacre
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The Dasht-i-Leili massacre occurred in December 2001 during the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan where between 250 and 3000 (depending on sources) Taliban prisoners were shot and/or suffocated to death in metal truck containers, while being transferred by U.S. and Northern Alliance soldiers from Kunduz to Sheberghan prison in Afghanistan.

The controversy surrounds the accounts of two individuals, filmmaker Jamie Doran and writer Robert Young Pelton who was traveling with the U.S. Special Forces attached to Abdul Rashid Dostum’s forces. Doran blames Dostum’s forces for the deaths of the Taliban prisoners. Pelton, on the other hand, completely disputes Doran’s claims.

Doran’s documentary Afghan Massacre: The Convoy of Death documents the evidence based largely on the work of award-winning Afghan journalist Najibullah Quraishi, who says he has seen video evidence of the survivors of the convoy being executed in the desert under supervision of US soldiers, but claims the video was stolen from him. Doran himself admitted in an interview with Stefan Steinberg that he in fact had absolutely no evidence that American troops were involved in the alleged shootings , but believes his sources as to the validity of the massacre charges.

Did you even read the articles? No evidence of it anywhere? Said multiple times. You still have yet to give any evidence which links that says the U.S. was involved..because even the two filmmakers disagree with each other.

And then you give a CNN article, which states its unclear how those bodies got there. Why those bodies were put there. For all you know it could be a grave site dug by the Taliban. You take the uncertain and jump to conclusions based upon your own pre-established prejudices.So your conclusion is that the Taliban dug the graves?

I dont think so.

are you allegeing that CNN Guardian and Wikipedia are socialist websites?

Have you read the CNN article? You put up websites like they're the cats ass truth and yet the article doesnt give you any backup whatsoever. Only that people died, but no one has a clue who did it. Except the Socialist website who magically knows. As for Wikipedia..cant you edit those pages to make them say what you want them to?

So your conclusion is that the Taliban dug the graves?

I dont think so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dasht-i-Leili_massacre

You should be familiar with this website..especially at the bottom:

Pelton argues that any bodies outside of the 250 Taliban fighters who did die, are likely to be some of the estimated 2,000 Talibs allegedly shot by commander Taliban commander Abdul Malik in 1997 and/or the 10,000 people of the Hazaras tribe killed under Taliban rule.

So your conclusion is that the Taliban dug the graves?

Then they trew themselves in the containers and...sealed themselves in?
and then the dead Bodies walked to the mass grave?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dasht-i-Leili_massacre

You should be familiar with this website..especially at the bottom:

Pelton argues that any bodies outside of the 250 Taliban fighters who did die, are likely to be some of the estimated 2,000 Talibs allegedly shot by commander Taliban commander Abdul Malik in 1997 and/or the 10,000 people of the Hazaras tribe killed under Taliban rule.from CNN "Dostum admits as many as 200 captives died en route to the prison." but other sources say more than a thousand.

250? I dont think so.

But even if only 250 POW were murdered, Its still a Warcrime.

Sorry it took so long, had to buy milk..but anyway..do you have a condition which leads you to see only what suits your arguement but not see anything else which contradicts it?

From your own CNN quoted article:

The ground around Mazar-e-Sharif offers abundant evidence of mass death. In May, investigators with the Boston, Massachusetts-based group Physicians for Human Rights examined a grave in Dasht-e-Leili and said hundreds of victims had been dumped there.

But how and why the men died is still uncertain.


And here we go:

Dostum admits as many as 200 captives died en route to the prison. But he would not elaborate on how much the United States knew or approved of his treatment of the war prisoners.

He is adamant, though, that U.S. forces were not present when the prisoners were loaded into shipping containers.

Are we going to keep doing this all night? I mean you cite a source and I use your own source to disavow what you trying to say that the US did? Because we've gone from an issue of torture at Camp X-ray to whether or not US forces were involved in the container incident. You've yet to back up one of your claims and we go round and round in circles.

Sorry it took so long, had to buy milk..but anyway..do you have a condition which leads you to see only what suits your arguement but not see anything else which contradicts it?ditto

Nice edit.. :)

off the topic but..

You know a union might help you...
I wonder how often some Mods edit Titles that are against Bush...

... Go take it up with the mods and get your affairs in order.

I would like to, but its of no use, she can ban, erase, edit everithing I do...and she does not have to give a reason.

I am sorry you feel this way OceanDrive, but I, Cogitation, and Myrth have OPENLY given the reasons why your thread title was changed.

Not one word of any of your posts have been modified.

I would ask you to stop making accusations about my political affiliations, as they have precisely nothing to do with anything. (In fact, if you choose to search this forum you will see that you are incorrectin your assumptions).