NationStates Jolt Archive

I know that he made the comments Tuesday, but if I've heard anything more reprehensible than this, I honestly can't remember what it was.

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) was reading a letter from an FBI agent who was talking about the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. Durbin remarked, "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings."

Now whether or not the prisoners are being mistreated (has not been proven, but doesn't mean that it might not be happening), there is no possible way that you can relate the interrogation of terrorists who wish to kill anyone that doesn't believe the same way they do to the slaughter of millions of innocent people. If the reports are true of the hog-tying and other acts, they still do not even compare to the gassing, burning, and torture of millions of people that were looked down upon because of their race or belief.

What has happened to the integrity of our politicians? Will they say anything to get their point across? The prison may be harsh and there may be questionable methods of interrogation, and I think these should be investigated, but it is in no way comparable to Nazi concentration camps or the gulags.

and the proof that they are terrorists.....?

I compare it to my social studies teacher in my sophmore year... What a b... :p

and the proof that they are terrorists.....?
Could it be the fact that they were in Al Qaeda or the Taliban? I mean, unless you want to overlook those factions. Have they flown planes into buildings? No. Have they aided in the planning of these actions? No doubt.

I know that he made the comments Tuesday, but if I've heard anything more reprehensible than this, I honestly can't remember what it was.

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) was reading a letter from an FBI agent who was talking about the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. Durbin remarked, "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings."

Now whether or not the prisoners are being mistreated (has not been proven, but doesn't mean that it might not be happening), there is no possible way that you can relate the interrogation of terrorists who wish to kill anyone that doesn't believe the same way they do to the slaughter of millions of innocent people. If the reports are true of the hog-tying and other acts, they still do not even compare to the gassing, burning, and torture of millions of people that were looked down upon because of their race or belief.

What has happened to the integrity of our politicians? Will they say anything to get their point across? The prison may be harsh and there may be questionable methods of interrogation, and I think these should be investigated, but it is in no way comparable to Nazi concentration camps or the gulags.

Interesting how you completely miss that he was alluding not to the genocide, but to the actual interrogation methods and treatment used by the Nazis and the Soviets, making his allusion completely relevant.

Could it be the fact that they were in Al Qaeda or the Taliban? I mean, unless you want to overlook those factions. Have they flown planes into buildings? No. Have they aided in the planning of these actions? No doubt.

Wow, so there have been trials where evidence was put forth and their guilt was ascertained?

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) was reading a letter from an FBI agent who was talking about the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. Durbin remarked, "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings."

Now whether or not the prisoners are being mistreated (has not been proven, but doesn't mean that it might not be happening), there is no possible way that you can relate the interrogation of terrorists who wish to kill anyone that doesn't believe the same way they do to the slaughter of millions of innocent people.

Are you claiming that everybody who ended up in a concentration camp under the Nazis, or in a Gulag under the USSR or was killed at the order of the Khmer Rouge was innocent?

Are you claiming that everybody who ended up in a concentration camp under the Nazis, or in a Gulag under the USSR or was killed at the order of the Khmer Rouge was innocent?
Could you tell me what they were guilty of? I'm not aware of anything.

Wow, so there have been trials where evidence was put forth and their guilt was ascertained?


Technically, they aren't entitled to a trial, nor are the covered by the Geneva convention.

Technically, they aren't entitled to a trial, nor are the covered by the Geneva convention.

They are covered by the declaration of human rights. It gives them the right to a trial.

Interesting how you completely miss that he was alluding not to the genocide, but to the actual interrogation methods and treatment used by the Nazis and the Soviets, making his allusion completely relevant.
Have you been to it? I'm not aware of these treatments that you're talking about. My main question is this...why would any self-respecting senator say this? Why would any law-maker want to compare his country to that of WW2 Germany?

Could you tell me what they were guilty of? I'm not aware of anything.

Common criminals were the victims of all three.

Common criminals were the victims of all three.
Okay, so 1 in 20,000. I'm sorry, I didn't know we were splitting hairs here. Disregard my whole post, please.

Why would any law-maker want to compare his country to that of WW2 Germany?

... because they think it's an accurate comparison? 'It's my country' doesn't have to be followed with 'and it's perfect'.

Have you been to it? I'm not aware of these treatments that you're talking about. My main question is this...why would any self-respecting senator say this? Why would any law-maker want to compare his country to that of WW2 Germany?

Any self-respecting senator who puts human rights above patriotism.

Have you been to it? I'm not aware of these treatments that you're talking about.

Been to where? If you mean Gitmo, the US is refusing international oversight. What is it that you have to hide? The reports seem to reveal...

My main question is this...why would any self-respecting senator say this? Why would any law-maker want to compare his country to that of WW2 Germany?

1. He wasn't. He was comparing the methods used to those used by Nazis, Soviets and the Khmer Rouge, a valid comparison.

2. Because he is ashamed of what his country is doing and wants to stop this disgraceful behaviour?

Okay, so 1 in 20,000. I'm sorry, I didn't know we were splitting hairs here. Disregard my whole post, please.

Given that you appear to have missed the entire point of the statement you quoted, splitting hairs is all that is left to us.

Have you been to it? I'm not aware of these treatments that you're talking about. My main question is this...why would any self-respecting senator say this? Why would any law-maker want to compare his country to that of WW2 Germany?

Maybe because they realize the country may have commited wrongs that were also done by say WW2 Germany and think that alluding to this helps better illustrate their point?

1. He wasn't. He was comparing the methods used to those used by Nazis, Soviets and the Khmer Rouge, a valid comparison.
A valid comparison by what standards? These prisoners are treated much better than most prisoners in the world (except Martha Stewart) and there has been no real credible evidence that there is torture.

A valid comparison by what standards?

By standards of decency.

These prisoners are treated much better than most prisoners in the world

Wow, so the US has let observers in to make sure of that? Proved so to be the case?

(except Martha Stewart) and there has been no real credible evidence that there is torture.

Yeah, except reports from your own government, such as the 2000 page report reported on by the New York times a few weeks ago where torture was proved. Oh, yeah, and those pictures from Aby Ghurayb, they were just photoshopped?

Are you claiming that everybody who ended up in a concentration camp under the Nazis, or in a Gulag under the USSR or was killed at the order of the Khmer Rouge was innocent?

Most killed by the Khmer Rouge WERE innocent. Pol Pot had EVERYONE who didn't fit his ideal for Cambodia killed. All educated persons. Persons with glasses, because he believed people with glasses were intelligent. I've studied the Khmer Rouge pretty extensively. Those killed were almost all innocent citizens.

Anyhoo... These methods of interrogation should not be allowed. I don't give a shit what the terrorists do or have done. We don't need to sink to their level. It makes me sick.

The worst torture yet: Apparently they have to listen to intollerably loud music... A CONTINUOUS LOOP OF CHRISTINA AGUILARA! No shit!!! That's got to be against the Geneva Convention. :eek:

Disregard my whole post, please.

Done.

Anything else I can help you with?

The existence of Camp X-Ray is detestable. These are just words.

By standards of decency.



Wow, so the US has let observers in to make sure of that? Proved so to be the case?



Yeah, except reports from your own government, such as the 2000 page report reported on by the New York times a few weeks ago where torture was proved. Oh, yeah, and those pictures from Aby Ghurayb, they were just photoshopped?
Prisoners are allowed hot meals, their customary 6 prayers a day, they are provided 2 muslim chaplains that are employed by the government, and all this is paid for by our taxes, so it costs them nothing.

Abu Ghraib, wow, I didn't think this would come up. I thought we were talking about Guantanamo? The people involved with Abu Ghraib have been taken care of, and the situation is over. It was a group of irresponsible, abusive soldiers that had a lack in command. It has nothing to do with what's going on in Cuba.

I think the problem is that they are only concerned with genocide link and conveniently forget about the other treatments that were being given prior to their termination. I would assume that means things that usually involve much physical and mental distress to the prisoner.

And since some people insist that there is no proof of that, allow me to use a certain phrase from a very high ranking politician.

"Lack of proof is not proof of lack"

And I do believe that the same person was somewhat responsible behind the facility as well. Isn't it fun when statements can be turned around to bite someone where they least expect it?

Prisoners are allowed hot meals, their customary 6 prayers a day, they are provided 2 muslim chaplains that are employed by the government, and all this is paid for by our taxes, so it costs them nothing.

Claims the US government, whose credibility has been such a shining beacon of integrity this century.

Abu Ghraib, wow, I didn't think this would come up. I thought we were talking about Guantanamo?

Hey, you were somehow trying to say that the US doesn't torture people. You have, you do. This has been proved over and over again - even by your own government's reports. Abu Ghurayb is something which is such a good example to bring forth to show, that, look, the US has been shown to be a human rights violator, and that claims to what is going on in Guantanamo are, your history examined, quite credible.

The people involved with Abu Ghraib have been taken care of, and the situation is over.

Yeah, sure. Some lowly peons were taken out, while the all the big shots got away. And then more reports came in to the same sorts of abuses...

It was a group of irresponsible, abusive soldiers that had a lack in command. It has nothing to do with what's going on in Cuba.

You keep telling yourself that, and turn a blind eye to your own government's reports to the contrary - that Abu Ghurayb was in no way special or isolated.

I know that he made the comments Tuesday, but if I've heard anything more reprehensible than this, I honestly can't remember what it was.

so you find the idea that if one didn't know the context of a description of prisoner abuse, one would be much more likely to link that description with some sort of totalitarian regime than with the united states of america to be reprehensible.

in other words, you find it reprehensible that when someone describes torture america isn't the first thing that leaps to mind.

amazing. welcome to the anti-america club. glad to have you aboard.

I'm going to avoid the urge to call you retarded. You have clearly been indoctrinated, one of the mad masses who will believe anything the state throws at them. Oh, how I pity you.

you don't know what was in the letter. Maby when reading it, it sounded like a Nazi/Soviet/et cetera prision camp.

They have not been proven to be Al Queida. Most have not even been charged. Many are there because they were Arab and on visa violations.

The US gov says they are guilty of the same thing the Soviets/Nazis said their victims were guilty of. See the paralell yet?

You can't blindly believe your gov.

If they are being treated so good, why not let in internationl people to prove it?

I know that he made the comments Tuesday, but if I've heard anything more reprehensible than this, I honestly can't remember what it was.

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) was reading a letter from an FBI agent who was talking about the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. Durbin remarked, "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings."

Now whether or not the prisoners are being mistreated (has not been proven, but doesn't mean that it might not be happening), there is no possible way that you can relate the interrogation of terrorists who wish to kill anyone that doesn't believe the same way they do to the slaughter of millions of innocent people. If the reports are true of the hog-tying and other acts, they still do not even compare to the gassing, burning, and torture of millions of people that were looked down upon because of their race or belief.

What has happened to the integrity of our politicians? Will they say anything to get their point across? The prison may be harsh and there may be questionable methods of interrogation, and I think these should be investigated, but it is in no way comparable to Nazi concentration camps or the gulags.
Wow, yet another person to totally miss the point of that statement. The fellow was (correctly) comparing TECHNIQUES of interogation, and was pointing out that we, as Americans, shouldn't be allowing or encouraging the use of tactics that resemble those used by the Nazis or other such groups. It doesn't matter who you are interogating, or how guilty they might be, we still should never sink to the level of torture...not if we want to hold on to any of our claims to honor.

I would really love it if people would stop making excuses for torture. I would love it if people would stop attacking those who dare to suggest that America should oppose torture. I would love it if people would stop thinking that it is fair for America to use the methods we decry other governments for using. I believe we are better than this, and that America should not permit its military or its government to use torture against anybody. Saying, "well, those guys have done worse stuff!" does not in any way mitigate the use of 'minor' torture techniques. Pointing the finger at people who have been even wickeder, or who were wicked first, doesn't cut it with me. Such playground finger-pointing is totally unworthy of America.

I love my country, and I am as ashamed of torture appologists as I am of the people who are perpetrating these abuses in the first place. You are an embarassment to the best values of America.

I'm going to avoid the urge to call you retarded. You have clearly been indoctrinated, one of the mad masses who will believe anything the state throws at them. Oh, how I pity you.
I appreciate your consideration in not calling me retarded. You're so nice, and I wish there were more out there like you.

I'm going to avoid the urge to call you retarded. You have clearly been indoctrinated, one of the mad masses who will believe anything the state throws at them. Oh, how I pity you.

Hint: if you are going to flame someone it helps if you quote them first so that we know who you are breaking the rules against.

Wow, yet another person to totally miss the point of that statement. The fellow was (correctly) comparing TECHNIQUES of interogation, and was pointing out that we, as Americans, shouldn't be allowing or encouraging the use of tactics that resemble those used by the Nazis or other such groups. It doesn't matter who you are interogating, or how guilty they might be, we still should never sink to the level of torture...not if we want to hold on to any of our claims to honor.

I would really love it if people would stop making excuses for torture. I would love it if people would stop attacking those who dare to suggest that America should oppose torture. I would love it if people would stop thinking that it is fair for America to use the methods we decry other governments for using. I believe we are better than this, and that America should not permit its military or its government to use torture against anybody. Saying, "well, those guys have done worse stuff!" does not in any way mitigate the use of 'minor' torture techniques. Pointing the finger at people who have been even wickeder, or who were wicked first, doesn't cut it with me. Such playground finger-pointing is totally unworthy of America.

I love my country, and I am as ashamed of torture appologists as I am of the people who are perpetrating these abuses in the first place. You are an embarassment to the best values of America.
I'm still waiting to hear the "same methods" that we supposedly use. Have we starved anyone to death? Have we dripped water on their heads until they tell us what we want to hear? Have we put them on a rack and stretched them? Have we hung them upside down? Have we shaved them, sanitized them, and left them to starve? Have we dipped them in a pool and left them in subzero temps to freeze to death?

So, let's get this straight.

Prisoners (mostly insurgents and their facilitators) in Gitmo have to suffer through:

1) Their air conditioned cells made too hot or too cold as a means of interrogation.
2) Uncomfortable poses/positions.
3) Having loud, obnoxious music blasted at them. (a)
4) Being around scantily clad women.
5) Having water dripped on them.
6) Getting free qur'ans.
7) Getting access to muslim chaplains (paid for by our tax dollars).
8) Being allowed their mulitple, uninterrupted prayer times.
9) Getting culturally-appropriate, hot meals such as orange-glazed chicken with rice pilaf.

And this is somehow comparable to people being starved, gassed, burned, mowed down en masse by machine gun fire, having bio-warfare experiments performed on them, being rounded up and stuffed in boxcars to tightly that many died even before reaching the horrors of the concentration camps/gulags, living in pest and disease ridden wards, etc etc etc ???

You people are absolute nuts with no sense of perspective. None whatsoever.

(a) - if this is "torture", then every single asshole with a loud stereo system that pulls up next to me at a stoplight, blaring shitty rap music, needs to be rounded up and tried as war criminals.

I'm still waiting to hear the "same methods" that we supposedly use. Have we starved anyone to death? Have we dripped water on their heads until they tell us what we want to hear? Have we put them on a rack and stretched them? Have we hung them upside down?
*Sigh*

So many things wrong with this, I don't even know where to start. Does anybody else feel like picking through the logical falacies? I'm going to get a beer.

*Sigh*

So many things wrong with this, I don't even know where to start. Does anybody else feel like picking through the logical falacies? I'm going to get a beer.
No, why don't you do it?

I'm still waiting to hear the "same methods" that we supposedly use. Have we starved anyone to death? Have we dripped water on their heads until they tell us what we want to hear? Have we put them on a rack and stretched them? Have we hung them upside down?

I hope crow tastes good. (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/international/asia/20abuse.html?) (Use http://www.bugmenot.com if you don't want to register.)

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) was reading a letter from an FBI agent who was talking about the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. Durbin remarked, "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings."
Although this both saddens and angers me, it doesn't surprise me. As with Vietnam, when a significant percentage of the public becomes impatient with a conflict, rest assured that some politician will try to make political hay out of it. And again, as with Vientam, the next step is to demean and harrass the soldiers.

All I can say is that anyone trying to harrass or intimidate any of these young men and women soliders will do so over my dead body. And I won't be alone in this. There are a huge number of Vietnam veterans who vowed, "never again!"

Dick Durbin hits it. He's quite right.

Every disgusting regime smeared and attacked those they arrested, but until they are SHOWN to be terrorists they should not be considered terrorists.

Especially considering that Human Rights Watch and other organizations have reported that in places like Iraq a large majority of those detained have in fact NOT been terrorists.

I hope crow tastes good. (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/international/asia/20abuse.html?) (Use http://www.bugmenot.com if you don't want to register.)
I'm sorry, but isn't that about Bagram? It's several thousands of miles away from Guantanamo. This thread is to discuss what the Senator said in it's relation to Guantanamo. You can start another one on Afghanistan if you'd like.

Although this both saddens and angers me, it doesn't surprise me. As with Vietnam, when a significant percentage of the public becomes impatient with a conflict, rest assured that some politician will try to make political hay out of it. And again, as with Vientam, the next step is to demean and harrass the soldiers.

All I can say is that anyone trying to harrass or intimidate any of these young men and women soliders will do so over my dead body. And I won't be alone in this. There are a huge number of Vietnam veterans who vowed, "never again!"

Wait a minute --- Are you saying that no American soldier has done anything wrong thus far, and it's all a game of finger pointing for political gains?

Surely, you're not that naive...

I hope crow tastes good. (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/international/asia/20abuse.html?) (Use http://www.bugmenot.com if you don't want to register.)
Fass, could you please just quote the part that makes your point? I did read one particular method they mentioned...but then they ask you to buy the rest of the article......

I'm sorry, but isn't that about Bagram? It's several thousands of miles away from Guantanamo. This thread is to discuss what the Senator said in it's relation to Guantanamo. You can start another one on Afghanistan if you'd like.


I'm still waiting to hear the "same methods" that we supposedly use. Have we starved anyone to death? Have we dripped water on their heads until they tell us what we want to hear? Have we put them on a rack and stretched them? Have we hung them upside down?
You did not specifiy WHERE you wanted the abuses to be from. You were talking about all soldiers (from what I read in your last quote). So...are you saying, "Yeah, I know torture has been used by American soldiers in other places, BUT NOT IN GITMO, SO THERE!!!"?

Every disgusting regime smeared and attacked those they arrested, but until they are SHOWN to be terrorists they should not be considered terrorists.
So we should try every Iraqi with a gun just to be sure? What about all those kids down in Columbia, let's just round them up while we're at it.

Have you been to it? I'm not aware of these treatments that you're talking about. My main question is this...why would any self-respecting senator say this? Why would any law-maker want to compare his country to that of WW2 Germany?

Because it's his duty to say what he thinks. That is if the job of the Senate and it's memebrs is to scrutinise the work of the executive branch. But please if the job of the legislative branch of the USA is to blindly support the actions of the executive then I apologise for the mistake. :rolleyes:

You did not specifiy WHERE you wanted the abuses to be from. You were talking about all soldiers (from what I read in your last quote). So...are you saying, "Yeah, I know torture has been used by American soldiers in other places, BUT NOT IN GITMO, SO THERE!!!"?
The person I quoted was talking about what Durbin said about Guantanamo and the soldiers there. That's what this whole thread is about. I wasn't trying to talk about anything besides that fact.

We seem to be forgetting about the soldier pissing on the detainees... Not to mention what happened with the Korans...

So we should try every Iraqi with a gun just to be sure?

Self-defense is self-defense.

I cannot criticize the soldiers shooting at those shooting them. That is a totally different issue. I think by far the best means of securing them would be bringing them home now though, and for that and other reasons that is the course of action I support.

But all of this is separate from the issue at discussion: how to deal with PRISONERS.

Could it be the fact that they were in Al Qaeda or the Taliban? I mean, unless you want to overlook those factions. Have they flown planes into buildings? No. Have they aided in the planning of these actions? No doubt.

They aren't. Several of them have been released without charge, at their countrys' insistence, so you don't mean to suggest we're letting Al-Qaeda terrorists free do you?

We got most of those people by offering a bounty. If someone offered me several thousand dollars to point out terrorists no questions asked there are quite a few people I'd be tempted to turn in. In countries where families are in armed conflict with eachother, the request "we'll give you $5000 for information leading to the arrest of suspected al-queda terrorists. Would you happen to know of anyone that you think is working for them?" would probably be translated as "we'll kill all your enemies for you and pay you $5000 a person for the privilege. Where can we find your enemies?"

Just being arrested does not make you a terrorist. If you want detestable then take a look at Rep. Duncan Hunter's claim that because there's the names of some Lean Cuisine meals written on a piece of paper that we should be angry, not because they're being treated badly, but that we should be angry that we have to pay for their luxury treatment.

If anyone is seriously angry that we have politicians calling secretive prison camps that have been declared outside the juristiction of the American court system a bad thing then you are the worst case argument for the benifits of electoral government.

Durbin is a douche-bag.

He is so concerned for human rights all of a sudden. He is a scum bag politician, shooting off his mouth, to serve his own agenda, in a country where he is safe expressing himself in.

To all the people who are so horrified by alleged torture- Where the Hell were you when sadaam was REALLY torturing men,women and children? Where were you when Iraqi soldiers were shooting men woman and children and bulldozing them into mass graves? he really did this and there is real proof. Gassing the Kurds?
For these, I see people demanding links to proof time and time again-then a link is provided, but the source isnt good enough for you.

F those being held in Guantanamo. There werent innocent bystanders kidnapped for fun and profit. They were people trying to kill other people, but failed and now hope we wont kill them. If the circumstances were that they captured Americans, they would have chopped their heads off a long time ago. They are there for a good reason. And guess what? No one owes you an explanation for why they are there.

The Iraqi people had no rights? How about all the other Hell holes across Africa where diseased and starving people are being slaughtered? Or you just dont care if it isnt Americans being accused of atrocities?

We seem to be forgetting about the soldier pissing on the detainees... Not to mention what happened with the Korans...
HAH, I was waiting for this to come up. Saudi Arabia was one of the first countries to protest against the destruction of those Korans, yet they've been destroying Bibles for years. Saudi Arabia is named by Human Rights campaigners to be the worst violater of religious freedom, and symbols that aren't approved by the Wahhabi establishment are banned from the country. If there is going to be an outcry of our desecration of a few Korans, then there should be an even bigger one related to this.

HAH, I was waiting for this to come up. Saudi Arabia was one of the first countries to protest against the destruction of those Korans, yet they've been destroying Bibles for years. Saudi Arabia is named by Human Rights campaigners to be the worst violater of religious freedom, and symbols that aren't approved by the Wahhabi establishment are banned from the country. If there is going to be an outcry of our desecration of a few Korans, then there should be an even bigger one related to this.

Hahaha. You say our actions are okay, because another country's actions are worse?

Let me laugh again.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

Interesting how you completely miss that he was alluding not to the genocide, but to the actual interrogation methods and treatment used by the Nazis and the Soviets, making his allusion completely relevant.

It's detestable not because it's untrue or unjustified, but because it's critical of Dubya.

No doubt if the Dubya team did indeed lock up several million muslims as well as democrats, homosexuals, neo-pagans, and athiests and started killing them in specious medical experiments and eventually gas chambers, and invaded Canada and Mexico, we'd still have republicans claiming that it's unfair to compare those actions to those of the Nazi's because Hitler primarily killed Jews and invaded Eastern European countries, neither of which Dubya has done, and Hitler had an ugly mustache, Bush is clean shaven.

Hahaha. You say our actions are okay, because another country's actions are worse?

Let me laugh again.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.
I didn't say our actions were good, just that all sides of that story should be brought out if there's going to be an argument against it. I love it when disrespectful people roam the threads. It makes things so interesting.

Durbin is a douche-bag.

He is so concerned for human rights all of a sudden. He is a scum bag politician, shooting off his mouth, to serve his own agenda, in a country where he is safe expressing himself in.

Well this explains why anyone would vote Republican if they're even slightly informed of the issues. Didn't think any of you were actually willing to come right out and admit that you have an anti-civil rights agenda though.

Hahaha. You say our actions are okay, because another country's actions are worse?

Let me laugh again.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

america: still not as bad as stalin!

To all the people who are so horrified by alleged torture- Where the Hell were you when sadaam was REALLY torturing men,women and children? Where were you when Iraqi soldiers were shooting men woman and children and bulldozing them into mass graves? he really did this and there is real proof. Gassing the Kurds?
Why does this point get made so often? I've said it before...TORTURE IS WRONG. People WERE kicking up a fuss about what was happening in Iraq before the invasion...but the US government at that point didn't have a reason to go in. All of a sudden, belatedly, they bring these abuses by Saddam and his cronies up as justification? Same goes for the Taliban...the international community was almost unanimous in their protest of human rights abuses there...but it only became a rallying point when the US felt like it (and the rest of the countries that didn't act before also piss me off).

Point being...you may not remember the anger and the outrage and the work that people did to help those who were suffering in Iraq...but it was there. It simply wasn't an issue that had anything to do with your government at the time, so you weren't seeing the finger pointing at you.

NO ONE is saying, "Yay for Saddam! Kill those nasty Kurds! Aww...prisoners in Gitmo...so cute and cuddly, don't hurt them".

We are saying, if you want to be a 'shining beacon' to the international community, have some fucking standards.


The Iraqi people had no rights? How about all the other Hell holes across Africa where diseased and starving people are being slaughtered? Or you just dont care if it isnt Americans being accused of atrocities Again...you don't hear it because these protests aren't being directed at you or your government. But the resistance is there.

Could it be the fact that they were in Al Qaeda or the Taliban? I mean, unless you want to overlook those factions. Have they flown planes into buildings? No. Have they aided in the planning of these actions? No doubt.
Again, proof being where exactly, does taliban or al quieda have membership cardsa that say
"Abdul jakeem zabar
Al Queida operative
2nd class"

?

HAH, I was waiting for this to come up. Saudi Arabia was one of the first countries to protest against the destruction of those Korans, yet they've been destroying Bibles for years. Saudi Arabia is named by Human Rights campaigners to be the worst violater of religious freedom, and symbols that aren't approved by the Wahhabi establishment are banned from the country. If there is going to be an outcry of our desecration of a few Korans, then there should be an even bigger one related to this.
Sounds an awful lot like, "Hey...they STARTED it...."

america: still not as bad as stalin!

Different story in the facial hair department:

Stalin 1-0 Bush.

I didn't say our actions were good, just that all sides of that story should be brought out if there's going to be an argument against it. I love it when disrespectful people roam the threads. It makes things so interesting.
What is the point of bringing up a subject (alleged abuses) and then saying, "But if we're going to talk about this, we have to talk about ALL the abuse that happens all over the world, and compare it to see if it's really that bad after all. That's fair and balanced."

Do you really want your standards set like this? By comparing them to what others do? What do you really want to accomplish with making sure we all talk about every abuse that governments commit, when we are discussing such a specific issue?

Sounds an awful lot like, "Hey...they STARTED it...."
Or it sounds a lot like, this may be happening here, but it's been happening for a lot longer elsewhere, let's tell both sides of the stories. Everyone's so critical as to how we're handling our situations, but no one wants to talk about what else is going on in the world.

What is the point of bringing up a subject (alleged abuses) and then saying, "But if we're going to talk about this, we have to talk about ALL the abuse that happens all over the world, and compare it to see if it's really that bad after all. That's fair and balanced."

Do you really want your standards set like this? By comparing them to what others do? What do you really want to accomplish with making sure we all talk about every abuse that governments commit, when we are discussing such a specific issue?
I was talking about the desecration of Korans...was I not?

Hahaha. You say our actions are okay, because another country's actions are worse?

Let me laugh again.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

That argument shows up a lot, it's really funny how that happens. Apparently, yes, a lot of people /do/ believe that because someone else does appaling things, we are justified in doing anything /less/ appaling back to them. Or the same amount of appaling, sometimes - dear old 'an eye for an eye'.

I find it very bizzare, really. Just because you're fighting an enemy with different, or less, morals and values, doesn't mean you should shift or sink to their level. Balance is not actually required if you want to come out on top.

Or it sounds a lot like, this may be happening here, but it's been happening for a lot longer elsewhere, let's tell both sides of the stories. Everyone's so critical as to how we're handling our situations, but no one wants to talk about what else is going on in the world.
Bullshit.

We do talk about it. A lot. It simply isn't relevant to what your government is doing (or not). A Tibetan monk being tortured in China does not have any impact on whether detainees are being abused in Gitmo. So what relevance does it actually have to this discussion?

Now, if you want to talk about Chinese human rights abuses, let's do so. But don't bring up abuses committed by other governments as some sort of smokescreen for what is your own government is doing. Both sides of the story would be discussing the allegations, and the defense. Not this.

Wait a minute --- Are you saying that no American soldier has done anything wrong thus far, and it's all a game of finger pointing for political gains?

Surely, you're not that naive...
No, I didn't say that. If a specific soldier has committed a specific act which is contrary to law, he or she should be prosecuted. What I am saying is that blaming military personnel for being in an unpopular war is analagous to shooting the messenger because you don't like the message.

I was talking about the desecration of Korans...was I not?
Yes...and? So, Saudi Arabia desecrating Bibles forced your hand? That's what MADE them desecrate the Koran?

There is not a cause-effect link here. Pissing on Korans is not one side of the story, and desecrating Bibles the other.

Yes...and? So, Saudi Arabia desecrating Bibles forced your hand? That's what MADE them desecrate the Koran?

There is not a cause-effect link here. Pissing on Korans is not one side of the story, and desecrating Bibles the other.


Saudi Arabia doesnt even allow a US soldier to bring a personal bible there. Nor alcohol.

Saudi Arabia doesnt even allow a US soldier to bring a personal bible there. Nor alcohol.
So.....?
(I'm taking at face value the accusation that Bibles were desecrated by the way...I hadn't actually heard that...but what is the point?)

Due to the face that I have classes in 20 minutes and Eutrusca is the only other one debating on this side of the argument, I think this thread's pretty much done. You guys can keep it up if you feel like it though.

I always (in my naive little dream world) wanted the US to set an example to other countries by treating prisoners well. Not torturing them, etc.

And getting an answer out of a prisoner after a long period of sleep deprivation is ridiculous, as the prisoner probably doesn't know what he's even saying after lack of sleep. I find that terrible.

The other gov'ts torture our soldiers. I'd love to see the US rise above.

That last statement brought to you by: Hype's Utopian Dreamworld

Due to the face that I have classes in 20 minutes and Eutrusca is the only other one debating on this side of the argument, I think this thread's pretty much done. You guys can keep it up if you feel like it though.
Damn it...I'm starting to have fun!!!! FORGET CLASS! STAY! PLEASE!!!!

Well Carn...it's up to you to satisfy my blood lust...

Saudi Arabia doesnt even allow a US soldier to bring a personal bible there. Nor alcohol.

Okay, point one, desecration of the Bible isn't actually a major religious no-no. Desecrating a Qu'ran is. There /is/ a difference here.

Point two, again, what is this theory of 'They do worse, so let's focus on them, who we can't do anything about/so it's okay if we do bad stuff'? Can someone please explain it to me?

Look, the fact of the matter is that the Senator made extravagant and intemperate comments. If you're going to compare object A to object B, I would prefer that there at least be some sort of similarity between the two.

Once the interrogators at Guantanamo Bay start giving their prisoners sulphuric acid enemas, then we can talk about how the place and its methods resemble those of Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin or (insert tyrant of your choice here).

Until that day, all such comparaisons are just a lot of hot air spewed forth to make a cheap political point.

Well this explains why anyone would vote Republican if they're even slightly informed of the issues. Didn't think any of you were actually willing to come right out and admit that you have an anti-civil rights agenda though.


Its not a rupublican/democrat issue. I'm not anti civil rights. Civil rights protect people in the US. When al Queda terrorists are caught in the US, its a whole different story.

Point two, again, what is this theory of 'They do worse, so let's focus on them, who we can't do anything about/so it's okay if we do bad stuff'? Can someone please explain it to me?
It's being avoided.

Okay, point one, desecration of the Bible isn't actually a major religious no-no. Desecrating a Qu'ran is. There /is/ a difference here.

It may be formalized in Islam, but desecrating a Bible is still a huge insult to most Christians.

Until that day, all such comparaisons are just a lot of hot air spewed forth to make a cheap political point.
Well frankly...you've just hit on what fuels everything that comes out of the mouths of politicians :D

No, I didn't say that. If a specific soldier has committed a specific act which is contrary to law, he or she should be prosecuted. What I am saying is that blaming military personnel for being in an unpopular war is analagous to shooting the messenger because you don't like the message.

Well, it's not their fault they're in the war. However, it *is* their fault if they go and torture people, regardless of them wanting to be in the war or not.

Okay, point one, desecration of the Bible isn't actually a major religious no-no. Desecrating a Qu'ran is. There /is/ a difference here.

Point two, again, what is this theory of 'They do worse, so let's focus on them, who we can't do anything about/so it's okay if we do bad stuff'? Can someone please explain it to me?


Being the enemy of the US is a major "no-no". Desecrate the rule book.

It may be formalized in Islam, but desecrating a Bible is still a huge insult to most Christians.

Insult, yes, but it isn't going to (guessing here, based on basic knowledge of religion) make them think that God hates them or is going to hate them or somesuch. And it isn't going to drive them into religious despair.

HAH, I was waiting for this to come up. Saudi Arabia was one of the first countries to protest against the destruction of those Korans, yet they've been destroying Bibles for years. Saudi Arabia is named by Human Rights campaigners to be the worst violater of religious freedom, and symbols that aren't approved by the Wahhabi establishment are banned from the country. If there is going to be an outcry of our desecration of a few Korans, then there should be an even bigger one related to this.

You should work for the tourism board. I can see the slogans you'd come up with.

"Come to America. We're nicer than Hitler."
"USA. We're less closed minded than a middle eastern theocratic monarchy."

Fass, could you please just quote the part that makes your point? I did read one particular method they mentioned...but then they ask you to buy the rest of the article......

Weird, I can read it all:
[...]"Then he arrived in the interrogation room, an interpreter who was present said, his legs were bouncing uncontrollably in the plastic chair and his hands were numb. He had been chained by the wrists to the top of his cell for much of the previous four days.

Mr. Dilawar asked for a drink of water, and one of the two interrogators, Specialist Joshua R. Claus, 21, picked up a large plastic bottle. But first he punched a hole in the bottom, the interpreter said, so as the prisoner fumbled weakly with the cap, the water poured out over his orange prison scrubs. The soldier then grabbed the bottle back and began squirting the water forcefully into Mr. Dilawar's face.

"Come on, drink!" the interpreter said Specialist Claus had shouted, as the prisoner gagged on the spray. "Drink!"

At the interrogators' behest, a guard tried to force the young man to his knees. But his legs, which had been pummeled by guards for several days, could no longer bend. An interrogator told Mr. Dilawar that he could see a doctor after they finished with him. When he was finally sent back to his cell, though, the guards were instructed only to chain the prisoner back to the ceiling.

"Leave him up," one of the guards quoted Specialist Claus as saying.

Several hours passed before an emergency room doctor finally saw Mr. Dilawar. By then he was dead, his body beginning to stiffen. It would be many months before Army investigators learned a final horrific detail: Most of the interrogators had believed Mr. Dilawar was an innocent man who simply drove his taxi past the American base at the wrong time."

[...]

"In sworn statements to Army investigators, soldiers describe one female interrogator with a taste for humiliation stepping on the neck of one prostrate detainee and kicking another in the genitals. They tell of a shackled prisoner being forced to roll back and forth on the floor of a cell, kissing the boots of his two interrogators as he went. Yet another prisoner is made to pick plastic bottle caps out of a drum mixed with excrement and water as part of a strategy to soften him up for questioning."

[...]

"Prisoners considered important or troublesome were also handcuffed and chained to the ceilings and doors of their cells, sometimes for long periods, an action Army prosecutors recently classified as criminal assault."

[...]

"Senior officers frequently toured the detention center, and several of them acknowledged seeing prisoners chained up for punishment or to deprive them of sleep. Shortly before the two deaths, observers from the International Committee of the Red Cross specifically complained to the military authorities at Bagram about the shackling of prisoners in "fixed positions," documents show."

[...]

"A Saudi detainee who was interviewed by Army investigators last June at Guantánamo said Specialist Corsetti had pulled out his penis during an interrogation at Bagram, held it against the prisoner's face and threatened to rape him, excerpts from the man's statement show."

[...]

The company received basic lessons in handling prisoners at Fort Dix, N.J., and some police and corrections officers in its ranks provided further training. That instruction included an overview of "pressure-point control tactics" and notably the "common peroneal strike" - a potentially disabling blow to the side of the leg, just above the knee.

[...]

"When Sgt. James P. Boland saw Mr. Habibullah on Dec. 3, he was in one of the isolation cells, tethered to the ceiling by two sets of handcuffs and a chain around his waist. His body was slumped forward, held up by the chains.

Sergeant Boland told the investigators he had entered the cell with two other guards, Specialists Anthony M. Morden and Brian E. Cammack. (All three have been charged with assault and other crimes.) One of them pulled off the prisoner's black hood. His head was slumped to one side, his tongue sticking out. Specialist Cammack said he had put some bread on Mr. Habibullah's tongue. Another soldier put an apple in the prisoner's hand; it fell to the floor.

When Specialist Cammack turned back toward the prisoner, he said in one statement, Mr. Habibullah's spit hit his chest. Later, Specialist Cammack acknowledged, "I'm not sure if he spit at me." But at the time, he exploded, yelling, "Don't ever spit on me again!" and kneeing the prisoner sharply in the thigh, "maybe a couple" of times. Mr. Habibullah's limp body swayed back and forth in the chains."

And so on, and so on. It's a very long article detailing horrendous abuse.

You should work for the tourism board. I can see the slogans you'd come up with.

"Come to America. We're nicer than Hitler."
"USA. We're less closed minded than a middle eastern theocratic monarchy."
BAHHAHHAAAA!!!!

Damn it...I'm starting to have fun!!!! FORGET CLASS! STAY! PLEASE!!!!

Well Carn...it's up to you to satisfy my blood lust...
haha, sorry to ruin your day...maybe (in fact definitely) another time

Well frankly...you've just hit on what fuels everything that comes out of the mouths of politicians :D

Yes, but I had higher hopes of them. They are both trivializing what happened in those other regimes around the world and making a mockery of the US's efforts to not be like those other regimes.

*snip*
Thank you very much Fass.

*waits for the justifications to start flying...oh...but look at what so and so did....*

Or perhaps we can just accept that YES, abuses are being committed, and NO they are not acceptable, and it is good that in an open-democratic nation these sorts of things are not well-hidden, are being questioned, and hopefully rooted out?

Sounds an awful lot like, "Hey...they STARTED it...."

Well hey, that's the way America works these days.

Before the whole 9/11 thing we tried to provoke Saddam into attacking by bombing him and flying over his airspace in maneuvers that had nothing to do with the "no fly zone." Essentially we were playing "I'm not touching you, you can't get mad if I'm not touching you."

Just the other day a congresional meeting was ended when the chairman just walked out and refused to listent to what anyone else had to say. As Jon Stewart described it, "He's literally taking his gavel and going home. Our government is now officially run by children."

Yes, but I had higher hopes of them. They are both trivializing what happened in those other regimes around the world and making a mockery of the US's efforts to not be like those other regimes.
Actually, the people committing abuses are doing that. And never have high hopes of politicians. You'll always be let down.

I'll be back in an hour

Different story in the facial hair department:

Stalin 1-0 Bush.

this means war!!!!!

*two weeks later*

http://img159.echo.cx/img159/3339/bushy3pu.jpg

So.....?
(I'm taking at face value the accusation that Bibles were desecrated by the way...I hadn't actually heard that...but what is the point?)


I dont know that bibles were desecrated. No one in here would give a shit if they were anyway, so it doesnt really matter. (I'd be offended, but a white American male with faith is seen as the enemy)

My point is that while in "friendly" countries our soldiers cannot even have a bible. And what makes anyone think an American prisoner, if they happened to live, would be allowed to posses any small shred of anything he valued? A bible, a picture of a loved one?

The moral is that everyone expects the US to keep to a much higher standard than the rest of the world. And while you know we are capable often do, its such an outrage when we dont.

Any relief or compassion we've shown goes out the window because scumbag's accusations are readily accepted at face value.

It may be formalized in Islam, but desecrating a Bible is still a huge insult to most Christians.


I dont want to see that happen, but I'm not going to run out in the street and burn down the businesses my people work in. I'm not going to try to rile everyone up into a riot that kills other people.

The moral is that everyone expects the US to keep to a much higher standard than the rest of the world. And while you know we are capable often do, its such an outrage when we dont.
As it should be. And you're right...if you want to be the 'good guy' you have to be many times better than everyone else. It's a hard task...but one worth striving for.

Any relief or compassion we've shown goes out the window because scumbag's accusations are readily accepted at face value. People focus on bad things, in part because the good things don't need fixing. The abuses do. We should not be worried that people are making accusations, or protesting abuses. We should be worried if no one was. Because they will always occur...and silence means cover up.

I just want to say that I hoped amny of you watched teh Daily Show yesterday. Jon Stewart provided one of the best rants I've ever seen concerning the abuse of comparing people and things to Hitler. Hopefully we can all learn a lesson from him concerning this.

NOTE: Senator Richard Durbin has created a firestorm of controversy with his comparisons of Guantanamo Bay with the most murderous regimes in history. At the very least, his remarks were "intemperate." I tend to agree with those who insist that he apologize to American soldiers.


Durbin rebuked on floor of Senate

By Rowan Scarborough and James G. Lakely
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
June 17, 2005

The Senate Armed Services Committee chairman yesterday accused Sen. Richard J. Durbin of insulting American soldiers with a "grievous error in judgment" by comparing U.S. treatment of al Qaeda suspects to the crimes of Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Pol Pot, and demanded that the Senate's No. 2 Democrat apologize.

The rebuke followed a similar rebuke by the commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, who called Mr. Durbin "totally out of line."

Republican lawmakers lined up to condemn the remarks as making the war on terror more dangerous for American troops.

Some were particularly angry about the Al Jazeera Arab-language news station, which had posted Mr. Durbin's Nazi comparison made in a Tuesday night floor speech.

"That's horrible. That's our worst nightmare," said Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, about the posting by the network, which the administration accuses of stirring up anti-Americanism.

In a Tuesday night speech to the Senate, after reading an e-mail from a FBI agent, Mr. Durbin said: "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This as the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

The scolding of Mr. Durbin by Sen. John W. Warner, Virginia Republican, set off a tense debate on the Senate floor that lasted more than an hour.

Mr. Warner, joined by Sen. Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, repeatedly chastised Mr. Durbin for likening interrogation techniques at the Pentagon-run prison at U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to three 20th-century dictators who killed tens of millions of innocents.

A clearly uncomfortable Mr. Durbin refused to apologize.

He blamed the "right-wing media" for the flap, and read his words from Tuesday's Congressional Record to show its "context." He said the real issue was Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld permitting rough interrogation techniques in the war on terror.

But clearly Democrats felt the pressure.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, came to the floor to defend his chief deputy and to lash out at press reports and the White House, which earlier in the day called Mr. Durbin's remarks "reprehensible."

"The noise machine of the far right never stops and it's gotten so much more in operation in the last few weeks," he said. "This is all a distraction by the White House."

But Mr. Reid did not directly address Mr. Durbin's gulag comparison. He was followed by Sen. Robert C. Byrd, West Virginia Democrat, who spent more than 10 minutes recognizing Father's Day.

Then Republican Sens. John Kyl of Arizona and Jeff Sessions of Alabama further denounced Mr. Durbin's comments and echoed the calls for an apology.

Mr. Warner began the Senate debate with a floor speech in which he read from a front-page account of Mr. Durbin's remarks in yesterday's editions of The Washington Times.

Mr. Warner said, "To equate actions of the men and women of the armed forces ... with regard to their services down there in Guantanamo maintaining the detainees to the genocidal acts of murder and repression of the Nazis, of the Soviet gulag, of Pol Pot, I think is insulting to our men and women in uniform.

"The danger that loose comments such as that, comparisons which have no basis in fact or history, could do harm to the men and women serving wherever they are in the world today in this war on terrorism. Because this is the type of thing that is picked up and is utilized by press antithetical to the interest of the United States and [who] distort in their own way.

"I feel apologies are in order to the men and women of the armed forces."

Mr. Durbin quickly appeared on the Senate floor but offered no apology. He read that part of his speech again. He said he had read earlier from an FBI's agent letter on harsh treatment of suspected terrorists and had compared such treatment to what would be found under the Soviet gulag, Nazis and Pol Pot.

"To suggest I'm criticizing American servicemen, I am not," Mr. Durbin said. "I don't know who was responsible for this. But the FBI agent made this report ... I was attributing this form of interrogation to repressive regimes.

"Now sadly we have a situation here where some in the right wing media have said that I've been insulting men and women in uniform. Nothing could be further from the truth. I respect men and women in the uniform."

Mr. Warner did not accept the explanation. He said the government is now investigating FBI and al Qaeda inmate complaints and it was wrong for Mr. Durbin to read from one agent's unsubstantiated letter before all the evidence is in.

"There is no verification of the accuracy of that report," Mr. Warner said. "For you to have come to the floor with just that fragment of a report and then unleashed the words 'the Nazis' ... It seems to be that was a grievous error in judgment."

Mr. McConnell then read Mr. Durbin's references to the Nazis, gulags and Pol Pot and asked, "Does the senator from Illinois stand by these words?"

Mr. Durbin answered: "In this particular incident that I just read from an FBI agent describing in detail the methods that were used on prisoners, was I trying to say that, 'Isn't this the kind of thing we see from repressive regimes?' Yes."

There was criticism of Mr. Durbin outside the Senate.

The VFW's commander in chief, John Furgess, said, "The senator was totally out of line for even thinking such thoughts, and we demand he apologize to every man and woman who has ever worn the uniform of our country."

Several Democrats ducked the furor yesterday.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, New York Democrat, declined to comment, saying she had not heard Mr. Durbin's speech. When a reporter read the passage to her, she declined again.

The offices of Democratic Sens. John Kerry of Massachusetts and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut did not answer calls for comment.

So what relevance does it actually have to this discussion?

convenient cover for the republican that isn't ready to be completely open about the fact that they fully approve of violating human rights, perhaps?

Well Carn...it's up to you to satisfy my blood lust...


funny you should mention that... I'm felling a little less "live and let live" today.

Actually, the people committing abuses are doing that. And never have high hopes of politicians. You'll always be let down.

I disagree with you there. The people committing abuses aren't the ones bringing discredit on the United States. Sick people will do what they do, no matter what. And the US military has done a good job investigating these allegations of abuse and punishing those responsible, to its great credit.

I think the politicians, with their pathological need to get some sound bite on the evening news, are doing more damage than any number of Lynndie Englands.

As it should be. And you're right...if you want to be the 'good guy' you have to be many times better than everyone else. It's a hard task...but one worth striving for.

People focus on bad things, in part because the good things don't need fixing. The abuses do. We should not be worried that people are making accusations, or protesting abuses. We should be worried if no one was. Because they will always occur...and silence means cover up.


Being the "good guy" is whats making us bad right now.

Maybe its time we worry only about ourselves and our allies.

I know that he made the comments Tuesday, but if I've heard anything more reprehensible than this, I honestly can't remember what it was.

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) was reading a letter from an FBI agent who was talking about the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. Durbin remarked, "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings."

Now whether or not the prisoners are being mistreated (has not been proven, but doesn't mean that it might not be happening), there is no possible way that you can relate the interrogation of terrorists who wish to kill anyone that doesn't believe the same way they do to the slaughter of millions of innocent people. If the reports are true of the hog-tying and other acts, they still do not even compare to the gassing, burning, and torture of millions of people that were looked down upon because of their race or belief.

What has happened to the integrity of our politicians? Will they say anything to get their point across? The prison may be harsh and there may be questionable methods of interrogation, and I think these should be investigated, but it is in no way comparable to Nazi concentration camps or the gulags.The interesting thing that seems to get lost in the discussion of Senator Durbin's comments is this: He's right.

What he read to the Senate just prior to the quoted comment was a quote from a FBI report on the deplorable treatment given the "detainees" at Guantanamo Bay. One part of what he read was of a prisoner manacled hand and foot to the floor in his own excrement.

Senator Durbin's point is that if he read the list from the FBI report of the mistreament of the prisoners, without telling the Senate where and when this mistreatment took place, they would have assumed they took place in the Soviet Gulag, or a Nazi Concentration Camp.

He's right.

And that is what is truly deplorable.

convenient cover for the republican that isn't ready to be completely open about the fact that they fully approve of violating human rights, perhaps?

Yes. Yes that's right. I support George Bush because I hate people and I want to strip as many of them as possible of their rights. No, that's not quite true. I hate people who aren't white and don't have at least 6 zeroes after their net worth. This whole Guantanamo Bay thing isn't really for suspected terrorists. It's for the people who embarrass the Bush dynasty in some way. We're sending our political enemies there. George Soros will "disappear" shortly, now that the rigged elections are over and the Party no longer needs the specter of his vast millions to scare people into supporting our King -- ahem, I mean, President.

All Heil the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy! :mp5:

Good that people are condemning this speech. Have any Democrats condemned this?

Apparently not yet.

The interesting thing that seems to get lost in the discussion of Senator Durbin's comments is this: He's right.

What he read to the Senate just prior to the quoted comment was a quote from a FBI report on the deplorable treatment given the "detainees" at Guantanamo Bay. One part of what he read was of a prisoner manacled hand and foot to the floor in his own excrement.

Senator Durbin's point is that if he read the list from the FBI report of the mistreament of the prisoners, without telling the Senate where and when this mistreatment took place, they would have assumed they took place in the Soviet Gulag, or a Nazi Concentration Camp.

He's right.

And that is what is truly deplorable.


So true

Yes. Yes that's right. I support George Bush because I hate people and I want to strip as many of them as possible of their rights. No, that's not quite true. I hate people who aren't white and don't have at least 6 zeroes after their net worth. This whole Guantanamo Bay thing isn't really for suspected terrorists. It's for the people who embarrass the Bush dynasty in some way. We're sending our political enemies there. George Soros will "disappear" shortly, now that the rigged elections are over and the Party no longer needs the specter of his vast millions to scare people into supporting our King -- ahem, I mean, President.

All Heil the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy! :mp5:

don't try to duck the subject. do you approve of the sort of treatment that has been reported as widespread and systematic in the entire worldwide system of united states indefinite detention centers or not? are you for torture and human rights abuses or against? don't try to appologize for them, or excuse them. take a fucking stand.

They are covered by the declaration of human rights. It gives them the right to a trial.

Now here's a hair splitter.

1. Its war
2. they were captured but they weren't wearing uniforms or insignia to denote militia.
3. They are illegal combatants. Under International Law, we could've executed them on the spot.
4. We didn't because we are more humane than that.

As for the Declaration of Human Rights, what about the Human Rights violations in China, Sudan, Libya, Congo, Mexico, Rwanda, Somalia, etc etc etc.

4. We didn't because we are more humane than that.

I'd like to think that, but really, what's more humane? Killing somebody quickly, thus ending their suffering, or torturing them for years for no real reason?

As for the Declaration of Human Rights, what about the Human Rights violations in China, Sudan, Libya, Congo, Mexico, Rwanda, Somalia, etc etc etc.

But, wait a minute --- You're trying to say our human rights violations are a-okay, because other countries do worse?

Why is it that I always see this argument from people who are right of center?

Now here's a hair splitter.

1. Its war
2. they were captured but they weren't wearing uniforms or insignia to denote militia.
3. They are illegal combatants. Under International Law, we could've executed them on the spot.
4. We didn't because we are more humane than that.

"Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty."

"No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."

"Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law."

"All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination."

"Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law."

"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile."

"Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him."

"Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed."

"

"Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein."

As for the Declaration of Human Rights, what about the Human Rights violations in China, Sudan, Libya, Congo, Mexico, Rwanda, Somalia, etc etc etc.

What about them? They make US violations no different.

don't try to duck the subject. do you approve of the sort of treatment that has been reported as widespread and systematic in the entire worldwide system of united states indefinite detention centers or not? are you for torture and human rights abuses or against? don't try to appologize for them, or excuse them. take a fucking stand.

Who's ducking the question? I was ridiculing your assertion that Republicans are evil and apparently hate human rights.

Obviously I'm against torture, for the most part. However, what's going on in Gitmo is not torture. Making someone stand up for a long time, or depriving him of sleep, only qualifies as torture under the most incredibly wimpy definition of the word.

All I can say is that anyone trying to harrass or intimidate any of these young men and women soliders will do so over my dead body. And I won't be alone in this. There are a huge number of Vietnam veterans who vowed, "never again!"

And not just the Vietnam Veterans my friend. Many soldiers will defend themselves against people that harass or intimidate any soldier. I also know civilians that'll do the same.

I myself will defend those soldiers that these people harass and intimidate.

I'd like to think that, but really, what's more humane? Killing somebody quickly, thus ending their suffering, or torturing them for years for no real reason?


But, wait a minute --- You're trying to say our human rights violations are a-okay, because other countries do worse?

Why is it that I always see this argument from people who are right of center?

But by killing them, we lose all the information they had.

No, we aren't saying that our own violations are okay because other countries are worse. We're saying, "You want to see human rights violations? Look at China/Burma/Zimbabwe. That is a place where they violate human rights. We do not. Western civilization has softened you up, and decreased your capacity to discern true evil and call it by its name."

I'd like to think that, but really, what's more humane? Killing somebody quickly, thus ending their suffering, or torturing them for years for no real reason?

Show me in the memo that he saw torture? We haven't seen the memo yet so I'm waiting and while I wait, I shall be listening to the condemnation of this ignorant fool of a Senator.

But, wait a minute --- You're trying to say our human rights violations are a-okay, because other countries do worse?

No I'm not. I'm saying ours is far from what most nations do to their own people. We are actually more humane when it comes to prisoners than most other nations.

Why is it that I always see this argument from people who are right of center?

Because we are ahem right! :D

"Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein."

Under the Geneva Conventions, we can execute them on the spot. What now?

What about them? They make US violations no different.

Correct but I really hate to say this but we treat our prisoners more humanely than most other nations do. It is a rather known fact.

Who's ducking the question? I was ridiculing your assertion that Republicans are evil and apparently hate human rights.

We're evil and hate human rights? OMG! :eek: Then I guess I'm not your typical republican then because I'm not evil nor do I hate human rights.

Obviously I'm against torture, for the most part. However, what's going on in Gitmo is not torture. Making someone stand up for a long time, or depriving him of sleep, only qualifies as torture under the most incredibly wimpy definition of the word.

Here here Gramnonia.

Let's see.


According to an insider's written account,female interrogators tried to break Muslim detainees at the U.S. prison camp in Guantanamo Bay by sexual touching, wearing a miniskirt and thong underwear

That's the WORST allegation about Gitmo.


They compare THAT to the holocaust?

We're evil and hate human rights? OMG! :eek: Then I guess I'm not your typical republican then because I'm not evil nor do I hate human rights.



Here here Gramnonia.

*takes a bow* Thank you, friend.

I was rather shocked at the whole hate-human-rights thing too; apparently they forgot to send me the memo.

*takes a bow* Thank you, friend.

I was rather shocked at the whole hate-human-rights thing too; apparently they forgot to send me the memo.

I didn't receive it either. Alwell.

YOu know why nothing isgetting done in this country? Republicans are sitting around chastising Democrats on teh Senate floor instead of doing important things, though I doubt if they actually did work it would be anything that actually aided in the advancement of American society, they would probably try to make an amendment to ban contraceptives

Good that people are condemning this speech. Have any Democrats condemned this?

Apparently not yet.
What's to condemn? Durbin is right--the sorts of things described by our own government are similar in kind to what happened in the very places Durbin named. So we're not doing them on the same scale--big fucking deal--we shouldn't be doing them at all. We're supposed to be better than that, and that's the point Durbin made, and made effectively. It's too bad that you people can't see beyond your blind loyalty to the Bush regime to realize that they've destroyed what good will we once had in the world. You better wake up.

What's to condemn? Durbin is right--the sorts of things described by our own government are similar in kind to what happened in the very places Durbin named. So we're not doing them on the same scale--big fucking deal--we shouldn't be doing them at all. We're supposed to be better than that, and that's the point Durbin made, and made effectively. It's too bad that you people can't see beyond your blind loyalty to the Bush regime to realize that they've destroyed what good will we once had in the world. You better wake up.

You better wake up The Nazz. There is nothing in what he said. What he said was wrong. Wake up and smell the roses. Why hasn't he published this memo? We want to see the memo. What is he hiding? Oh wait...he's hiding the fact that there really isn't torture going on! :rolleyes:

Under the Geneva Conventions, we can execute them on the spot. What now?

That you are even involving the Conventions makes me question that you have even read the declaration; it does indeed apply to everyone you have in custody who is a human. When you declare them as POW, the Geneva conventions will apply (which some would claim they already do, as the US's transparent excuses for violating them fool very few people) - until then, as humans, they have all the rights under the declaration of Human Rights.

Really, you have no excuse for what you are doing to these people. The judicial vacuum you are trying to create for them is not only a shame for your country, it is also non-existent.

Correct but I really hate to say this but we treat our prisoners more humanely than most other nations do. It is a rather known fact.

What, you think you should be lauded that you don't violate the charter as much as other countries, but you still do? Really, I expect more from the US than I do Rwanda, mostly because you claim to be better. Act like it.

Let's see.




That's the WORST allegation about Gitmo.


They compare THAT to the holocaust?
You're a moron, or a liar, or both. Read Durbin's speech and take a very close look at what the FBI agent Durbin quoted said. Tell you what--I'll excerpt it here for you:On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold. . . . On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.I'd say that's a bit more serious than what you describe.

Ihatevacations']YOu know why nothing isgetting done in this country? Republicans are sitting around chastising Democrats on teh Senate floor instead of doing important things, though I doubt if they actually did work it would be anything that actually aided in the advancement of American society, they would probably try to make an amendment to ban contraceptives

And democrats are doing good things? THey're sitting around screaming that Republicans have never done an honest days work, that we're the evil white christian party...

Comparing Gitmo to concentration camps is total bullshit. 600 prisoners are being detained at Gitmo, none harmed or killed. 6 MILLION died in the holocaust. It's demeaning to those that died in the holocaust. That's 100,000 times more than Gitmo, and they're all dead. Not a single person has been executed at Gitmo. The Daily show had a segment about comparing people to Hitler. Y'all should see it.

That you are even onvolving the Conventions makes me question that you have even read the declaration; it does indeed apply to everyone you have in custody who is a human.

The Declaration of Human Rights does not apply to enemy combatants. The Geneva Conventions do. Therefore, under the Geneva Conventions, we could've legally kill these people without trial or jury.

When you declare them as POW, the Geneva conventions will apply (which some would claim they already do, as the US's transparent excuses for violating them fool very few people) - until then, as humans, they have all the rights under the declaration of Human Rights.

Wrong o dude. In war, the rules change. If your captured in war, the Declaration on human rights don't apply. Only those the Geneva Conventions apply to those captured in combat.

The question I am asking you is, if the Geneva Conventions and the Declaration of Human Rights conflict? What would you do?

Really, you have no excuse for what you are doing to these people.

I would've shot them if I captured them because they aren't protected by the Geneva Conventions.

The judicial vacume you are trying to create for them is not only a shame for you country, it is also non-existent.

Are you saying we should not follow the Geneva Conventions? :Eek:

What, you think you should be lauded that you don't violate the charter as much as other countries, but you still do? Really, I expect more from the US than I do Rwanda, mostly because you claim to be better. Act like it.

I expect more from the UN but the UN does crap. Thank God the US House just passed the UN Reform Act that'll cut our funding for the UN by 50%.

You're a moron, or a liar, or both. Read Durbin's speech and take a very close look at what the FBI agent Durbin quoted said. Tell you what--I'll excerpt it here for you:I'd say that's a bit more serious than what you describe.

Now we are resorting to insults? My my my.... Careful, someone could report your for flaming.

Anyway, that part you quoted, doesn't constitute torture.

And democrats are doing good things? THey're sitting around screaming that Republicans have never done an honest days work, that we're the evil white christian party...
I didn't realize that was made on the Senate floor, oh wait it wasn't

Gitmo to concentration camps is total bullshit. 600 prisoners are being detained at Gitmo, none harmed or killed. 6 MILLION died in the holocaust. It's demeaning to those that died in the holocaust. That's 100,000 times more than Gitmo, and they're all dead. Not a single person has been executed at Gitmo. The Daily show had a segment about comparing people to Hitler. Y'all should see it.
You think we are going to release to the public if some one dies or is killed? I don't give a rats ass, I'm not condoning it, I jsut don't care, it is like all the pro-life people declaring everyone else babykillers, its jsut fluff and exagerration, who cares.

funny you should mention that... I'm felling a little less "live and let live" today.
Excellent. *rubs hands a la Mr. Burns*

You better wake up The Nazz. There is nothing in what he said. What he said was wrong. Wake up and smell the roses. Why hasn't he published this memo? We want to see the memo. What is he hiding? Oh wait...he's hiding the fact that there really isn't torture going on! :rolleyes:
I'm awake--you're the one who's ignoring testimony from members of our own government, from FBI agents to soldiers in the field to CIA agents. The only people hiding evidence is the Bush administration.

It's also demeaning to human rights when their religious and cultural beliefs are profaned but hey, apparently having naked women dance in front of you is party time for Christians- when the wives aren't looking anyways.

It's funny how Republicans in general apply such a narrow and strict definition to things they enjoy like torture, while broad definitions are stuck on things they don't like... such as "enemy combatants" and "right to life."

Honestly, this is the classic case of the "It's Not Happening to Me" disease simply because the recepients of such brunt psychological torture are all Muslims that the Republicans believe are all card-carrying members of Al Qaeda.

If it were Jehovah's Witnesses getting blood transfusions, Bibles getting pissed on, or Hindus being force-fed hamburgers would you still say "It's not torture?"

Bet you would.

Being the "good guy" is whats making us bad right now. You have an odd definition of good. But that's part of my moral relativism argument about the guy and the burning down of the neighbour's house and the...ah, never mind:)

Maybe its time we worry only about ourselves and our allies.
See, you keep saying that...but it just never happens.

What has happened to the integrity of our politicians? Will they say anything to get their point across?

Yep. Next question.

I'm awake--you're the one who's ignoring testimony from members of our own government, from FBI agents to soldiers in the field to CIA agents. The only people hiding evidence is the Bush administration.

Using temperature is not torture.
Chaining them in an interview room isnt torture
Loud rap music isn't torture.

What part of this that you quoted constitutes torture?

Senator Durbin's point is that if he read the list from the FBI report of the mistreament of the prisoners, without telling the Senate where and when this mistreatment took place, they would have assumed they took place in the Soviet Gulag, or a Nazi Concentration Camp.

He's right.

And that is what is truly deplorable.
*applauds*

Ihatevacations']I didn't realize that was made on the Senate floor, oh wait it wasn't


You think we are going to release to the public if some one dies or is killed? I don't give a rats ass, I'm not condoning it, I jsut don't care, it is like all the pro-life people declaring everyone else babykillers, its jsut fluff and exagerration, who cares.

1) It doesn't matter if was on the senate floor or not. IT WAS THE PARTY'S CHARIMAN. He's supposed to be the voice of the party. Democrats claim to want progress, yet their chairman pulls this sort of shit, and spwans even more partisanship, which delays progress.

2) Over a thousand reporters have visited Gitmo. If one of them had died, we'd have heard about it by now.

Now we are resorting to insults? My my my.... Careful, someone could report your for flaming.

Anyway, that part you quoted, doesn't constitute torture.
You think I give a shit if you report me? And if you think that doesn't constitute torture, then you're a sick human being.

Let's see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al-Bawaba, a Saudi source.
According to an insider's written account,female interrogators tried to break Muslim detainees at the U.S. prison camp in Guantanamo Bay by sexual touching, wearing a miniskirt and thong underwear

That's the WORST allegation about Gitmo.

They compare THAT to the holocaust?

They'll do anything that will help them get elected or get Bush out and Osama in.

THAT's the worst? I see... who do I call to say I'm a terrorist? :D :D :D

The Declaration of Human Rights does not apply to enemy combatants. The Geneva Conventions do. Therefore, under the Geneva Conventions, we could've legally kill these people without trial or jury.

You cannot have it both ways. Either the conventions apply, or they don't. You cannot, as you claim, have them apply to these people in the battlefield, but then have them stop applying when you have captured them.

The US is claiming that the conventions do not apply, which automatically means that the declaration of human rights does. You do not get to dismiss them both - it's either or.

Wrong o dude. In war, the rules change. If your captured in war, the Declaration on human rights don't apply. Only those the Geneva Conventions apply to those captured in combat.

Then, why are you denying these people the rights they have under the conventions. Again, you cannot have the convention apply in one place, and not in another. Either they apply all the time, or they do not apply at all, which is where the declaration of Human Rights comes in.

The question I am asking you is, if the Geneva Conventions and the Declaration of Human Rights conflict? What would you do?

They do not conflict. One of them applies. The US government is denying that it is the conventions, making it be the declaration.

I would've shot them if I captured them because they aren't protected by the Geneva Conventions.

Your argumentation is coming off as schizoid. You are claiming that you have rights under the convention, and now you're claiming that the conventions do not apply. Which is it? Because you cannot have them apply and not apply at the same time.

Are you saying we should not follow the Geneva Conventions? :Eek:

Your government seems to be saying so. Which makes the declaration of human rights all the more applicable in this case.

I expect more from the UN but the UN does crap. Thank God the US House just passed the UN Reform Act that'll cut our funding for the UN by 50%.

Ah, so when you have no answer, you start dealing in the irrelevant to try to fool your opponent into not seeing that you have failed to come up with an answer?

I disagree with you there. The people committing abuses aren't the ones bringing discredit on the United States. Sick people will do what they do, no matter what. And the US military has done a good job investigating these allegations of abuse and punishing those responsible, to its great credit.

I think the politicians, with their pathological need to get some sound bite on the evening news, are doing more damage than any number of Lynndie Englands.

Nah. Surely it's the devious liberal media that's to blame.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=426477&page=7&pp=15

As for the Declaration of Human Rights, what about the Human Rights violations in China, Sudan, Libya, Congo, Mexico, Rwanda, Somalia, etc etc etc.
Seriously people. Can we stop with the "but they do it too" finger pointing? So far no one has really dealt with these questions:

Point two, again, what is this theory of 'They do worse, so let's focus on them, who we can't do anything about/so it's okay if we do bad stuff'? Can someone please explain it to me?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9085246&postcount=61
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9085283&postcount=67
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9085274&postcount=65

And not just the Vietnam Veterans my friend. Many soldiers will defend themselves against people that harass or intimidate any soldier. I also know civilians that'll do the same.

I myself will defend those soldiers that these people harass and intimidate.
As you will defend those who harass and humiliate others in Gitmo? How nice.

Using temperature is not torture.
Chaining them in an interview room isnt torture
Loud rap music isn't torture.

What part of this that you quoted constitutes torture?

Being chained in the same position for days (in one's own waste). Having your ass frozen off/being burned. Loud rap music used as sleep deprivation.

All of those, I would say, constitue degrading or painful action in an attempt to break a prisoner and obtain information. Is that not torture?

And on the whole sexual bit: for a strictly religious man, in a religion that demands chastity, temptation away from this law can harm him psychologically with feelings of guilt and degradation.

While I agree that the comparisons were tasteless, especially to victims or their families, the action of these american agents are still reprehensible.

Now the ADL demands an apology.

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/HolNa_52/4734_52.htm

ADL to Senator Durbin: Inappropriate Comparison to Nazi Tactics Unacceptable


New York, NY, June 16, 2005 ... The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today called on Senator Richard J. Durbin (D-IL) to repudiate his remarks and apologize to the American people for distorting an important issue, with an inappropriate comparison to Nazi tactics.

In a speech on the Senate floor on June 14th on the situation at Guantanamo Bay he likened American treatment of prisoners to what "must have been done by Nazis... that had no concern for human beings."


Following is the text of the letter:

Dear Senator Durbin:

We write to object to your reference to Nazis in the context of the debate on detainees at Guantanamo Bay on the Senate floor earlier this week.

Whatever your views on the treatment of detainees and alleged excesses at the Guantanamo Bay facility, it is inappropriate and insensitive to suggest that actions by American troops in any way resemble actions taken by Nazis in their treatment of prisoners. Suggesting some kind of equivalence between their interrogation tactics demonstrates a profound lack of understanding about the horrors that Hitler and his regime actually perpetrated.

We urge you to repudiate your remarks and apologize to the American people for distorting an important issue with an inappropriate comparison to Nazi tactics. However heated the debate over issues of the day, we would urge you to refrain from using Holocaust imagery in the future.


The Anti-Defamation League, founded in 1913, is the world's leading organization fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry.

That is a place where they violate human rights. We do not. Western civilization has softened you up, and decreased your capacity to discern true evil and call it by its name."
Let me get this clear. Are you honestly saying,

WE DO NOT VIOLATE HUMAN RIGHTS.

?

What code of 'human rights' are you following?

Detainees aren't being harmed in any way. They aren't being whipped. They aren't being beaten. THEY'RE PLAYING FUCKING SOCCER.

IT'S A WAR FOR CHRIST'S SAKE. Do you think everything in a war is going to be just fine and dandy, humane in every way? No. It's a war. War = Violent and brutal.

What they are doing is entirely humane. They're not killing anyone, they're not beating anyone. Coercive interrogation. How the hell are we supposed to extract information, just asking them nicely? That's going to work :rolleyes:

No. The Senators and soldiers should be issuing emphatic apologies for that travesty of justice Guantanamo Bay. This Senator was correct in his assertions. Take the name USA off of some reports from Guantanamo, and you could confuse it with some of the most evil regimes in history. The methods are extremly similar, the comparison stands.

Every time something comes up that could threatan the idea you have that "AMERICA IS THE GrEATEESST!!!!1111" Republicans immediatly go "OMG he's attacking our servicmen!!!111" That is pure, unadultarated bullshit. Mr. Eutrusca, I thought you would be more sensible than that. He did not attack US soldiers, he attacked the horrible record of US detention facilities.

I stand behind Senator Durban 100%. If you value human rights, if you value America's reputation, then you should too.

Now here's a hair splitter.

1. Its war

No it's not. Remember "Mission Accomplished?"

2. they were captured but they weren't wearing uniforms or insignia to denote militia.
You make it sound like they were captured on a battle field. They weren't. For the most part we got them by offering bribes to their enemies. That would be like McCarthy "finding" communists by asking Republican's which Democrats they think are communists.

3. They are illegal combatants. Under International Law, we could've executed them on the spot.
Again, most of them were bought from their own political enemies. We didn't capture them on any battlefields.

4. We didn't because we are more humane than that.

Yup. More humane than...
China, Sudan, Libya, Congo, Mexico, Rwanda, Somalia, etc etc etc.

There's a benchmark to be proud of. [/sarcasm]

2) Over a thousand reporters have visited Gitmo. If one of them had died, we'd have heard about it by now.

AHHHHHHH HA HA HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!

Hey everyone, someone here believes the Military has Media Transparency!!

Oh please, the only reason anyone ever found out about what happened at Abu Ghraib in the first place was because someone LEAKED the photos out.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

The Declaration of Human Rights does not apply to enemy combatants. The Geneva Conventions do. Therefore, under the Geneva Conventions, we could've legally kill these people without trial or jury.
Unless enemy combatants are somehow legally declared NOT HUMAN, then you are wrong. The Declaration of Human Rights applies to all humans. It is not, however, binding legislation, which is the crux of the problem. You don't HAVE to obey them. But you are expected to, because your nation claims to uphold those rights.

Thank God the US House just passed the UN Reform Act that'll cut our funding for the UN by 50%.
Yay! Then you can continue NOT paying your dues anyway!

You cannot have it both ways. Either the conventions apply, or they don't. You cannot, as you claim, have them apply to these people in the battlefield, but then have them stop applying when you have captured them.

Since we lifted them off of the field of battle, the Geneva Conventions apply more than the Declaration of Human Rights.

The US is claiming that the conventions do not apply, which automatically means that the declaration of human rights does. You do not get to dismiss them both - it's either or.

The accords in which they are POWs don't apply. That is a fact. However, we are still following the Geneva Conventions as befitted an Illegal Combatant.

Then, why are you denying these people the rights they have under the conventions. Again, you cannot have the convention apply in one place, and not in another. Either they apply all the time, or they do not apply at all, which is where the declaration of Human Rights comes in.

Now what precisely are you talking about here. I'm now confused. Are you talking about the way we treated Iraqi prisoners as opposed to the terrorists we captured in Afghanistan?

They do not conflict. One of them applies. The US government is denying that it is the conventions, making it be the declaration.

But yet we picked them up during a war. Now we have a conflict here. Since we picked them but not pows, they really don't fit under either one.

Your argumentation is coming off as schizoid. You are claiming that you have rights under the convention, and now you're claiming that the conventions do not apply. Which is it? Because you cannot have them apply and not apply at the same time.

Actually you can. Isnt it amazing on how you actually find loopholes in things? :D

Your government seems to be saying so. Which makes the declaration of human rights all the more applicable in this case.

How?

Ah, so when you have no answer, you start dealing in the irrelevant to try to fool your opponent into not seeing that you have failed to come up with an answer?

:confused:

No. The Senators and soldiers should be issuing emphatic apologies for that travesty of justice Guantanamo Bay. This Senator was correct in his assertions. Take the name USA off of some reports from Guantanamo, and you could confuse it with some of the most evil regimes in history. The methods are extremly similar, the comparison stands.

Every time something comes up that could threatan the idea you have that "AMERICA IS THE GrEATEESST!!!!1111" Republicans immediatly go "OMG he's attacking our servicmen!!!111" That is pure, unadultarated bullshit. Mr. Eutrusca, I thought you would be more sensible than that. He did not attack US soldiers, he attacked the horrible record of US detention facilities.

I stand behind Senator Durban 100%. If you value human rights, if you value America's reputation, then you should too.

How in God's creation can you compare someone who KILLED 6 MILLION PEOPLE to a detention facility full of 600 criminals AND NOT ONE HAS BEEN KILLED?

There is no comparison to someone who tried to eliminate an entire fucking race. You people are out of your minds.

No. The Senators and soldiers should be issuing emphatic apologies for that travesty of justice Guantanamo Bay. This Senator was correct in his assertions. Take the name USA off of some reports from Guantanamo, and you could confuse it with some of the most evil regimes in history. The methods are extremly similar, the comparison stands.

Every time something comes up that could threatan the idea you have that "AMERICA IS THE GrEATEESST!!!!1111" Republicans immediatly go "OMG he's attacking our servicmen!!!111" That is pure, unadultarated bullshit. Mr. Eutrusca, I thought you would be more sensible than that. He did not attack US soldiers, he attacked the horrible record of US detention facilities.

I stand behind Senator Durban 100%. If you value human rights, if you value America's reputation, then you should too.

Hey one quick question:

If we don't keep those people there, where should we put them? In your neighborhood?

These people would slit your throat for a farthing if given the chance.

Using temperature is not torture.
Chaining them in an interview room isnt torture
Loud rap music isn't torture.

What part of this that you quoted constitutes torture?
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/06-15-2005.gif
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/Default.aspx

Torture me, please! ;)

No it's not. Remember "Mission Accomplished?"

Afghanistan is still going on.

You make it sound like they were captured on a battle field. They weren't. For the most part we got them by offering bribes to their enemies. That would be like McCarthy "finding" communists by asking Republican's which Democrats they think are communists.

Prove that we bribed them please.

Again, most of them were bought from their own political enemies. We didn't capture them on any battlefields.

Prove your statement. We captured more of them on the field of battle than through political enemies.

Yup. More humane than...


There's a benchmark to be proud of. [/sarcasm]

Yea that better be sarcasm.

How in God's creation can you compare someone who KILLED 6 MILLION PEOPLE to a detention facility full of 600 criminals AND NOT ONE HAS BEEN KILLED.

There is no comparison to someone who tried to eliminate and entire fucking race. You people are out of your minds.

Great post.

I have yet to see mass executions, gassings, starvations, and medical experiments being committed on these "poor innocent people".

The only logical reason for their actions is a pure hatred for the US. They say they don't support the war, but support the troops? My BS detector explodes everytime they say that. These people are pathologically enraged at the President, and everything that this country does and/or stands for. These people really are mentally deficient. How could you hate someone so much that your hatred takes over your life. My God!!

"Time flies when your spewing venom"-Schnitt

Since we lifted them off of the field of battle, the Geneva Conventions apply more than the Declaration of Human Rights.

Ah, but you are claiming them not be soldiers or POW. Which makes them mere humans, hence human rights.

The accords in which they are POWs don't apply. That is a fact. However, we are still following the Geneva Conventions as befitted an Illegal Combatant.

Again, even if they are not POW, they are still human.

Now what precisely are you talking about here. I'm now confused. Are you talking about the way we treated Iraqi prisoners as opposed to the terrorists we captured in Afghanistan?

Both. You have violated the human rights of both of them. Human rights are not negated by the convention.

But yet we picked them up during a war. Now we have a conflict here. Since we picked them but not pows, they really don't fit under either one.

Which part of "human rights" is it you are having troubles with? If not POW, they are still human.

Actually you can. Isnt it amazing on how you actually find loopholes in things? :D

This is not a loop-hole. You are just violating the declaration and trying, miserably at that, to claim that it does not apply, which it most clearly does.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/06-15-2005.gif
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/Default.aspx

Torture me, please! ;)

Those are great! :p

"Time flies when your spewing venom"-Schnitt
well, you would know

Detainees aren't being harmed in any way. They aren't being whipped. They aren't being beaten. THEY'RE PLAYING FUCKING SOCCER.

Yeah, about that....

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510972005?open&of=ENG-USA

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510852005?open&of=ENG-USA

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510942005?open&of=ENG-USA
(not guantonamo, but similar facilities.)

The other thing to be considered: torture or not, none of these guys have gotten trials. Nor have they been accorded the rights of normal POWs. You can argue torture as a moral question, but legally each human being is allowed certain rights.

Yay! Then you can continue NOT paying your dues anyway!

Only if the UN doesn't start to reform will we do this. Frankly, I'm placing bets that we will withold 50% of the UN dues.

How in God's creation can you compare someone who KILLED 6 MILLION PEOPLE to a detention facility full of 600 criminals AND NOT ONE HAS BEEN KILLED?

There is no comparison to someone who tried to eliminate an entire fucking race. You people are out of your minds.

Well put, Haloman.

Unless enemy combatants are somehow legally declared NOT HUMAN, then you are wrong. The Declaration of Human Rights applies to all humans. It is not, however, binding legislation, which is the crux of the problem. You don't HAVE to obey them. But you are expected to, because your nation claims to uphold those rights.

Read up on the Geneva Conventions.

Yeah, about that....

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510972005?open&of=ENG-USA

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510852005?open&of=ENG-USA

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510942005?open&of=ENG-USA
(not guantonamo, but similar facilities.)

The other thing to be considered: torture or not, none of these guys have gotten trials. Nor have they been accorded the rights of normal POWs. You can argue torture as a moral question, but legally each human being is allowed certain rights.

THeir rights aren't protected by the geneva convention. They aren't fighting for a country, they're fighting for a terrorist organization. To be given rights, you must wear a uniform. These guys aren't. Do I like everything going on at the camp? No. Something needs to be done about it. I'm saying that comparing it to Hitler is total bullshit.

Read up on the Geneva Conventions.
I think Fass is dealing with this issue. I would simply be repeating his points.

You think I give a shit if you report me? And if you think that doesn't constitute torture, then you're a sick human being.

What that we drastically changed Temperatures?
What that we played loud Music?
What the we left them chained in an interview room?

I want to see what you see in this that you can characterize this as torture.

Yeah, about that....

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510972005?open&of=ENG-USA

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510852005?open&of=ENG-USA

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510942005?open&of=ENG-USA
(not guantonamo, but similar facilities.)

The other thing to be considered: torture or not, none of these guys have gotten trials. Nor have they been accorded the rights of normal POWs. You can argue torture as a moral question, but legally each human being is allowed certain rights.

The Geneva Accords don't apply to guerrillas who fail to distinguish themselves from civilians.

Only if the UN doesn't start to reform will we do this. Frankly, I'm placing bets that we will withold 50% of the UN dues.
I'd be amazed if they actually paid that much.

But by killing them, we lose all the information they had.

No, we aren't saying that our own violations are okay because other countries are worse. We're saying, "You want to see human rights violations? Look at China/Burma/Zimbabwe. That is a place where they violate human rights. We do not. Western civilization has softened you up, and decreased your capacity to discern true evil and call it by its name."

So what you're saying is that our human rights violations are OK because other countries do worse. Very few things in this world are exclusivly defined by their most extreme example. You can't say that what we do doesn't violate human rights just because other countries are guilty of worse.

And if you think that pointing out other countries violations somehow devalues the point made by those speaking out against American violations then I'd like to point out that even an American lawyer would never try to defend a murderer by saying "sure he killed 5 people, but look, I've found a story about this other guy who killed 6. Why aren't we talking about him, huh?"

It is difficult for me to believe how completely you misread Senator Durbin's statement. If you had read carefully, you would be aware that he is not making any comparison between America's interrogation of terrorist suspects and the behavior of the Nazis or Pol Pot. What he was comparing (or rather, contrasting) is the concept Americans have of our own agents as opposed to the concept we have of the cruelty of the Soviet Communists and others.

"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings."

The point is that Americans hold certain values about the universal sanctity of human life. We believe that we are right in combatting terrorism only insofar as we are better than terrorists -- and taking the moral high ground means treating them like human beings regardless of the crimes of which they are suspected.

We believe that our historical enemies -- the representatives of "evil" in this century -- would behave otherwise. They would torture their captives -- for whatever reason they are captive -- to the detriment of the very concept of humanity.

Senator Durbin was not in any way suggesting that America's war on terrorism is "the same as" the slaughter of human life under Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany. But he was suggesting that America's soldiers and interrogators have failed to live up to the ideals by which we distinguish ourselves, by our own standards, from those monsters of history.

It may not be a slippery slope... but down we go, nonetheless.

Interesting how you completely miss that he was alluding not to the genocide, but to the actual interrogation methods and treatment used by the Nazis and the Soviets, making his allusion completely relevant.

The interrogation methods used as Gitmo are nothing like those used by the Nazis or Soviets. Examples of Soviet interrogation methods:

1.Stepping on a man's testicles and slowly crushing them beneath the boot heel
2.Heating a ramrod over an oven and thrusting it inside a person's anus
3.Burning with cigarettes
4.Forcing them to stand in a certain position for hours on end
5.Putting them in a room and increasing the temperature to such a high degree that blood oozes from their pores
6.Starvation
7.Shining extremely bright lights in peoples' eyes

So what you're saying is that our human rights violations are OK because other countries do worse. Very few things in this world are exclusivly defined by their most extreme example. You can't say that what we do doesn't violate human rights just because other countries are guilty of worse.

And if you think that pointing out other countries violations somehow devalues the point made by those speaking out against American violations then I'd like to point out that even an American lawyer would never try to defend a murderer by saying "sure he killed 5 people, but look, I've found a story about this other guy who killed 6. Why aren't we talking about him, huh?"
Let me repeat the question here, and instead of a long, involved answer that doesn't really answer anything, let's make this one a yes or no question.

So what you're saying is that our human rights violations are OK because other countries do worse?

Yeah, about that....

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510972005?open&of=ENG-USA

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510852005?open&of=ENG-USA

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510942005?open&of=ENG-USA
(not guantonamo, but similar facilities.)

The other thing to be considered: torture or not, none of these guys have gotten trials. Nor have they been accorded the rights of normal POWs. You can argue torture as a moral question, but legally each human being is allowed certain rights.

Okay, class, repeat after me: 'THese people are PRISONERS OF WAR.' They are also "Unlawful Combatants". This means they have NO RIGHTS. Under wartime conditions, the UN declaration has no force of law. as Unlawful combatants, these gents are not protected by teh Geneva Conventions.

They are protected by U.S. army Regulations, the policies of the post commander, and the orders of the Provost Martial.

"Legally" they can be skinned alive, and have porkchops shoved down their dying throats, while being arseraped by an electrified dildo then buried in pigshit with their ass toward mecca, and it would be 'legal' on the authority of the National Command Authority (should such orders be issued).

You will note, however, that not one has been subjected to this kind of treatment. They're alive, they have been fed proper Muslim diets in keeping with their faith, three of them a day, they're allowed out, they get excercise, they play soccer and write their lawyers (and teh letters are delivered).
They are not subjected to the lead-lined hose treatment, or the hot-needle-of-inquiry. They are not being Aesphyxiated, or poisoned. they certainly aren't being worked to death, burned, and their fillings melted down to pay for the war effort.
Nobody's making lampshades from muslim skin.
They aren't being starved to death either. Nor are they being gassed en-masse, gunned down for sport, or used as guinea pigs in medical experimentation.

Afghanistan is still going on.
Really? I thought was had triumphed and established a democratic government. :rolleyes:

Prove that we bribed them please.

I didn't say bribe, I said we offer bounties (http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,SOF_0804_Idema,00.html) . But if you were an Afghani then how picky would you be about proving your statements? Some of them have made a full time job out of it.

Prove your statement. We captured more of them on the field of battle than through political enemies.

Well I've given you proof of our policy straight from the military itself. Let me guess, the military has a liberal bias. Now I'm going to ask you to prove your statements.

Yea that better be sarcasm.

OK, lets clarify. Do you think it's untrue that we have a better civil rights policy than China, Rwanda etc. or do you just think that being better than them is something to be proud of?

The interrogation methods used as Gitmo are nothing like those used by the Nazis or Soviets. Examples of Soviet interrogation methods:

1.Stepping on a man's testicles and slowly crushing them beneath the boot heel
2.Heating a ramrod over an oven and thrusting it inside a person's anus
3.Burning with cigarettes
4.Forcing them to stand in a certain position for hours on end
5.Putting them in a room and increasing the temperature to such a high degree that blood oozes from their pores
6.Starvation
7.Shining extremely bright lights in peoples' eyes
And yet similar methods have already been given on this thread as evidence by Fass, used elsewhere by US soldiers...so as long as it isn't in Gitmo, it's okay?

I'm not going to address the question of whether these methods actually have been used at Gitmo...I don't have the information to say yea or nay to that.

Okay, class, repeat after me: 'THese people are PRISONERS OF WAR.' They are also "Unlawful Combatants". This means they have NO RIGHTS. Under wartime conditions, the UN declaration has no force of law. as Unlawful combatants, these gents are not protected by teh Geneva Conventions.

They are protected by U.S. army Regulations, the policies of the post commander, and the orders of the Provost Martial.

"Legally" they can be skinned alive, and have porkchops shoved down their dying throats, while being arseraped by an electrified dildo then buried in pigshit with their ass toward mecca, and it would be 'legal' on the authority of the National Command Authority (should such orders be issued).

You will note, however, that not one has been subjected to this kind of treatment. They're alive, they have been fed proper Muslim diets in keeping with their faith, three of them a day, they're allowed out, they get excercise, they play soccer and write their lawyers (and teh letters are delivered).
They are not subjected to the lead-lined hose treatment, or the hot-needle-of-inquiry. They are not being Aesphyxiated, or poisoned. they certainly aren't being worked to death, burned, and their fillings melted down to pay for the war effort.
Nobody's making lampshades from muslim skin.
They aren't being starved to death either. Nor are they being gassed en-masse, gunned down for sport, or used as guinea pigs in medical experimentation.

Good post my friend :) It is very accurate. You're to be commended.

It is difficult for me to believe how completely you misread Senator Durbin's statement. If you had read carefully, you would be aware that he is not making any comparison between America's interrogation of terrorist suspects and the behavior of the Nazis or Pol Pot. What he was comparing (or rather, contrasting) is the concept Americans have of our own agents as opposed to the concept we have of the cruelty of the Soviet Communists and others.

"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings."

The point is that Americans hold certain values about the universal sanctity of human life. We believe that we are right in combatting terrorism only insofar as we are better than terrorists -- and taking the moral high ground means treating them like human beings regardless of the crimes of which they are suspected.
We believe that our historical enemies -- the representatives of "evil" in this century -- would behave otherwise. They would torture their captives -- for whatever reason they are captive -- to the detriment of the very concept of humanity.

Senator Durbin was not in any way suggesting that America's war on terrorism is "the same as" the slaughter of human life under Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany. But he was suggesting that America's soldiers and interrogators have failed to live up to the ideals by which we distinguish ourselves, by our own standards, from those monsters of history.

It may not be a slippery slope... but down we go, nonetheless.
You've made an excellent distinction.
You will, of course, be ignored.

The Geneva Accords don't apply to guerrillas who fail to distinguish themselves from civilians.
And the proof that every single one of them is a guerilla?

Trials, maybe?

Some British detainees were returned to the UK and released without charge. Dangerous men, then.

What that we drastically changed Temperatures?
What that we played loud Music?
What the we left them chained in an interview room?

I want to see what you see in this that you can characterize this as torture.
Read carefully--chained in the fetal position for 24 hours, denied food and water and forced to piss and shit on yourself, subjected to deafening music in a language you likely don't understand and kept in constantly changing temperatures--changes that are extreme, as much as 50 degrees fahrenheit in short periods of time. That's torture, and the guy who drew that comic strip that treats it as though it were a party is a dickweed for treating it so lightly.

And the proof that every single one of them is a guerilla?

Trials, maybe?

Some British detainees were returned to the UK and released without charge. Dangerous men, then.

Once they are released, they're not our problem anymore.

You're a moron, or a liar, or both. Read Durbin's speech and take a very close look at what the FBI agent Durbin quoted said. Tell you what--I'll excerpt it here for you:I'd say that's a bit more serious than what you describe.
When there are Taliban/al-qida Lampshades, when there are decapitations at gitmo.... then I would agree. Until that time, get a grip on reality, not rhetoric.

And yet similar methods have already been given on this thread as evidence by Fass, used elsewhere by US soldiers...so as long as it isn't in Gitmo, it's okay?

I'm not going to address the question of whether these methods actually have been used at Gitmo...I don't have the information to say yea or nay to that.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9086161&postcount=33

Read carefully--chained in the fetal position for 24 hours,

Not torture

denied food and water and forced to piss and shit on yourself,

Borderline but I don't think its torture.

subjected to deafening music in a language you likely don't understand

This most assuredly IS NOT torture!

and kept in constantly changing temperatures--changes that are extreme, as much as 50 degrees fahrenheit in short periods of time.

Not torture

That's torture, and the guy who drew that comic strip that treats it as though it were a party is a dickweed for treating it so lightly.

Nope. I only see one borderline here that can border on it but that's about it. So where's the torture?

Read carefully--chained in the fetal position for 24 hours, denied food and water and forced to piss and shit on yourself, subjected to deafening music in a language you likely don't understand and kept in constantly changing temperatures--changes that are extreme, as much as 50 degrees fahrenheit in short periods of time. That's torture, and the guy who drew that comic strip that treats it as though it were a party is a dickweed for treating it so lightly.

It's causing no physical harm. They are not being beaten. This is not stuff the Nazis would have done. They lined the Jews up and shot them all, thousands at a time, they didn't use coercive interrogation.

Once they are released, they're not our problem anymore.
Ignoring my first question, are we?

Let's try again.

How do you know that every single one of the detainees was a guerilla, and not a civilian...who would therefore be subject to the various human rights things.

Ignoring my first question, are we?

Let's try again.

How do you know that every single one of the detainees was a guerilla, and not a civilian...who would therefore be subject to the various human rights things.

Can figure that out by questioning them. You don't need a trial to prove someone's innocent or not.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9086161&postcount=33
Thank you. The quote you provided was helpful, because quoted within it were the following links:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510972005?open&of=ENG-USA
He was flown to the US airbase in Kandahar, where he alleges he was physically assaulted on arrival, and kept naked for the first week. He has alleged that he was beaten, doused in freezing water, and that on one occasion, a guard grabbed Mohammed’s penis and threatened to cut it off with scissors he was brandishing.

In early January 2002, Mohammed was transferred to Guantánamo Bay. He was sedated, shackled, hooded and gagged for the flight. He alleges that he was beaten upon arrival. During the ensuing interrogation process, he has said that he was subjected to #4 hanging by the wrists for up to eight hours at a time, beatings, sleep deprivation, strobe lighting, extreme cold via air conditioners, and racial abuse. He has alleged that dogs were used to
intimidate detainees, and that he was subjected to a brutal removal from his
cell, during which he was pepper sprayed and physically assaulted. During an
interrogation in 2003, when Mohammed was 16 years old, the interrogator
allegedly #3 burned his arm with a cigarette. The teenager still has scars that he says was from this incident.

I haven't read them all yet, but I highlighted #3 and #4 of your earlier list of things that WEREN'T supposedly happening in Gitmo. The quote you provided denies these claims, but provides no counter proof. You've just proved your earlier quote false, you realise?

The interrogation methods used as Gitmo are nothing like those used by the Nazis or Soviets. Examples of Soviet interrogation methods:

1.Stepping on a man's testicles and slowly crushing them beneath the boot heel
2.Heating a ramrod over an oven and thrusting it inside a person's anus
3.Burning with cigarettes
4.Forcing them to stand in a certain position for hours on end
5.Putting them in a room and increasing the temperature to such a high degree that blood oozes from their pores
6.Starvation
7.Shining extremely bright lights in peoples' eyes

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9086161&postcount=33

You beat me to it :D

When I was in Folsom, I wished they would have splurged and spent $12 bucks a day on our slop. At the time I think they spent .25 cents on us. I'd have rather spent 50 years in Club Gitmo, then my 5 years in Folsom. All the fights and stabbings, and times in the hole (where I had to piss on myself) I experienced would make being chained to the floor in a cold room, have naked ladies dancing and touching me, seem like a freaking vacation.

We should have just shot these animals on the battlefield where we found them. At least we were nice enough to let them live better then they would in some sandpit back in Afganistan or Iraq.

I'd be amazed if they actually paid that much.


Actually-maybe we dont pay anything at all. We could call it all even with the mountains of unpaid "diplomats" traffic tickets.

Actually-maybe we dont pay anything at all. We could call it all even with the mountains of unpaid "diplomats" traffic tickets.
Yeah...I'm sure the amounts would even out.

Not sure if I want to roll my eyes, laugh, or do both at once, possibly causing me to fall out of my chair and knocking myself unconscious while dreaming of crunchy taco salads and dancing the merengue in a celtic tunic...

It still seems to me that all these comparisons to supposedly worse methods of interrogation are irrelevant.

The issue here is this: has the United States lived up to its own standards?

I was under the impression that we held ourselves to a higher standard than the example of the Nazis.

Of course, that seems to be implied even by the structure of the current argument. If I may be permitted the luxury of reconstructing this argument in theoretical terms, it seems that everyone acknowledges that the United States promises more recognition for human rights than the negative examples offered. Then some of you go on to point out that, despite our recent abuses, we are still better than the Nazis, therefore we have kept our promise.

Of course, this is much like claiming that, since 10>3, and 5>3, 10=5.

Can figure that out by questioning them. You don't need a trial to prove someone's innocent or not.
And they haven't had trials.

There was me thinking that "innocent until proven guilty" was alive and well.

Obviously not.

And the proof that every single one of them is a guerilla?

That would be the guns they were carrying. It also didn't help their cases when those guns were making "bang bang" sounds while being pointed in the direction of American soldiers. Generally not something you should be doing if "innocent".

It's causing no physical harm. They are not being beaten. This is not stuff the Nazis would have done. They lined the Jews up and shot them all, thousands at a time, they didn't use coercive interrogation.
I should have known better than to think that a serious discussion could have taken place on this subject with the likes of you and Corneliu. If you think that what's going on in that description is causing no physical harm, then there's no help for you. Corneliu thinks it isn't torture, and I assume he's being honest in thinking that, so there's no help for him either.

And people wonder why I stated in another thread that this president does not speak for me, and why I refuse to accept him as my president. It's because people like you can't see beyond your blind loyalty to see when your government is fucking up.

It still seems to me that all these comparisons to supposedly worse methods of interrogation is irrelevant. They are, but everytime the real question is asked, there is a dreadful silence...and then a flurry of new posts saying, "But so and so does this and that...."

The issue here is this: has the United States lived up to its own standards.

Can't get a straight answer around here...

I just find it insulting that he compares all of this to the Soviet gulags, where many members of my family once perished. The gulags killed millions of people... yet for some reason, I haven't heard of any deaths at.

While some of the things they have to go through might be disgusting and debasing to some of you, what do you expect? We are currently engaged in a global war on terrorism. We aren't going to extract any information by politely asking them questions and giving them little toys. Unfortunately, there is a chance that maybe some of them aren't affiliated with any terrrorist organizations, but errors are always made in war. However, what these prisoners go through is NOTHING compared to what happened to the Jews, Russians, etc. You're comparing apples and oranges.

And they haven't had trials.

There was me thinking that "innocent until proven guilty" was alive and well.

Obviously not.

That only deals with crooks and NOT people hauled off the battlefield. As such, we interrogated these people and let them go.

first, from www.dictionary.com (your friend).

torture: Infliction of severe physical pain as a means of punishment or coercion. An instrument or a method for inflicting such pain. Excruciating physical or mental pain. Something causing severe pain or anguish.

physcially speaking, the levels of torture described by Fass and by the good Senator has happened. And the persons who did it are being prosecuted for it. With mental forms of torture, these are sanctioned methods of torture, so it's legal for us to do.

second: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=8799776&src=rss/topNews
Imagine that, prisoners released are captured/killed in Iraq. Innocent huh? If you wanna read the thread on it, you can find it here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=426217).

third: The prisoners, even with the torture, ARE being treated better and more humanely than what has happened in other countries (such as nazi Germany, Stalin-esqe Russia, or Pol Pot's Cambodia(?)). This makes the US better than these countries. I don't see why you can't see that. You're not going to put someone on death row for robbing a bank, but you will put someone on death row for murdering another person. You also have to realize that people aren't perfect, and when they're put into high stress situations (like finding info from a prisoner, or being a guard at a prison where attacks come, if not daily, then frequently), shit happens and people break the rules. They are getting punished for it.

It's like the other day, someone compared the holocaust with what's happening in the Middle East right now. 6million people being killed just because they're jew? C'mon folks, we're not attacking people just because of their muslim faith, we're doing it because they perform terroristic activities.

I just find it insulting that he compares all of this to the Soviet gulags, where many members of my family once perished. The gulags killed millions of people... yet for some reason, I haven't heard of any deaths at.

While some of the things they have to go through might be disgusting and debasing to some of you, what do you expect? We are currently engaged in a global war on terrorism. We aren't going to extract any information by politely asking them questions and giving them little toys. Unfortunately, there is a chance that maybe some of them aren't affiliated with any terrrorist organizations, but errors are always made in war. However, what these prisoners go through is NOTHING compared to what happened to the Jews, Russians, etc. You're comparing apples and oranges.

A very intelligent post. I commend you.

My condolences on your losses.

these are sanctioned methods of torture, so it's legal for us to do.
A rose is a rose is a rose. Sanctioned torture or not, it doesn't make it right.


third: The prisoners, even with the torture, ARE being treated better and more humanely than what has happened in other countries (such as nazi Germany, Stalin-esqe Russia, or Pol Pot's Cambodia(?)). This makes the US better than these countries. I don't see why you can't see that.

Did you completely miss these quotes?

The issue here is this: has the United States lived up to its own standards?

I was under the impression that we held ourselves to a higher standard than the example of the Nazis.

Of course, that seems to be implied even by the structure of the current argument. If I may be permitted the luxury of reconstructing this argument in theoretical terms, it seems that everyone acknowledges that the United States promises more recognition for human rights than the negative examples offered. Then some of you go on to point out that, despite our recent abuses, we are still better than the Nazis, therefore we have kept our promise.

It is difficult for me to believe how completely you misread Senator Durbin's statement. If you had read carefully, you would be aware that he is not making any comparison between America's interrogation of terrorist suspects and the behavior of the Nazis or Pol Pot. *snip*

Senator Durbin was not in any way suggesting that America's war on terrorism is "the same as" the slaughter of human life under Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany. But he was suggesting that America's soldiers and interrogators have failed to live up to the ideals by which we distinguish ourselves, by our own standards, from those monsters of history.


This 'argument' is cyclical enough without people repeating the same points over and over, without ever addressing the questions that are being asked here.

Let me repeat the question here, and instead of a long, involved answer that doesn't really answer anything, let's make this one a yes or no question.

So what you're saying is that our human rights violations are OK because other countries do worse?
Is anyone going to answer this?

The issue here is this: has the United States lived up to its own standards?

Or this?

Yeah...I'm sure the amounts would even out.

Not sure if I want to roll my eyes, laugh, or do both at once, possibly causing me to fall out of my chair and knocking myself unconscious while dreaming of crunchy taco salads and dancing the merengue in a celtic tunic...


Do both at once. twice. Let us know when you recover.

Do both at once. twice. Let us know when you recover.
Hehehehe.

Now come on Carn...NO ONE seems willing to deal with the points I, and others have raised...I need a worthy opponent here. Please step up and do the job that others seem unwilling to? Please?

A rose is a rose is a rose. Sanctioned torture or not, it doesn't make it right.
That's your opinion. if it's sanctioned, it's a-ok by me.

...
Did you completely miss these quotes?

Originally Posted by AnarchyeL
The issue here is this: has the United States lived up to its own standards?
i must have. I will answer it this way: Yes, we have, we prosecute those who break the law in taking torture to far.

I was under the impression that we held ourselves to a higher standard than the example of the Nazis.
we do.

Of course, that seems to be implied even by the structure of the current argument. If I may be permitted the luxury of reconstructing this argument in theoretical terms, it seems that everyone acknowledges that the United States promises more recognition for human rights than the negative examples offered. Then some of you go on to point out that, despite our recent abuses, we are still better than the Nazis, therefore we have kept our promise.
You don't think these prisoners have more human rights than say... prisoners under Saddam, prisoners of Pakistan, prisoners of Saudi Arabia? We are still better than the Nazi's, we don't do mass murder.

... But he was suggesting that America's soldiers and interrogators have failed to live up to the ideals by which we distinguish ourselves, by our own standards, from those monsters of history.
I disagree, i don't believe we have failed to live up to the ideals of American standards, i've said it once, but it may need to be repeated: We prosecute those who take torture too far.

So what you're saying is that our human rights violations are OK because other countries do worse?
No answer is ever a simple yes or no. I've found this out w/ my girlfriend :P but, since you want yes or no (just like she does), the answer is Yes.

The issue here is this: has the United States lived up to its own standards?
Did above, but i'll say it again. Yes we have.

Does that make you happy Sinhue?

Does that make you happy Sinhue?
Deliriously. Now I know where you stand.

Torture is okay, as long as it's legal.

Torture is okay as long as it isn't as bad as the torture used in other countries.

One more question...does the fact of something being legal automatically make it acceptable to you?

So, let's get this straight.

Prisoners (mostly insurgents and their facilitators) in Gitmo have to suffer through:

1) Their air conditioned cells made too hot or too cold as a means of interrogation.
2) Uncomfortable poses/positions.
3) Having loud, obnoxious music blasted at them. (a)
4) Being around scantily clad women.
5) Having water dripped on them/squirted in their faces.
6) Getting free qur'ans.
7) Getting access to muslim chaplains (paid for by our tax dollars).
8) Being allowed their mulitple, uninterrupted prayer times.
9) Getting culturally-appropriate, hot meals such as orange-glazed chicken with rice pilaf.

And this is somehow comparable to people being starved, gassed, burned, mowed down en masse by machine gun fire, having bio-warfare experiments performed on them, being rounded up and stuffed in boxcars to tightly that many died even before reaching the horrors of the concentration camps/gulags, living in pest and disease ridden wards, etc etc etc ???

You people are absolute nuts with no sense of perspective. None whatsoever.

(a) - if this is "torture", then every single asshole with a loud stereo system that pulls up next to me at a stoplight, blaring shitty rap music, needs to be rounded up and tried as war criminals.
I'd like to have this answered, as well.

No answer is ever a simple yes or no. I've found this out w/ my girlfriend :P but, since you want yes or no (just like she does), the answer is Yes.
as i said, it's hard to give just a yes or no answer. You see it as a human rights violation as compared to what's happene under Saddam, what's happened in Rwanda and all the other historic things that have been mentioned (and are currently going on). But me, i don't think they are the same.

Can figure that out by questioning them. You don't need a trial to prove someone's innocent or not.

Tell me you didn't post this with a straight face! No one can be this (I can't say or I'll be accused of flaming)

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Hehehehe.

Now come on Carn...NO ONE seems willing to deal with the points I, and others have raised...I need a worthy opponent here. Please step up and do the job that others seem unwilling to? Please?


I'm sorry sweetness, but I'm in an exceptionally bad mood and wont get across my points the way I'd like to without getting ugly. And I dont want to say anything I cant take back.
My positions are hard to defend sometimes. Especially when outnumbered almost all the time. I'm tired and trying to think of where to go to dinner now.

One thing I'll say is- The US has a higher standard than everyone else, we are at it more often than others are at their lower standards.
And another difference- we are in this and active. That fact alone gives others the luxury to sit around and talk about it.
Bad things happen. I'm not going to say I'm proud of everything. I dont have all the facts-nor does anyone else in here. So we are really arguing things that are largely hypothetical. One government and one news agency says one thing, another government and news agency say another.

But you know what? I'll stick with mine-right or wrong. I'd rather be me, here, anyday. And I dont really care what the opinions are of psuedo intellectual, self loathing hypocrites that pollute my air with incessant yammering.
I really dont care at all. No matter how bad we are here, its HERE that everyone from around the word is flocking to. Wether they love us and want a better life and more opporotunities, or they hate us and are here to take advantage of us doesnt matter- its here.

So-be well. I am off in search of a very under done steak and a side of spinach. I'll give you a sound licking some other time.

Deliriously. Now I know where you stand.

Torture is okay, as long as it's legal.

Torture is okay as long as it isn't as bad as the torture used in other countries.

One more question...does the fact of something being legal automatically make it acceptable to you?

you make it sound so cut and dry, but you should know it isn't :P

yes, if something is legal, it's automatically acceptable to me. RIght now, marijuana isn't illegal in the US, and i'm against it being legal. But if a law is passed making it legal, i'll accept it as such. It takes many people to make something legal, and if that many people can agree on it, why should i disagree?

i disagree with your second sentence. If it's legal, it's ok. It doesn't matter if it's worse than other countries or not.

edit in bold

I'd like to have this answered, as well.
It has been. Repeatedly. You are simply repeating the same idea that "What so and so does is worse, so that makes it okay". We are not COMPARING TORTURES and saying which ones are worse. Some of you are denying torture is taking place, others are offering evidence that it is. Then, people are saying, "Oh, but THAT'S not torture because they don't burn people with cigarrettes and stuff"...and others are showing that, actually, yes they are.

The point is...as has been stated, restated, rerestated and FUCKING RERERESTATED IS THIS:

The point is that Americans hold certain values about the universal sanctity of human life. We believe that we are right in combatting terrorism only insofar as we are better than terrorists -- and taking the moral high ground means treating them like human beings regardless of the crimes of which they are suspected.

So...you're only 'better' than the terrorists because you use torture not quite as bad as other people use torture?

So much for the moral high ground your government keeps claiming.

-snip-

*carts Sinuhue a massive crate of equally massive cookies*

as i said, it's hard to give just a yes or no answer. You see it as a human rights violation as compared to what's happene under Saddam, what's happened in Rwanda and all the other historic things that have been mentioned (and are currently going on). But me, i don't think they are the same.
Are you talking to yourself or me? Because the bolded part of your quote is the exact opposite of what I personally believe or what I have stated here.

You can't compare them and have one form of torture turn out rosier than the other. It's torture. Period. Maybe it makes you 'gentler' than other torturers...but certainly NO BETTER.

Tell me you didn't post this with a straight face! No one can be this (I can't say or I'll be accused of flaming)

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Actually yes I did because it is accurate.

I'm sorry sweetness, but I'm in an exceptionally bad mood and wont get across my points the way I'd like to without getting ugly. And I dont want to say anything I cant take back.
Good on you Carni...some of us (myself most certainly included) don't know when to take a step outside for a while...

...enjoy the bloody steak! I look forward to the licking...

you make it sound so cut and dry, but you should know it isn't :P

yes, if something is legal, it's automatically acceptable to me. RIght now, marijuana isn't illegal in the US, and i'm against it being legal. But if a law is passed making it legal, i'll accept it as such. It takes many people to make something legal, and if that many people can agree on it, why should i disagree?

i disagree with your second sentence. If it's legal, it's ok. It doesn't matter if it's worse than other countries or not.

So you have no concept of unjust laws? Wasn't your nation created on the basis of resisting unjust laws?

Strange that.

Are you talking to yourself or me? Because the bolded part of your quote is the exact opposite of what I personally believe or what I have stated here.

You can't compare them and have one form of torture turn out rosier than the other. It's torture. Period. Maybe it makes you 'gentler' than other torturers...but certainly NO BETTER.

Actually you can compare them. People are quick to point the fingers at the US for human rights abuses but then say we're making stuff up when we point there's out. They have done far far worse than we have done but yet, no one covers them but when an American does something its front page news for 2 weeks. Hypocracy only goes so far.

*carts Sinuhue a massive crate of equally massive cookies*
Oddly enough, just as I read this, someone actually brought me two cookies. My blood ran cold for a second... :eek:

Actually you can compare them. People are quick to point the fingers at the US for human rights abuses but then say we're making stuff up when we point there's out. They have done far far worse than we have done but yet, no one covers them but when an American does something its front page news for 2 weeks. Hypocracy only goes so far.
alright so torture is cool as long as everyone else is doing it?

radical, I'm gonna nail my sister to a tree, should be a blast.

Actually you can compare them. People are quick to point the fingers at the US for human rights abuses but then say we're making stuff up when we point there's out. They have done far far worse than we have done but yet, no one covers them but when an American does something its front page news for 2 weeks. Hypocracy only goes so far.
Apparently not. I've dealt with this...did you miss it? You failed to address the points I brought up THEN too when the EXACT SAME argument was used:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9085936&postcount=122

That would be the guns they were carrying. It also didn't help their cases when those guns were making "bang bang" sounds while being pointed in the direction of American soldiers. Generally not something you should be doing if "innocent".

Here's a question. Did you know that the foreces (not just American) in Afghanistan offered cash rewards for turning in Al Qeada members?

So lets see, hmm, we have an utterly empoverished country, and the easiest way to make a buck is to point a finger at your neightbour and say 'Hay guys, he did it!'. No way that could lead to false incarceration.

Actually, never mind.

I say kill them all and let Allah sort them out.

Oddly enough, just as I read this, someone actually brought me two cookies. My blood ran cold for a second... :eek:

Hmm.

*shifts eyes*

Oh, wha---? Erm...

*runs*

I know that he made the comments Tuesday, but if I've heard anything more reprehensible than this, I honestly can't remember what it was.


Keep in mind, the methods to which he refers are more than likely being applied not only to known terrorists, but to many suspected terrorists who are being detained with no rights and no trial under the patriot Act.

Wow, so there have been trials where evidence was put forth and their guilt was ascertained?

I agree: they should all be set free, with bail, so they can go car-bomb and do all sorts of other awful things to Americans/Iraqis. Terrorists definitely deserve due process.

Actually yes I did because it is accurate.

I already knew that you parrot what you hear, that is obvious.. but please try thinking!!! And no it's not accurate nor is it the way a free country works.

I agree: they should all be set free, with bail, so they can go car-bomb and do all sorts of other awful things to Americans/Iraqis. Terrorists definitely deserve due process.

Yeah lets just execute them all, those camel loving sand humpers. That'll teach those dammed terrorists that we're on the side of FREEDOM!!!!1

Apparently not. I've dealt with this...did you miss it? You failed to address the points I brought up THEN too when the EXACT SAME argument was used:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9085936&postcount=122

The UN is doing nothing about these things because the UN is incapable of doing anything about it. So much for promoting world peace and international Security.

Yeah lets just execute them all, those camel loving sand humpers. That'll teach those dammed terrorists that we're on the side of FREEDOM!!!!1

We can execute them under the accords of the Geneva Conventions and it'll be legal too :D

radical, I'm gonna nail my sister to a tree, should be a blast.
Careful...that means something different in Arkansas than where you're from :D

We can execute them under the accords of the Geneva Conventions and it'll be legal too :D

Yeah that'll be fucking awesome. Screw it, lets just execute everyone. They're only arabs, it's not like they're people or something.

I already knew that you parrot what you hear, that is obvious.. but please try thinking!!! And no it's not accurate nor is it the way a free country works.

Talk about parroting. At least I question everything I hear. Apparently you don't.

Yeah that'll be fucking awesome. Screw it, lets just execute everyone. They're only arabs, it's not like they're people or something.

If they are caught in arms against us and are not wearing a uniform or insignia detailing what unit they're with yea, fine by me.

So, let's get this straight.

Prisoners (mostly insurgents and their facilitators) in Gitmo have to suffer through:

1) Their air conditioned cells made too hot or too cold as a means of interrogation.
2) Uncomfortable poses/positions.
3) Having loud, obnoxious music blasted at them. (a)
4) Being around scantily clad women.
5) Having water dripped on them.
6) Getting free qur'ans.
7) Getting access to muslim chaplains (paid for by our tax dollars).
8) Being allowed their mulitple, uninterrupted prayer times.
9) Getting culturally-appropriate, hot meals such as orange-glazed chicken with rice pilaf.

And this is somehow comparable to people being starved, gassed, burned, mowed down en masse by machine gun fire, having bio-warfare experiments performed on them, being rounded up and stuffed in boxcars to tightly that many died even before reaching the horrors of the concentration camps/gulags, living in pest and disease ridden wards, etc etc etc ???

You people are absolute nuts with no sense of perspective. None whatsoever.

(a) - if this is "torture", then every single asshole with a loud stereo system that pulls up next to me at a stoplight, blaring shitty rap music, needs to be rounded up and tried as war criminals.

For heavens sake do not attempt reason or common sense with these people! Let them ramble, rant, rave, lie and distort. Every single time these fool spout their crap, democrats flee the party in shame. I did several years ago and they were not nearly as desprate then, as now. Most of them once out of school will find a very different reality than what they have been led to believe by a completely inept and corrupted public educational system. Their belief systems for the most part will reflect the real world, and most importantly they will learn to develop a finely tuned spin detector.
In the meantime, it is my considered opinion that the proper course of action would simply to be to remove the detainees at Gitmo and place them in a Federal Holding Facility under operation by CCA (Corrections Corporation of America) in Senator Durbins district. His constituents should surely love that, and deserve it, they will. From this point forward, Geneva Conventions should apply and every single non uniformed combatant should be delt with immediately on the battlefield, compliments of the progressive, thoughtful, liberal american left.

If you claim to be a republican and to have a finely tuned spin detector, you might want to see whatever specialist analyzes that kind of stuff

The UN is doing nothing about these things because the UN is incapable of doing anything about it. So much for promoting world peace and international Security.
You quote me...then say something that has absolutely nothing to do with the quote, is not a topic of discussion, and completely avoids the questions being asked of you?

Let me help you out and revisit the issue I'd like you to actually deal with head on.

Your argument so far:



As for the Declaration of Human Rights, what about the Human Rights violations in China, Sudan, Libya, Congo, Mexico, Rwanda, Somalia, etc etc etc.



No I'm not. I'm saying ours is far from what most nations do to their own people. We are actually more humane when it comes to prisoners than most other nations.


Correct but I really hate to say this but we treat our prisoners more humanely than most other nations do. It is a rather known fact.

Actually you can compare them. People are quick to point the fingers at the US for human rights abuses but then say we're making stuff up when we point there's out. They have done far far worse than we have done but yet, no one covers them but when an American does something its front page news for 2 weeks. Hypocracy only goes so far.

Where I come in:
Seriously people. Can we stop with the "but they do it too" finger pointing? So far no one has really dealt with these questions:
Point two, again, what is this theory of 'They do worse, so let's focus on them, who we can't do anything about/so it's okay if we do bad stuff'? Can someone please explain it to me?





I didn't say our actions were good, just that all sides of that story should be brought out if there's going to be an argument against it. I love it when disrespectful people roam the threads. It makes things so interesting.What is the point of bringing up a subject (alleged abuses) and then saying, "But if we're going to talk about this, we have to talk about ALL the abuse that happens all over the world, and compare it to see if it's really that bad after all. That's fair and balanced."

Do you really want your standards set like this? By comparing them to what others do? What do you really want to accomplish with making sure we all talk about every abuse that governments commit, when we are discussing such a specific issue?





I was talking about the desecration of Korans...was I not?Yes...and? So, Saudi Arabia desecrating Bibles forced your hand? That's what MADE them desecrate the Koran?

There is not a cause-effect link here. Pissing on Korans is not one side of the story, and desecrating Bibles the other.





Or it sounds a lot like, this may be happening here, but it's been happening for a lot longer elsewhere, let's tell both sides of the stories. Everyone's so critical as to how we're handling our situations, but no one wants to talk about what else is going on in the world.Bullshit.

We do talk about it. A lot. It simply isn't relevant to what your government is doing (or not). A Tibetan monk being tortured in China does not have any impact on whether detainees are being abused in Gitmo. So what relevance does it actually have to this discussion?

Now, if you want to talk about Chinese human rights abuses, let's do so. But don't bring up abuses committed by other governments as some sort of smokescreen for what is your own government is doing. Both sides of the story would be discussing the allegations, and the defense. Not this.



Now, do you actually have something NEW to add to this argument, or will you continue repeating yourself?

The UN is doing nothing about these things because the UN is incapable of doing anything about it. So much for promoting world peace and international Security.
YES I AGREE BECAUZE THE US HAS NEVER DONE ANYTHING TO WREK THE UN. never. never ever ever.

because U S A spells FREEDOM 4 EVAR!!!1

Durbin is a douche-bag.

He is so concerned for human rights all of a sudden. He is a scum bag politician, shooting off his mouth, to serve his own agenda, in a country where he is safe expressing himself in.
Was Durbin not in favour of human rights before this fiasco? BTW, don't most politicians open their mouths to spout their own agenda? In my estimation, Durbin's cause is a noble one.

To all the people who are so horrified by alleged torture- Where the Hell were you when sadaam was REALLY torturing men,women and children? Where were you when Iraqi soldiers were shooting men woman and children and bulldozing them into mass graves? he really did this and there is real proof. Gassing the Kurds?
This is a good question. Perhaps you should ask the politicians that actually played a part in assisting Saddam during his years in power. You know, those self serving politicians that turned a blind eye to the chemical and biological agents that were sent over for Saddam to use.

Those same self serving politicians that removed Iraq from the list of terrorist nations, and exchanged ambassadors and shared military intelligence.

Yes, where are those people today?

Yes, where are those people today?
*raises hand timidly*

Aren't they still in power, teacher? :D

Actually you can compare them. People are quick to point the fingers at the US for human rights abuses but then say we're making stuff up when we point there's out. They have done far far worse than we have done but yet, no one covers them but when an American does something its front page news for 2 weeks. Hypocracy only goes so far.
The high moral ground you once stood upon, has opened up and swallowed you and your two wrongs make a right theory.

Talk about parroting. At least I question everything I hear. Apparently you don't.

Hahaha, you're a lost cause.. you're not worth it. Later.

You question nothing.

OK Corneliu. Give me a week to try out Gitmo techniques on you. I'd bet you'll be willing to change your mind about 'torture'.

Some of the techniques are also designed to be effective against Muslims specifically. Lapdancers are abhorrent to their culture in the same way the openly gay were to ours until recently. Would you want a gay man coming on to you while you can't do anything to stop them? I'd bet you wouldn't, I certianly wouldn't.

The techniques may not be as brutal as the soviets and the Nazis but Durbin's statement is correct. These are the actions of a nation with far less conscience than the US claims to have.

Hahaha, you're a lost cause.. you're not worth it. Later.

You question nothing.

Run and retreat. That is all the left ever does is run and retreat. They don't stand to fight for what they believe in. Cowards.

*raises hand timidly*

Aren't they still in power, teacher? :D
Unfortunately yes, some of them are. Dick Cheney for one. Donald Rumsfeld makes two. Colin Powell has been forced out. There are many others. Those names popped into my head quickly.

Just as a side note, by virtually all international law, Gitmo would be classified as "Cruel and Inhumane Treatment", not Torture as such. Torture is reserved for more abhorent crimes, generally speaking. There is no comparison between hooding someone, or defacing the Koran, and rape, for example. What's happening to the people in Gitmo is wrong, but it's nowhere near the same level as the things that went on in the Balkans, for example.

The high moral ground you once stood upon, has opened up and swallowed you and your two wrongs make a right theory.

Then I guess that the High Moral ground called the UN has been swallowed up too since they have not prevented one war nor one genocide. They haven't done NOTHING about human rights abuses anywhere on this planet.

Run and retreat. That is all the left ever does is run and retreat. They don't stand to fight for what they believe in. Cowards.

Believe as you wish, the fact of the matter is I know for a fact that much of your information is incorrect and I also believe that your belief structure is some messed up. So, it's not retreat, it's simply pointless in trying to have a debate or discussion with you, because when you're wrong you'll die before you'll admit it. It's just not worth my time. I've tried a few times with you. It is pointless. In my opinion you're a lost cause.

Then I guess that the High Moral ground called the UN has been swallowed up too since they have not prevented one war nor one genocide. They haven't done NOTHING about human rights abuses anywhere on this planet.
That's a flat out lie, and I'm guessing you know it. There's a rich well documented account of UN intervention which clearly falsifies this statement. A good example would be Cyprus.

So far, only one of you that is defending the use of torture has answered these questions...would the rest of you care to answer a direct question for a change?


Let me repeat the question here, and instead of a long, involved answer that doesn't really answer anything, let's make this one a yes or no question.

So what you're saying is that our human rights violations are OK because other countries do worse?



The issue here is this: has the United States lived up to its own standards?

The UN is doing nothing about these things because the UN is incapable of doing anything about it. So much for promoting world peace and international Security.
Ummm the UN told you not to go into Iraq, but you wouldn't listen. It is difficult to promote world peace when the country with the most WMD is running around kocking over all the sand castles in Iraq. IMHO the world is less safe since the invasion of Iraq. Don't blame the UN.