Forget Gitmo?

bonkey · 03-11-2005 12:48pm #1

from [url=]here[/url]

The CIA and the White House, citing national security concerns and the value of the program, have dissuaded Congress from demanding the agency answer questions in open testimony about the conditions under which captives are held.

There's a chunk of other, similar articles on this referenced from google news at the moment.

Maybe I shouldn't be shocked. After all, these prisons, like Gitmo, are only for "really bad people", right? And don't we need to be kept safe.

Interestingly, I can see those who have no issue with this being largely the same group who have supported various actions of the US government, often justifying the loss of civil liberties / privacy on the grounds of "if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear"

One would have to ask, therefore, what it is the US fears, given that it has up-till-recently hidden teh mere existence fo these prisons, and even now seeks to keep hidden the manner in which it treats its prisoners.

jc

bonkey · 03-11-2005 12:51pm

Forgot link. Can't edit above post from where I currently am.

It should have been...

http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=111c425e-3f65-49c3-b5c3-a40754abf457

Hobbes · 03-11-2005 1:01pm

Saw that the other day. Although the US government have denied it, but then with thier record on being truthful whos to say.

I had posted some months back on politics a link to a canadian guy who was detained in the US (only flying through the country to get to another), sent to another country to be tourtured and after months was released without charge. His crime? Asking a stranger to co-sign a lease who was in the same place as him when getting an apartment (AFAIR).

So I can well believe this crap is going on.

Snickers Man · 03-11-2005 3:15pm

Hobbes wrote:

canadian guy who was detained in the US (only flying through the country to get to another), sent to another country to be tourtured and after months was released without charge. His crime? Asking a stranger to co-sign a lease who was in the same place as him when getting an apartment.

I think you're being a little disingenuous there Hobbes and not telling us the full truth. I'll bet here were other grounds for suspicion.

eg

having a swarthy complexion

declining to eat the bacon in his airline meal.

sporting a full dark beard

being called Mohammed

I'm sure they got him bang to rights.

Zombrex · 03-11-2005 3:40pm

I mean what kind of person doesn't eat bacon?? A Communist thats who!

Hobbes do you have a link to that post (search isn't working for me for some reason)

bonkey · 03-11-2005 4:01pm

Careful now. All these nasty comments about bacon will have people calling you anti-Semitic.

or something.

Hobbes wrote:

Although the US government have denied it

Have they?

All I could find was that the Administration and CIA had refused to comment on the article in the Washington Post that appeared yesterday.

Refused to comment...the words "nothing to hide" are echoing around my head again.

jc

Zombrex · 03-11-2005 4:57pm

bonkey wrote:

Careful now. All these nasty comments about bacon will have people calling you anti-Semitic

Watch Mel Gibson's The Passion bonkey ... Mel Gibson isn't wrong bonkey, he isn't wrong ... just watch it ..

(anyone who doesn't watch South Park won't get this ...

)

Anyway, back on topic ... it think it is a bit of damning statement of the fear the American public is in that they really don't seem to care about what happened at Gitmo. I mean it is all very well to say it isn't Americans its just Bush, but the Gitmo issue is largely ignored or not understood by middle America

I think in time history will look back at this with horror as it did the Japanise interment camps during WWII

Memnoch · 03-11-2005 6:22pm

Harsh times call for harsh measures.

We must fight these terrorists home and abroad, and sometimes, some of us must sacrifice our principles in true pragmatism so that the majority may safely follow theirs.

America is a light in the darkness, a symbol of freedom, democracy and equality, and you damned europeans should just be thankful that we are around or you would all be speaking german right now.

Sand · 03-11-2005 9:01pm

Harsh times call for harsh measures.

We must fight these terrorists home and abroad, and sometimes, some of us must sacrifice our principles in true pragmatism so that the majority may safely follow theirs.

America is a light in the darkness, a symbol of freedom, democracy and equality, and you damned europeans should just be thankful that we are around or you would all be speaking german right now.

Thats crazy talk.

Theres no such thing as Al-Queda.

We must strive to home and abroad, to find these non-existent terrorists so we can surrender to them and try to adapt to how our moral masters dictate - grow beards, force women back into the kitchen, preferably wearing a sheet. This "alleged" desire to carry out massive attacks on our cities is clearly a lie spread by the nefarious neo-cons, these brave young freedom fighters - if they exist at all - wish only to liberate themselves from our cruel and evil depradations such as McDonalds!

Because at the end of the day, its Americas fault. America is clearly the worst country in the whole world. Americans are basically to blame for everything. Polution? America. Famine? America. Poverty? America. Tsuanamis? America. China/India buying up all the oil? America. U.N. being useless? America. Israel not wiped off the map yet? America. Chechnya? America. Tieniemen Square? America. USSR not winning the Cold War? America. Didnt get a parking spot this morning? America. They should just be grateful they have us Europeans here to remind them what a mess of things theyre making.

Seriously though, Gitmo is enough. Given its apparently a medieval torture dungeon complete with ogre last I heard - I also heard disturbing rumours about detainees being taught to read and stuff like that, but I assume thats hysterical sensationalism - what are they doing in these black sites thats worse than the hellhole Gitmo apparently is?

breandan · 04-11-2005 12:23am

Memnoch wrote:

America is a light in the darkness, a symbol of freedom, democracy and equality, and you damned europeans should just be thankful that we are around or you would all be speaking german right now.

As apposed to the English we now speak............

bonkey · 04-11-2005 12:16pm

Memnoch wrote:

America is a light in the darkness, a symbol of freedom, democracy and equality, and you damned europeans should just be thankful that we are around or you would all be speaking german right now.

At the risk of not picking up on humour....

The point most critics are making is that the second word of that quote is in danger of becoming (some would say has become) the wrong tense.

jc

supersheep · 05-11-2005 12:12am

Sand wrote:

Thats crazy talk.

Theres no such thing as Al-Queda.

We must strive to home and abroad, to find these non-existent terrorists so we can surrender to them and try to adapt to how our moral masters dictate - grow beards, force women back into the kitchen, preferably wearing a sheet. This "alleged" desire to carry out massive attacks on our cities is clearly a lie spread by the nefarious neo-cons, these brave young freedom fighters - if they exist at all - wish only to liberate themselves from our cruel and evil depradations such as McDonalds!

Because at the end of the day, its Americas fault. America is clearly the worst country in the whole world. Americans are basically to blame for everything. Polution? America. Famine? America. Poverty? America. Tsuanamis? America. China/India buying up all the oil? America. U.N. being useless? America. Israel not wiped off the map yet? America. Chechnya? America. Tieniemen Square? America. USSR not winning the Cold War? America. Didnt get a parking spot this morning? America. They should just be grateful they have us Europeans here to remind them what a mess of things theyre making.

Seriously though, Gitmo is enough. Given its apparently a medieval torture dungeon complete with ogre last I heard - I also heard disturbing rumours about detainees being taught to read and stuff like that, but I assume thats hysterical sensationalism - what are they doing in these black sites thats worse than the hellhole Gitmo apparently is?

Thing is though, America are supposed to be the good guys. And the good guys don't get to play with the nasty spiky torture things and the like - that's only for the bad guys. If you claim to uphold freedom, you can't take someone and stick them in a camp for four years without charge, or hide them in Poland. You've gotta play by the rules. Even if it means you're handicapping yourself.
That's how the good guys play.

Sand · 05-11-2005 5:49pm

Thing is though, America are supposed to be the good guys. And the good guys don't get to play with the nasty spiky torture things and the like - that's only for the bad guys. If you claim to uphold freedom, you can't take someone and stick them in a camp for four years without charge, or hide them in Poland. You've gotta play by the rules. Even if it means you're handicapping yourself.
That's how the good guys play.

Well in the case where nasty spiky torture things were used, Abu Gharib, the soldiers involved were charged and convicted and the officer who was supposed to be running the show was demoted.

And in the case of Gitmo, that hell on earth where detainees are supposed to be having their toenails ripped out - actually they do things like teach people how to read and do their prayer calls and so on and so forth. So you see, I do feel that A) The Abu Gharib fallout demonstrated to any soldier or whoever else that if prisoners are mistreated they will be prosecuted, and to officers that they will be held responsible for any mistreatment in their facilities and

The reports on Gitmo painting it as some sort of death camp were a little over the top, hence these reports of secret CIA camps (the CIA has secret facilities, whod have thunk it, next youll be telling me they have people working for them that dont say they work for the CIA) are only the next subject of hysterical sensationalism. The worst Ive heard coming out of Gitmo is that when the most non-compliant are interogated that theyre insulted, belittled, humiliated and put under tremendous emotional strain. That is standard run of the mill techniques for interrogating fanatics who dont want to tell you what they know. Its not a pleasant experience for the person undergoing it but its not meant to be. And its a far cry from spiky torture instruments you describe.

Look at that case of the British soldiers which collapsed recently, they were accused of going into a town, beating a teenager to death, attacking a woman and various other crimes. This would have been hyped up as showing the evil crimes of the coalition forces - except when it came to trial there was no body, no grave, no proof showing any of the accused soldiers were even in the town, and several of the witnessess admitted they had lied about what they had seen so as to claim appearance fees in the court, and eventually claim blood money from the UK. The judge directed that given the above there was no way any of the men could be convicted.

So theres a lot of claims about misdemeanors on the part of the "good" guys, that usually doesnt hold up to the light of day. It is however a mark that they are the good guys that such claims are investigated and punished as appropriate. So again, I get a little cautious about believing every detention facility is an orwellian nightmare, every coalition soldier is a redneck Texan who spends his patrols shooting up civillians for ****s and giggles, and so on and so forth.

Also, on your point about upholding freedom and locking people up for 4 years - actually the US can lock up people for as long as they want, technically until they die of old age without charge. If Al Queda is fighting a war against the US, which they claim, then any of their "soldiers" taken prisoner do not have to be released until the end of hostilities, which will never happen as Al Queda and Co will never sign a peace deal with the US. All perfectly above board too.

supersheep · 05-11-2005 11:55pm

Sand wrote:

Well in the case where nasty spiky torture things were used, Abu Gharib, the soldiers involved were charged and convicted and the officer who was supposed to be running the show was demoted.

And in the case of Gitmo, that hell on earth where detainees are supposed to be having their toenails ripped out - actually they do things like teach people how to read and do their prayer calls and so on and so forth. So you see, I do feel that A) The Abu Gharib fallout demonstrated to any soldier or whoever else that if prisoners are mistreated they will be prosecuted, and to officers that they will be held responsible for any mistreatment in their facilities and The reports on Gitmo painting it as some sort of death camp were a little over the top, hence these reports of secret CIA camps (the CIA has secret facilities, whod have thunk it, next youll be telling me they have people working for them that dont say they work for the CIA) are only the next subject of hysterical sensationalism. The worst Ive heard coming out of Gitmo is that when the most non-compliant are interogated that theyre insulted, belittled, humiliated and put under tremendous emotional strain. That is standard run of the mill techniques for interrogating fanatics who dont want to tell you what they know. Its not a pleasant experience for the person undergoing it but its not meant to be. And its a far cry from spiky torture instruments you describe.

As far as I know, no sharp pointy torture implements were actually used in Abu Ghraib, just humiliation and abuse. Similar to what is used in Gunatanamo, I believe - emotional torture is still torture.

Sand wrote:

Look at that case of the British soldiers which collapsed recently, they were accused of going into a town, beating a teenager to death, attacking a woman and various other crimes. This would have been hyped up as showing the evil crimes of the coalition forces - except when it came to trial there was no body, no grave, no proof showing any of the accused soldiers were even in the town, and several of the witnessess admitted they had lied about what they had seen so as to claim appearance fees in the court, and eventually claim blood money from the UK. The judge directed that given the above there was no way any of the men could be convicted.

So theres a lot of claims about misdemeanors on the part of the "good" guys, that usually doesnt hold up to the light of day. It is however a mark that they are the good guys that such claims are investigated and punished as appropriate. So again, I get a little cautious about believing every detention facility is an orwellian nightmare, every coalition soldier is a redneck Texan who spends his patrols shooting up civillians for ****s and giggles, and so on and so forth.

Doesn't mean they didn't do it... But yes, I mainly agree here. I just want to point out that the boy they were accused of killing WAS actually killed - just not necessarily by them.

Sand wrote:

Also, on your point about upholding freedom and locking people up for 4 years - actually the US can lock up people for as long as they want, technically until they die of old age without charge. If Al Queda is fighting a war against the US, which they claim, then any of their "soldiers" taken prisoner do not have to be released until the end of hostilities, which will never happen as Al Queda and Co will never sign a peace deal with the US. All perfectly above board too.

But then, certain rules which the US are not applying would apply - the rules concerning the treatment of prisoners of war.

Hobbes · 06-11-2005 6:15am

Wicknight wrote:

Hobbes do you have a link to that post (search isn't working for me for some reason)

Heres the link...

http://www.maherarar.ca/

Worth reading.

Hobbes · 06-11-2005 6:28am

Sand wrote:

actually they do things like teach people how to read and do their prayer calls and so on and so forth.

If it is such a wonderful place why then are a large number of the immates on hunger strike then?

And which inmates are they teaching to read? Those children they have detained? You know, the ones that aren't actually charged with anything, just happen to be related to some of the prisoners.

The reports on Gitmo painting it as some sort of death camp were a little over the top,

Your right in those regards. However 2-3 years ago the US did mention they were building gas chamber to execute those they find seriously guilty (or whatever term). Considering the trials are far from fair, what name would you call the place? Happy funcamp?

hence these reports of secret CIA camps (the CIA has secret facilities, whod have thunk it, next youll be telling me they have people working for them that dont say they work for the CIA) are only the next subject of hysterical sensationalism.

Exporting of tourture has been going on for years and has been reported by the Press worldwide for a number of years in relation to Gitmo. The previous link I just gave gives 1 incident. Hard to believe you can be detained without rights by the US in an US airport (more then one incident with this), but it happens.

The worst Ive heard coming out of Gitmo is that when the most non-compliant are interogated that theyre insulted, belittled, humiliated and put under tremendous emotional strain.

2-4 year holiday is great. Imagine I removed your from society for 2 years, told no one where you were and then returned you without compensation to that society. Do you think you would still have a job? A house? Family and friends? A lot of people released without charge after YEARS of detainment are in this position.

From how I read it you have no problem with people being detained in cages without rights and reasonable tourture without being charged of any crime.

And that is right how?

Also, on your point about upholding freedom and locking people up for 4 years - actually the US can lock up people for as long as they want, technically until they die of old age without charge. If Al Queda is fighting a war against the US, which they claim, then any of their "soldiers" taken prisoner do not have to be released until the end of hostilities, which will never happen as Al Queda and Co will never sign a peace deal with the US. All perfectly above board too.

Then they would attain POW status, they would have to officially declare war on a country and they would have to be released at the end of such instances. Didn't Bush claim "Mission Accomplished" some time ago? Although I don't remember Congress officially declaring war.

Also as POW they would be entitled to more rights then they have now.

AQ and co... AQ are independant of the and co, and lumping the two together just helps to futher abuse peoples rights in the name of fighting terror.

Sand · 07-11-2005 9:16pm

As far as I know, no sharp pointy torture implements were actually used in Abu Ghraib, just humiliation and abuse. Similar to what is used in Gunatanamo, I believe - emotional torture is still torture.

As I understand it there was beatings and physical mistreatment of the prisoners there. A step above emotional stress. And youre now in the proccess of a U turn from originally claiming that the US *shouldnt* use nasty spiky torture things to now claiming no nasty spiky torture things were actually used at all. Which is a reminder of why hyped up sensationalism about torture only confuses the issue.

Doesn't mean they didn't do it... But yes, I mainly agree here. I just want to point out that the boy they were accused of killing WAS actually killed - just not necessarily by them.

Well the defence lawyer for the men made the point that the prosecution couldnt produce a body or a grave. Given that is it even certain any boy was killed?

But then, certain rules which the US are not applying would apply - the rules concerning the treatment of prisoners of war.

Only real difference would be questioning. They probably couldnt question them on their links to terrorism. Which is the most practical reason for not going down that path. Mind you, POWs are obliged to provide their unit, rank, and so on and so forth. The equivalent for a terrorist would be his cell. However, the non-compliant arent likely to talk anyway so the lock them up and throw away the key option sounds safest.

If it is such a wonderful place why then are a large number of the immates on hunger strike then?

Maybe they have a really strong belief in their cause? Wouldnt be the first time terrorists went on hunger strike.

And which inmates are they teaching to read? Those children they have detained? You know, the ones that aren't actually charged with anything, just happen to be related to some of the prisoners.

The compliant prisoners, those who cant read anyway Id imagine.

Your right in those regards. However 2-3 years ago the US did mention they were building gas chamber to execute those they find seriously guilty (or whatever term). Considering the trials are far from fair, what name would you call the place? Happy funcamp?

A detention facility, a lot of US prisons have nearby means of execution. Theyre still usually called prisons as opposed to death camps. Its a different country Hobbes, with a different system of crime and punishment. They do some things a little more "progressively" than we do, and vice versa.

Exporting of tourture has been going on for years and has been reported by the Press worldwide for a number of years in relation to Gitmo. The previous link I just gave gives 1 incident. Hard to believe you can be detained without rights by the US in an US airport (more then one incident with this), but it happens.

Well with all that evidence it should be easy to get a conviction then shouldnt it? Seeing as the usual domestic law enforcement are touted by people as being enough to deal with secretive, fanatical terrorists it shouldnt be a big deal to get convictions using the same system against a government/system thats bound by the law and accountable to the people and leaks like a sieve any time anything mildly embarrassing develops.

From how I read it you have no problem with people being detained in cages without rights and reasonable tourture without being charged of any crime.

I run a pros/cons angle on it. My ideal solution would be that stuff like 9/11 didnt happen, or that the people who carried it out werent attempting to carry out more of them. But unfortunately thats not the case. And given the anti-bush lobbys struggle to convict Bush for torture in Gitmo despite apparent evidence being everywhere, you can understand my misgivings about the ability of normal orthodox law enforcement to deal with these guys.

Also you and I as fellow Irishmen ( Im guessing?) owe a great debt of gratitude to Dev and his policy of people being detained in cages without rights and without being charged with any crime. It smashed the IRA in the Free State/Republic and helped protect our democracy. Wasnt kittens and sunshine but it worked.

So overall, I see it as the least worst option.

AQ and co... AQ are independant of the and co, and lumping the two together just helps to futher abuse peoples rights in the name of fighting terror.

Do you have a shorthand version of the above, that can stress the differentiation of the two whilst allowing me to refer to AQ and their allied local groups without a sentence of several hundred words? I was working with "and" but this apparently isnt pedantic enough.

rsynnott · 07-11-2005 11:08pm

Memnoch wrote:

Harsh times call for harsh measures.

We must fight these terrorists home and abroad, and sometimes, some of us must sacrifice our principles in true pragmatism so that the majority may safely follow theirs.

America is a light in the darkness, a symbol of freedom, democracy and equality, and you damned europeans should just be thankful that we are around or you would all be speaking german right now.

Is this a joke? Honestly, I can't tell.

There were, as far as I know, no nasty spiky things. There was however, sleep deprivation and other related nastiness. Torture by EU standards, though not by US or UN standards.

Hobbes · 08-11-2005 6:07am

Sand wrote:

Maybe they have a really strong belief in their cause? Wouldnt be the first time terrorists went on hunger strike.

Actually they are demanding to be tried or released. You do read the news right?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4206908.stm

Also they have been convicted of no crime to date, so how can you call them terrorists? Were the 100's that were released from the camp after 2 years imprisonment also terrorists?

A detention facility, a lot of US prisons have nearby means of execution. Theyre still usually called prisons as opposed to death camps.

Except that in a US prison you are normally given a fair trial and whatnot before you are executed. In Gitmo these prisoners can't even see what crimes they are being accused of and there is no oversight in this regards. Although if you know of any let me know.

Well with all that evidence it should be easy to get a conviction then shouldnt it?

Except that the US have twisted the laws to basically say "You are not in the US, we can do what we like". A good example is US airports. The ground is classed as international land, so they can detain you there without rights also and have done so to people.

It smashed the IRA in the Free State/Republic and helped protect our democracy.

Actually the IRA had little to no real power during the world wars. It only gained strength during the civil rights movements. Can you show where it helped protect democracy? Have you even read the history during that time? Do you also condone the imprisonment of Japanese during WWII in the US? Same thing no?

Do you have a shorthand version of the above

I point I am making you (and generally the US administration) can just slap AQ onto something to imply that hey everyone is a terrorist.

But I would like to know how you can infer that people in Gitmo are all terrorists when they haven't even been charged. Also you skipped over the bit if you were detained without rights for 2 years. You don't seem to have a problem with this?

bonkey · 08-11-2005 9:00am

Sand wrote:

Well with all that evidence it should be easy to get a conviction then shouldnt it?

Any reason you don't apply this reasoning to what the US is doing to its suspects, but do apply it to the critics of said policy?

Its ok to hold people indefinitely in Gitmo without evidence etc, because hey - proving they've done something wrong obviously isn't that important. As long as you suggest you'll eventually let them go, let them die, or give them a trial, then you're free to treat them as though they are already guilty.

Criticise this policy, or any of the other areas where there's questions about its legality/morality, and all of a sudden its a case of knocking the criticism because it hasn't been taken to court and shown to hold up there.

I would suggest that no defence of what has gone on / is going on in Gitmo can use the "take it to trial" defence, nor any other form of "innocent until proven guilty" reasoning without sacrificing any shred of intellectual honesty the argument may otherwise have had.

jc

lili · 08-11-2005 9:15am

do those people in gitmo have laywers for defend their rights?

Hobbes · 08-11-2005 9:29am

lili wrote:

do those people in gitmo have laywers for defend their rights?

Some do, however they are being denied the right to talk to thier clients and even when they do get access it is far from normal. Also a lot of the evidence the lawyers are not even allowed see.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4343898.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,13743,1098618,00.html

bonkey · 09-11-2005 1:23pm

Just saw the following regarding these prisons:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/09/AR2005110900318.html

Basically, it alleges that the CIA are asking the Justice Dept to investigate the leaking of this information.

This is very interesting. So far, the only answers regarding the allegations about these prisons have either dodged the topic or insisted that the prisons don't exist.

Now, the CIA are apparently looking to find out who leaked this classified information about prisons which don't exist and who's existence has been denied.

Of course, if this turns around to bite Republicans in the ass, I'm sure that this, unlike the Plame case, will be widely billed as a worthy investigation into very serious allegations of leaking classified information.

jc

Hobbes · 09-11-2005 1:55pm

Its been common knowledge that CIA were exporting people to Uzbek to be torture some time back. What has changed now?

Capt'n Midnight · 07-12-2005 9:14pm

Hobbes wrote:

Its been common knowledge that CIA were exporting people to Uzbek to be torture some time back. What has changed now?

http://robinrowland.com/garret/2005/11/waterboarding-is-war-crime.html
this Blog describes "Waterboarding" which the US have admited to using.

Of course the Waterboarding the US uses is the good kind that coerces terrorists into revealing only genuine info that prevents attacks.

The other kind of Waterboarding, while technically exactly the same, is bad. The Japanese used it in WWII on innocent civilians who had taken no parth in an attack (by special forces) yet the civilians confessed. These false confessions don't happen with the good kind. Also the bad kind of Waterboarding is a capital offense, the Japanese involved were executed for war crimes. This also doesn't happen with the totally different good kind of Waterboarding even though it's technically the same as the bad kind.

wiseones2cents · 08-12-2005 1:09am

America is guilty of many things. That is why they refuse to participate in the International courts. They actually threatened them and silenced them.

They refuse to pass anti-Torture laws because they know they are guilty of them.

These guys have made a mockery of war rules. Here is an example.

The U.S. has classified the prisoners held at Camp X-Ray as "illegal combatants" rather than prisoners of war, and claims that the protections afforded by the Geneva Conventions.

Were they not captured during war?

And the brains behind this logic was made Attorney General. All of America's puppets and henchmen are promoted.

You people that believe emotional torture of an Innocent man is justifiable, should rethink your positions. None of those men at Guantanamo have been convicted of anything.

Also the CIA transported prisoners to places that practice PHYSICAL Torture.
Which is Clearly Illegal and a Barbaric and Criminal Act.

America is a light in the darkness, a symbol of freedom, democracy and equality, and you damned europeans should just be thankful that we are around or you would all be speaking german right now.

America is a light in the darkness? I dont know where you get your info from but America's glory days are over. It is the complete opposite.

Freedom?They install puppet Dictators around the world to Oppress.

Democracy? America's idea of Democracy is criminals funding politicians and political campaigns world wide.

Equality? Thats not what the Black Population of New Orleans is saying. Its been 4 months and they have not recieved one bit of aid.

You make it seem like America saved the world single handedly.America sat back in both world wars for a few years and watched, thanks to its geographical position. Russia and Britain did most of the work
against Germany.

supersheep · 09-12-2005 8:38pm

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

http://robinrowland.com/garret/2005/11/waterboarding-is-war-crime.html
this Blog describes "Waterboarding" which the US have admited to using.

Of course the Waterboarding the US uses is the good kind that coerces terrorists into revealing only genuine info that prevents attacks.

The other kind of Waterboarding, while technically exactly the same, is bad. The Japanese used it in WWII on innocent civilians who had taken no parth in an attack (by special forces) yet the civilians confessed. These false confessions don't happen with the good kind. Also the bad kind of Waterboarding is a capital offense, the Japanese involved were executed for war crimes. This also doesn't happen with the totally different good kind of Waterboarding even though it's technically the same as the bad kind.

Did someone see or read Harold Pinter's Nobel Prize Speech?

As for the torture, of course it's still going on. It'll go on as long as people are willing to give up their freedoms in return for "safety" from something that is both highly unlikely to happen to them, and almost impossible to prevent. Not worth it, in my opinion. I'd rather take the risk than give up protection from torture and the shelter of the law.

Sand · 10-12-2005 12:16am

You make it seem like America saved the world single handedly.America sat back in both world wars for a few years and watched, thanks to its geographical position. Russia and Britain did most of the work
against Germany.

I know, that post has a highly unrealistic bias with regards to the U.S. Its disgusting tbh.

Any reason you don't apply this reasoning to what the US is doing to its suspects, but do apply it to the critics of said policy?

Never got round to answering this the first time, but my entire point was that people against Gitmo argue that normal law enforcement is enough to deal with terrorism. They also denounce Bush as a mass war crinimal and christ knows what else. Seeing as Bush is convicted of nothing, despite apparent mounds of evidence and his administration leaking sensitive memos and documents weekly, the same people cant argue that normal law enforcement is enough to deal with secretive, murderous terrorists because normal law encforcement cant convict in (apparently) the most open and shut case since Nuremburg - at least so far as those posters are concerned?

As for the torture, of course it's still going on. It'll go on as long as people are willing to give up their freedoms in return for "safety" from something that is both highly unlikely to happen to them, and almost impossible to prevent. Not worth it, in my opinion. I'd rather take the risk than give up protection from torture and the shelter of the law.

Well, as Rice herself said, she knows what it is like to be before a commitee investigating whether the administration did *everything* possible to avoid a terrorist attack. People here were denouncing her and the Bush administration on the grounds that she read a report that islamic terrorists were planning an attack on the U.S. Heres a newsflash, islamic terrorists are planning attacks right now! You cant have it both ways. And tbh, the reporting on Gitmo was horribly overhyped to the point where the journalists must have collapsed hyperventilating over their keyboards. Abuse was proven and punished in Abu Gharib, not in Gitmo.

Also the CIA transported prisoners to places that practice PHYSICAL Torture.
Which is Clearly Illegal and a Barbaric and Criminal Act.

Countries have renditioned people many times before. I doubt you were out with placards denouncing the capture of Nazi war crinimals by Mossad in South America - or who knows, maybe you were. As Rice pointed out, the taking of Carlos the Jackal to France was challenged in court and the challenge was defeated.

As for these places that practised torture, have you been listening to the testimony in Saddams trial? Apparently human beings were fed into mincing machines in his jails. Woops, instead of human beings, I meant nobody. Because as we all know Saddam was a threat to nobody.

ziggy · 10-12-2005 3:49am

This post has been deleted.

wiseones2cents · 10-12-2005 6:21pm

Countries have renditioned people many times before. I doubt you were out with placards denouncing the capture of Nazi war crinimals by Mossad in South America - or who knows, maybe you were. As Rice pointed out, the taking of Carlos the Jackal to France was challenged in court and the challenge was defeated.

I was not following politics or was aware at the time.I think Carlos the jackal and this situation are highly different.

As for these places that practised torture, have you been listening to the testimony in Saddams trial? Apparently human beings were fed into mincing machines in his jails. Woops, instead of human beings, I meant nobody. Because as we all know Saddam was a threat to nobody.

America is the most disgusting propaganda hyping, mis-information spewing, spin doctors around. They claim Saddam totured? I can name at least another 10 American allies and puppet governments that torture. Why hasn't it attacked them? Rather it sends them innocent prisoners to be tortured.

America only Attacks countries that dont bow to American Imperial will. Saddam had cut America from the oil profits after America back stabbed Iraq by giving the Iranians WMD to fight Iraq in exchange for American prisoners.

This is not about Saddam's ruthless rule. America has put worse dictators in power world wide.This is not about freedom, Al-Qaeda or 9/11 or even WMD. The CIA and MOSSAD had both said Saddam had no WMD.Its about Greed. Oil money. This war was in the works for years....

Now back to the subject. Here is the latest news. Can you say Guilty of Torture?

US rejects Red Cross call for access to all terror suspects
WASHINGTON - The United States rejected a fresh call by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) for full access to terror suspects, saying some of those detained were "exceptional" and posed "unique threats" to US security. The ICRC on Friday sought access to all detainees held by the United States in the campaign against terror groups, including those allegedly held in "secret prisons" abroad. The group is at present allowed to visit detainees held at the US military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, under an internationally recognized legal mandate to oversee the fair treatment of detainees captured in conflicts.

supersheep · 11-12-2005 12:06am

To be honest Sand, if it weren't for the fact that Eichmann's execution happened about two and a half decades before I was born, I would have been opposing it. No matter what someone did, the reason some people are the good guys and some people are the bad guys is because the good guys follow the law. If you give up freedom, equality, liberty, your legal system, your morals, just so you can defeat the bad guys, you're not a good guy any more.

Sand · 12-12-2005 7:47pm

But that wasn't why the U.S. & its allies invaded was it?

And no one fought WW2 to free the victims of Nazi concentration camps. People would still say the war, with its horrific atrocities that far, far outweigh anything so far in Iraq, was justified by the destruction of Nazism.

The claims of what weapons Saddam had at his disposal have been shown to be clearly wrong. It was an illegal pre-emptive strike when it wasn't required & this is why the invasion was wrong- not because Saddam was a great guy or anything.

The intervention in Kosovo was just as illegal as the Iraq war. Pre-emptive strikes are by neccessity done without warning, and based on intelligence that can be wrong and is often poked full of holes later.

I was not following politics or was aware at the time.I think Carlos the jackal and this situation are highly different.

Of course. Theres a statute iof limitations on this stuff afterall.

America is the most disgusting propaganda hyping, mis-information spewing, spin doctors around.

Well thats a balanced perspective I could spend many an hour debating with, but lets not and say we did.

To be honest Sand, if it weren't for the fact that Eichmann's execution happened about two and a half decades before I was born, I would have been opposing it. No matter what someone did, the reason some people are the good guys and some people are the bad guys is because the good guys follow the law.

Eichmann followed the law. The law said jews were subhuman and should be treated as slaves, all possible economic value wrung out of them, and then murdered with the greatest efficiency. The law is a tool to achieve good governance. It is not in itself good, so it is not the difference between "good" and "bad" guys. If the law was followed, Eichmann would have died peacefully in his bed, mocking every single victim of the Nazis. Is that a "good" outcome?

If you give up freedom, equality, liberty, your legal system, your morals, just so you can defeat the bad guys, you're not a good guy any more.

"We have become too civilized to grasp the obvious. For the truth is very simple. To survive you often have to fight, and to fight you have to dirty yourself. War is evil, and it is often the lesser evil."

I think something that people fail to grasp is that there is a war going on. Maybe panzers arent rolling through the Ardennes and bombers arent levelling Coventry, but there is actually a war going on. The first step in defeating the other side is actually finding them, which requires prisoners to be taken and interrogated. These guys are usually fanatical so an appeal to their human decency isnt all that effective, and they do their best to hide in open sight so people are going to be arrested in error. This is a risk in any intelligence based effort, even policing where innocent people have been jailed. We dont demand the end of policing in response to that. But were not dealing with guys from Cork who confess to killing 11 year old kids out of sheer guilt.

Rice has justified rendition on the proccess that the suspects are often from non-American backgrounds and that it was determined that non-Americans would be better at interrogating them, understanding the suspects culture better than someone born in Wyoming might. Thats her stated reasoning, and it makes some sense.

There has been little verified evidence of torture - certainly despite apparent reams of evidence no one has taken a court case or won afaik. If someone was delivered to be tortured by the US then why arent they suing for tens if not hundreds of millions? They would certainly find immense Democratic support looking for an angle to annialate the Republicans. Whilst I dont deny the possibility that torture is or has occured (there has been at least one death in Afghanistan by a US "merc" who was afaik investigated and punished, which would undermine the view that its somehow policy to torture) theres no convictions that show, yep, US policy. Indeed convictions in the cases like Abu Gharib were investigated by the US and punished by the US - the photos only became public halfway through the investigation. Yeah, again there seems to be controversy over what the US means by torture and what the EU means by torture, but Im a little less than willing to jump on board the hype train with the same people who brought you Gitmo: Belsen Returns!!!!

And the US has not given up anything actually - indeed its politicians and judges have continued to intervene in both Gitmo and more lately in the case of renditions and alleged CIA evil doing to ensure those values remain intact.

wiseones2cents · 12-12-2005 8:13pm

Sand wrote:

There has been little verified evidence of torture - certainly despite apparent reams of evidence no one has taken a court case or won afaik. If someone was delivered to be tortured by the US then why arent they suing for tens if not hundreds of millions? They would certainly find immense Democratic support looking for an angle to annialate the Republicans. Whilst I dont deny the possibility that torture is or has occured (there has been at least one death in Afghanistan by a US "merc" who was afaik investigated and punished, which would undermine the view that its somehow policy to torture) theres no convictions that show, yep, US policy. Indeed convictions in the cases like Abu Gharib were investigated by the US and punished by the US - the photos only became public halfway through the investigation. Yeah, again there seems to be controversy over what the US means by torture and what the EU means by torture, but Im a little less than willing to jump on board the hype train with the same people who brought you Gitmo: Belsen Returns!!!!

And the US has not given up anything actually - indeed its politicians and judges have continued to intervene in both Gitmo and more lately in the case of renditions and alleged CIA evil doing to ensure those values remain intact.

No proof? If it looks like a duck and acts like a duck and quacks like a duck. Chances are its a duck. They have refused to submit them selves to the International criminal court. They have refused to pass anti-torture laws.
They have denied access to these secret prisoners. It is Obvious they are torturing people.

And the Abu Gharib scandal? It is obvious that they recieved the orders from the top. The Pentagon was well aware of what was going on. They are the ones that gave the orders whether directly or indirectly.

There have been many accusations against America of torture. But who is taking the fall? Who are the scapegoats?The soldiers and mercenaries. Most were aquitted(the ones that took the blame).Many soldiers that complained were silenced and sentenced.

Not to mention all the hired mercenaries that were hired by America. Its like a mob leader orders his hitmen to torture. His hitman may be caught but never traced back to the mob leader. He always keeps his hands clean but doesn't mean he is innocent.

P.S. America's legal system is heavily coruptted, regardless of what you see.

lazydaisy · 12-12-2005 8:22pm

wiseone- why don't you just join Al Q already?

Sand · 12-12-2005 10:11pm

No proof? If it looks like a duck and acts like a duck and quacks like a duck. Chances are its a duck.

Yeah, and if Saddam developed WMD before, used weapons of WMD before and it looks likes hes developing them again, chances are he has WMD?

P.S. America's legal system is heavily coruptted, regardless of what you see.

Yep, probably it is to some degree. Irelands legal system is corrupt as well. Practically any system is corrupt to some degree. Unless youve carried out an extensively researched paper comparing corruption on an objective level throughout the world then your claim isnt useful.

wiseones2cents · 12-12-2005 11:25pm

Sand wrote:

Yeah, and if Saddam developed WMD before, used weapons of WMD before and it looks likes hes developing them again, chances are he has WMD?

I see you cant refute the logic I provided. I will refute yours though.
Saddam has never developped WMD. It recieved WMD(Chemical) from places like Russia and the USA. The Iraq/Iran war was supported by the USA and so was the use of chemical weapons at the time. America backed Saddam's war since there was an Islamic revolution going on in Iran calling America the great satan. So of coarse it would be in America's best interest to silence Iran. America also gave Iraq technology to build a super gun that Israel later destroyed. Including a Nuclear power plant.

Looked like he was developing WMD again?You care to show proof? Powell stated in an address that the sanctions were working and Saddam did not have the capability to produce WMD. The CIA and MOSSAD also claimed Saddam did not have WMD. Although we know a special ops unit was made to cherry pic info and present a case for war. Lets talk about America's witnesses that Saddam had WMD. Chalabi a known crook(Defrauded Jordan of 300 million) that was exiled and defected to America. Or lets talk about the forged documents from Britain that Saddam aquired uranium from Africa?

Therefore the facts point to the fact that Iraq did not have WMD. And as we know, this proved to be true. There are NO WMD in Iraq.

Yep, probably it is to some degree. Irelands legal system is corrupt as well. Practically any system is corrupt to some degree. Unless youve carried out an extensively researched paper comparing corruption on an objective level throughout the world then your claim isnt useful.

When you understand that America has more lawyers than the whole world put together? You will see that the legal profession is big business in the USA.

Sand · 13-12-2005 6:58pm

I see you cant refute the logic I provided.

Yep I did. If you disagree with the logic underlying the invasion of Iraq then your "guilty cos I think they are" spiel is a tad inconsistent on the burden of guilt. Anti-Americanism can be defined as an unfavorable predisposition towards the United States, which leads individuals to interpret American actions through negative stereotypes.

When you understand that America has more lawyers than the whole world put together? You will see that the legal profession is big business in the USA.

Im almost tempted to ask for a source on that, but why do I care? If they had 283 million lawyers they might all be wonderful civic minded public defenders or they might be all 80s style corporate attack dogs whacked out on cocaine. Oh no wait, I forgot. You think theyre corrupt, therefore they are corrupt.

lazydaisy · 13-12-2005 11:53pm

wiseonetwocents

Dont you know we need all those lawyers for all the criminals and drug dealers we have?

You know what i loved and thought was deliciously ironic about the footage of Condi answering questions in Europe about torture....

A black women faced with all these white overprivaleged men throwing accusations at her without any evidence. Deja vu. For christs sake Rosa Parks in barely dead a month!

Hobbes where did you come up with that? If US airports are all international land then how come you can't smoke in JFK or LaGuardia?

If the torture indeed did happen, do you think its worse or less than what Irish christian brothers have done?

wiseones2cents · 14-12-2005 12:30am

Sand wrote:

Yep I did. If you disagree with the logic underlying the invasion of Iraq then your "guilty cos I think they are" spiel is a tad inconsistent on the burden of guilt. Anti-Americanism can be defined as an unfavorable predisposition towards the United States, which leads individuals to interpret American actions through negative stereotypes.

No you did not refute the Logic in regards to the fact that it is more than obvious that America is torturing prisoners. The info I supplied is common knowledge.

You cannot just post a link and think that everyone falls under that stereotype.lol. I have good reason to have a unfavourable disposition towards the United States.

Im almost tempted to ask for a source on that, but why do I care? If they had 283 million lawyers they might all be wonderful civic minded public defenders or they might be all 80s style corporate attack dogs whacked out on cocaine. Oh no wait, I forgot. You think theyre corrupt, therefore they are corrupt.

Its not only them that is corrupt. Its the whole Country. Thats why they need all the lawyers.And even with all those lawyers, crime is running rampant. Why? Because crime is big business in the state. The courts are full
of offenders.

It is in their best interest to keep the crime going. Dont you think. But we wont get into that will we?

GuanYin · 14-12-2005 12:34am

lazydaisy wrote:

You know what i loved and thought was deliciously ironic about the footage of Condi answering questions in Europe about torture....

A black women faced with all these white overprivaleged men throwing accusations at her without any evidence. Deja vu. For christs sake Rosa Parks in barely dead a month!

Ah the voice of reason.

What the hell has skin colour got to do with anything here?

What lack of evidence? There is evidence of transport of prisoners through international airspace without authorisation. The nature of this transport, the origin and destination and ultimately the fate of these prisonors is the crux.

Rice is an elected official Its her JOB to answer these questions. Your remark is just plain stupid.

Hobbes where did you come up with that? If US airports are all international land then how come you can't smoke in JFK or LaGuardia?

I think he meant before immigration. You are in international territory up until you declare yourself to US immigration officals. Homeland Security can and have intercepted and detained people travelling to the US before the hit immigration.

From there, they are not subject to US federal law (something the federal system itself has expressed concern over). They are not obliged to offer you any rights.

An irish person of middle eastern ethnicity was held for several days in this manner without cause or explanation.

If the torture indeed did happen, do you think its worse or less than what Irish christian brothers have done?

Oh dear sweet jesus. :rolleyes: This is worse than your opening comment.

Yes it is. While the similarity of abuse of power is apparent, the level and measure of abuse of power is not even on the same level. Nor are the options open to the victims similar.

Apart from anything else. You're using child abuse by christian brothers as an argument to condone torture?

Sometimes I'm glad I was educated in Ireland.... and I went to a christian brothers school!

GuanYin · 14-12-2005 12:49am

wiseones2cents wrote:

No you did not refute the Logic in regards to the fact that it is more than obvious that America is torturing prisoners. The info I supplied is common knowledge.

While I don't dispute the probability that America is torturing prisoners, there is a certain uneven approach to any suggestion that any accusations or sanctions be made without actually gathering hard evidence first.

I mean, its all very well to say, the US is detaining and torturing people without trial or evidence and then push forward with accusations without evidence ourselves.

The way things are moving now, the senate is slowly distancing itself from the White House. I'd be surprised if the US were still in Iraq this time next year. I don't think Bush will be ousted, but I would imagine he won't get willy nilly senate backing in future.

You cannot just post a link and think that everyone falls under that stereotype.lol. I have good reason to have a unfavourable disposition towards the United States.

Care to enlighten us here?

When you say "The United States" what exactly are you implying? The People, the Government, Both, Neither? Which?

Its not only them that is corrupt. Its the whole Country. Thats why they need all the lawyers.And even with all those lawyers, crime is running rampant. Why? Because crime is big business in the state. The courts are full
of offenders.

Lets not throw stones lest we smash our glass houses. Apart from the widespread corruption in Irish law enforcement, courts and politics (have you watched the news today on the Justice Minister), our corruption has a far more "real" feeling to us than US corruption does for most americans.

The thing people fail to realise is that this corruption has absolutely no impact on the vast majority of US citizens.
Southern and central US (or "Jesusland" as its sometimes referred to) are far less bothered by US foreign plicy than the coastal cities. Why should they care - they don't travel much or see many non-nationals bar those who go to work there?
In some places, the war has been a good thing, unemployment is down, people have opportunities for training and education they didn't have before.

By and large the Bush administration has done well by them.
As Kavanagh said "Gods make their own importance".

It is in their best interest to keep the crime going. Dont you think. But we wont get into that will we?

Well I'd imagine thats the pointof corruption anywhere.

Sand · 14-12-2005 12:52am

No you did not refute the Logic in regards to the fact that it is more than obvious that America is torturing prisoners.

So wheres the convictions showing its policy....oh thats right, there are none. So its not more than obvious. Even obvious would be enough most courts, let alone more than obvious.

You cannot just post a link and think that everyone falls under that stereotype.lol. I have good reason to have a unfavourable disposition towards the United States.

Yeah, thats great - no need to delve too deeply into any troubled memories involving Americans tbh, Ill just accept that you have an unfavourable predisposition towards the U.S. which leads to you to interpret American actions through negative stereotypes, which was my point. You cant really disagree given the "Amerika iz teh Grate SaTaN!!!!" tone of your posts so far. Speaking of which...

Its not only them that is corrupt. Its the whole Country. Thats why they need all the lawyers.And even with all those lawyers, crime is running rampant. Why? Because crime is big business in the state. The courts are full
of offenders.

It is in their best interest to keep the crime going. Dont you think. But we wont get into that will we?

Yes please, if it will stop you going on about something that makes little or no sense and has little or nothing to do with the topic? I think if this thread goes on, Ill come back to your comment above to make a another point. Well see how it develops.

the_syco · 14-12-2005 1:02am

bonkey wrote:

"if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear"

Used to be one of those people, untill I noticed that they had a disliking to anyone who knew more about computer security than they do. Know an exploit? Don't tell the cops, or they may lock you up "cos why else would you know about the exploit, unless you reversed engineered, and thats illegal, huh?"

=-=

As for the spooks kidnapping the enemy, its been done since the cold war, except now they kidnap more than just the KGB (or FSB, whatever they call themselves).

Therefore the facts point to the fact that Iraq did not have WMD. And as we know, this proved to be true. There are NO WMD in Iraq.

Iraq DID have WMD. The US know this, as they gave Iraq them. The US, however, had no proof that said WMDs were destroyed.

GuanYin · 14-12-2005 1:05am

the_syco wrote:

Iraq DID have WMD. The US know this, as they gave Iraq them. The US, however, had no proof that said WMDs were destroyed.

Link to any site that offers hard evidence of this please.

When did they have WMDs? What payload, what type, how recently?

wiseones2cents · 14-12-2005 2:02am

lazydaisy wrote:

wiseonetwocents

Dont you know we need all those lawyers for all the criminals and drug dealers we have?

When you understand that the enormous multi billion dollar drug fighting beaurocracy's livelyhood depends on drugs being trafficed, the amount of profit being made by the lawyers and judges, and the CIA's hand in south American drug cartel's. You will know why there are so many drug dealers in America and with all those resources haven't been able to curb it.

Also thanks to Capitalism and poverty, many people are switching to drug dealing and prostitution. More money less hours.

You know what i loved and thought was deliciously ironic about the footage of Condi answering questions in Europe about torture...
A black women faced with all these white overprivaleged men throwing accusations at her without any evidence. Deja vu. For christs sake Rosa Parks in barely dead a month!

First of all. Comparing Condi to Rosa parks is dishonouring Rosa Parks.

No evidence? Where have you been? There is plenty evidence.Here's the newest info.

Investigator: U.S. Shipped Out Detainees
AP - 2 hours, 49 minutes ago
PARIS - A European investigator said Tuesday he has found mounting indications the United States illegally held detainees in Europe but then hurriedly shipped out the last ones to North Africa a month ago when word leaked out. Dick Marty, a Swiss senator looking into claims the CIA operated secret prisons in Europe, said an ongoing, monthlong investigation unearthed "clues" that Poland and Romania were implicated — perhaps

Now why would the CIA have secret prisons? TORTURE.

lazydaisy · 14-12-2005 2:09am

Oh Psi, what am I going to do with you? ... and they say Americans have no sense of irony.

My opening sentence was to wiseont2cents because he always talks about how many drug dealers mobsters and criminals are in america because of our nasty capitalism. Its called a joke.

My comments about condi - i was just illustrating an irony.

You're in international territory up until you declare yourself at immigration? You go through US immigration in Dublin and Shannon when coming from Ireland. Maybe if you ever left your insular little island you'd know that. You dont go through immigration in the US when you fly in from Shannon or Dublin.

WHen did I condone torture? Good lord psi. Maybe they should hire you to do the stoning and the inquisitioning.

And called me stupid, and made comments about my reasoning ability.

You are obnoxious. Just dont talk to me or respond to me again. You have no manners whatsoever.

wiseones2cents · 14-12-2005 2:30am

psi wrote:

While I don't dispute the probability that America is torturing prisoners, there is a certain uneven approach to any suggestion that any accusations or sanctions be made without actually gathering hard evidence first.

I mean, its all very well to say, the US is detaining and torturing people without trial or evidence and then push forward with accusations without evidence ourselves.

The way things are moving now, the senate is slowly distancing itself from the White House. I'd be surprised if the US were still in Iraq this time next year. I don't think Bush will be ousted, but I would imagine he won't get willy nilly senate backing in future.

Actually proof is mounting, especially in Europe. Also The fact that America does not want to participate in the International criminal courts and does not want to pass anti-torture laws is a pretty good indication of its guilt.

Care to enlighten us here?

When you say "The United States" what exactly are you implying? The People, the Government, Both, Neither? Which?

I am talking about the American administration and the ones pulling its strings. I do not have anything against the American people in general although I am disappointed with the supporters of this Administration and the supporters of war.

And I also am against some of thier music and television that is corrupting youths world wide. You know. The ones that promote violence, immorality,
murder, gun play, swarming, cop killing, degrading women, disrespecting the law, opposing authority, drug use, drinking and driving, glorifying gangsterism, drug dealing,ect...should I go on? And this is supposed to be a GOD fearing nation? Could have fooled me.

Lets not throw stones lest we smash our glass houses. Apart from the widespread corruption in Irish law enforcement, courts and politics (have you watched the news today on the Justice Minister), our corruption has a far more "real" feeling to us than US corruption does for most americans.

The thing people fail to realise is that this corruption has absolutely no impact on the vast majority of US citizens.
Southern and central US (or "Jesusland" as its sometimes referred to) are far less bothered by US foreign plicy than the coastal cities. Why should they care - they don't travel much or see many non-nationals bar those who go to work there?
In some places, the war has been a good thing, unemployment is down, people have opportunities for training and education they didn't have before.

By and large the Bush administration has done well by them.
As Kavanagh said "Gods make their own importance".

We know coruption exists everywhwere but American coruption has been going International. Southern Americans are more brainwashed than brainwashed. What their ministers say goes. I went to A protestant site. I was talking to some folks. Dont know if they were Protestant, Evangelists,Methodists and born again Christians but they claim it was alright to sin because Jesus's death forgave their sins and freed them form the law.

Therefore they do not see a problem living in a country full of sin. Sort of reminds me Sodom,Gomorrah and Babylon...

They think the fact that they believe in Jesus is enough to save them. And you wonder why their country is messed up........

Plus like you said, much of thier lively hood depends on arms production.

Well I'd imagine thats the pointof corruption anywhere.

The only difference is most Christian majority nations are discreet about it. Not America.

wiseones2cents · 14-12-2005 2:59am

Sand wrote:

So wheres the convictions showing its policy....oh thats right, there are none. So its not more than obvious. Even obvious would be enough most courts, let alone more than obvious.

The Convictions are coming. There are no convictions yet because the Americans are refusing to participate in International Criminal courts. And the Americans will not pass any Anti-torture laws.

I dont think Logic like:The U.S. has classified the prisoners held at Camp X-Ray as "illegal combatants" rather than prisoners of war, and claims that the protections afforded by the Geneva Conventions do not apply.

Were they not taken during war? Not even America's millions of Lawyers and corupt legal system would help them in a International court and they know it.

And the fact the CIA tried to cover up the death of an Iraqi who died during interogation. Kidnapped citizens from Italy.The fact that there is mounting evidence of secret prisons.

They evidence is there. We just have to figure how to bring to justice the people behind the world's most powerful Military without starting world war III.

Yeah, thats great - no need to delve too deeply into any troubled memories involving Americans tbh, Ill just accept that you have an unfavourable predisposition towards the U.S. which leads to you to interpret American actions through negative stereotypes, which was my point. You cant really disagree given the "Amerika iz teh Grate SaTaN!!!!" tone of your posts so far. Speaking of which...

Whether you accept it or not makes no difference to me. I am neither negative nor positive. I call it like it is. Aren't you going to post another link on explaning Anti-American behaviour?:rolleyes: No I dont see America as the great satan. It doesn't fit the qualifications. Though it fits the Qualifications of the beast in revelation.;)

please, if it will stop you going on about something that makes little or no sense and has little or nothing to do with the topic? I think if this thread goes on, Ill come back to your comment above to make a another point. Well see how it develops.

To you it makes little sense, Not to me.Your the one that stated politicians and Judges were intervening in Torture accusations and I said it means nothing. They are all corupt. If they weren't they would have hung bush a long time ago. It is clear he mislead the American people into war.

wiseones2cents · 14-12-2005 3:04am

the_syco wrote:

Iraq DID have WMD. The US know this, as they gave Iraq them. The US, however, had no proof that said WMDs were destroyed.

The US DID have proof by the Information Saddam Disclosed to the weapons inspectors just before the war. And Hans Blix verified it.The Americans didn't believe him(or played stupid).

America had their mind set on invading Iraq. It was in the works even before bush took office.

wiseones2cents · 14-12-2005 3:04am

the_syco wrote:

Iraq DID have WMD. The US know this, as they gave Iraq them. The US, however, had no proof that said WMDs were destroyed.

The US DID have proof by the Information Saddam Disclosed to the weapons inspectors just before the war. And Hans Blix verified it.The Americans didn't believe him(or played stupid).

America had their mind set on invading Iraq. It was in the works even before bush took office.

lazydaisy · 14-12-2005 4:58am

wiseonetwocents, I didnt compare Condi and Rosa Parks. And its not a dishonour anyway.

It is remarkable that Condi has broken through the glass ceiling. Even you have to admit that. Whether or not you agree with her politics.

All I'm saying seeing a black woman face a room full of interrogating over privaleged fat white men has certain resonances for Americans. But I guess you wouldnt know that, because what you actually do know about Americans is filtered through your agenda, and quite frankly sounds a little unstable.

What kind of justice are you seeking? Are there things you know about that you want to tell us? Things that will happen soon?

When you refer to Christian majority nations, who do you mean? And what are they discreet about? Their arms production or their corruption? I wasn't sure what you meant there.

Is MTV your main source of american culture? So I guess you know nothing about jazz, which was also accused of being full of sin by your sort, american literature, dance, etc etc. I guess you just watch Bruce Willis movies and listen to 50 cent. Right.

You strike me as someone who can't comprehend ambivalence. America is a bifurcated nation, it is prudish and licentious, religious and godless, all at the same time.

It was founded on crackpot religions and the right to practise them, those same religions that Europe found intolerable and still does. Nothing you say is a revelation to anyone about this.

Your just full of hellfire and damnation from what I can see.

Forget Gitmo?

Comments