Beyond the law

[lightstar]

how did we allow this to happen- has our country sunk this low or were we always steeped in moral-less decay?

An eight-month McClatchy investigation in 11 countries on three continents has found that Akhtiar was one of dozens of men ? and, according to several officials, perhaps hundreds ? whom the U.S. has wrongfully imprisoned in Afghanistan, Cuba and elsewhere on the basis of flimsy or fabricated evidence, old personal scores or bounty payments.

If the former detainees whom McClatchy interviewed are any indication ? and several former high-ranking U.S. administration and defense officials said in interviews that they are ? most of the prisoners at Guantanamo weren't terrorist masterminds but men who were of no intelligence value in the war on terrorism.

"As far as intelligence value from those in Gitmo, I got tired of telling the people writing reports based on their interrogations that their material was essentially worthless," a U.S. intelligence officer said in an e-mail, using the military's slang for Guantanamo.

Guantanamo authorities periodically sent analysts at the U.S. Central Command "rap sheets on various prisoners and asked our assessment whether they merited continued confinement," said the analyst, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject. "Over about three years, I assessed around 40 of these individuals, mostly Afghans. ... I only can remember recommending that ONE should be kept at GITMO."

One of the Afghan detainees at Guantanamo, White recalled, was more than 80 years old.

The investigation also found that despite the uncertainty about whom they were holding, U.S. soldiers beat and abused many prisoners.

Prisoner mistreatment became a regular feature in cellblocks and interrogation rooms at Bagram and Kandahar air bases, the two main way stations in Afghanistan en route to Guantanamo

The McClatchy reporting also documented how U.S. detention policies fueled support for extremist Islamist groups. For some detainees who went home far more militant than when they arrived, Guantanamo became a school for jihad, or Islamic holy war.

"In 2002, a CIA analyst interviewed several dozen detainees at Guantanamo and reported to senior National Security Council officials that many of them didn't belong there, a former White House official said. Despite the analyst's findings, the administration made no further review of the Guantanamo detainees. The White House had determined that all of them were enemy combatants, the former official said."

Rather than taking a closer look at whom they were holding, a group of five White House, Justice Department and Pentagon lawyers who called themselves the "War Council" devised a legal framework that enabled the administration to detain suspected "enemy combatants" indefinitely with few legal rights.

great series documenting Guatanamo

 

[dahunan]

We are all just scared of our Government

That same "War Council" said bush could lock up US citizens in Gitmo too

 

[homercles337]

Just wait for the neocons to come in and explain. Their logic is sound and valid.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: dahunan
We are all just scared of our Government

That same "War Council" said bush could lock up US citizens in Gitmo too

Only because the Bushwhackos have already done exactly that, and it took a Supreme Court ruling to stop them.

Judges Rule Against U.S. On Detained 'Combatant'

By Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 12, 2007; Page A01

A federal appeals court ruled yesterday that President Bush cannot indefinitely imprison a U.S. resident on suspicion alone, ordering the government either to charge Qatari national Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri with his alleged terrorist crimes in a civilian court or release him.

The opinion is a blow to the Bush administration's assertion that the president has exceptionally broad powers to combat terrorism, including the authority to detain without charges foreign citizens living legally in the United States.

t is the first time a court has said that Marri cannot be held forever without facing formal charges, but it is a symbolic victory -- Marri will continue his detention in a naval brig in Charleston, S.C. The government said that it was disappointed by the 2 to 1 decision, handed down by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, and that it will appeal to the full court.

The appeals panel ruled that Bush had overreached his authority and that the Constitution protects U.S. citizens and legal residents such as Marri from unchecked military power. It also rejected the administration's contention that it was not relevant that Marri was arrested in the United States and was living here legally on a student visa.

"The President cannot eliminate constitutional protections with the stroke of a pen by proclaiming a civilian, even a criminal civilian, an enemy combatant subject to indefinite military detention," the panel found.

Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd said that Marri posed a significant threat, and that imprisoning enemy fighters is necessary to stop future attacks.

"The president has made clear that he intends to use all available tools at his disposal to protect Americans from further al-Qaeda attack, including the capture and detention of al-Qaeda agents who enter our borders," Boyd said.
.
.
Marri is the last of three U.S. citizens or residents in the Charleston brig. Yaser Esam Hamdi, a U.S. citizen captured on the battlefield in Afghanistan, was held for almost three years by the military without charges. He was released and sent to his native Saudi Arabia after the Supreme Court ruled in 2004 that U.S. citizens must be afforded court trials.
.
.
(continues)

Considering the Traitor In Chief's demonstrated disrespect for the Constitution and the rule of law, I have no doubt they would continue to do it until someone stops them.

The next U.S. Citizens to be shipped to cells at Guantanamo should be George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and their tyrannical gang of traitors, murderers, torturers, war criminals and war profiteers.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Guess he forgot to mention the following in his article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/.../A52670-2004Oct21.html

At least 10 detainees released from the Guantanamo Bay prison after U.S. officials concluded they posed little threat have been recaptured or killed fighting U.S. or coalition forces in Pakistan and Afghanistan, according to Pentagon officials.

One of the repatriated prisoners is still at large after taking leadership of a militant faction in Pakistan and aligning himself with al Qaeda, Pakistani officials said. In telephone calls to Pakistani reporters, he has bragged that he tricked his U.S. interrogators into believing he was someone else.

The cases demonstrate the difficulty Washington faces in deciding when alleged al Qaeda and Taliban detainees should be freed, amid pressure from foreign governments and human rights groups that have denounced U.S. officials for detaining the Guantanamo Bay captives for years without due-process rights, military officials said.

"Reports that former detainees have rejoined al Qaeda and the Taliban are evidence that these individuals are fanatical and particularly deceptive," said a Pentagon spokesman, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Flex Plexico. "From the beginning, we have recognized that there are inherent risks in determining when an individual detainee no longer had to be held at Guantanamo Bay."

But I expected no balance from the OP's article in the first place.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Guess he forgot to mention the following in his article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/.../A52670-2004Oct21.html

At least 10 detainees released from the Guantanamo Bay prison after U.S. officials concluded they posed little threat have been recaptured or killed fighting U.S. or coalition forces in Pakistan and Afghanistan, according to Pentagon officials.

One of the repatriated prisoners is still at large after taking leadership of a militant faction in Pakistan and aligning himself with al Qaeda, Pakistani officials said. In telephone calls to Pakistani reporters, he has bragged that he tricked his U.S. interrogators into believing he was someone else.

The cases demonstrate the difficulty Washington faces in deciding when alleged al Qaeda and Taliban detainees should be freed, amid pressure from foreign governments and human rights groups that have denounced U.S. officials for detaining the Guantanamo Bay captives for years without due-process rights, military officials said.

"Reports that former detainees have rejoined al Qaeda and the Taliban are evidence that these individuals are fanatical and particularly deceptive," said a Pentagon spokesman, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Flex Plexico. "From the beginning, we have recognized that there are inherent risks in determining when an individual detainee no longer had to be held at Guantanamo Bay."

But I expected no balance from the OP's article in the first place.

TLC still up to the usual spin. Here is a "spin" for you. You like me, i like you, but i kick your ass and lock you up for no reason with no recourse for YEARS. Then i set you free without an explanation, only a "Look, fuck you. Go now!" Friends? Are you going to like me now?

But, i didnt expect any balance from TLC either. Can we talk about the chicken and the tortured egg now?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

But I expected no balance from the OP's article in the first place.

Clue, Chicken -- The Constitution applies to ALL American citizens, all of whom are considered innocent until proven guilty no matter what the charges.

This isn't about stopping the bad guys. It's about not holding American citizens without access to their Constitutionally guaranteed rights to a speedy trial, to hear and confront the charges against them and the right to legal counsel.

If you disagree with any of that, maybe YOU will volunteer to be the next detainee to be spirited off to unknown places for a few years with no regard for your guilt or innocence. Maybe they'll torture you while you're being held, and IF you live through it, you can come back a few years from now to tell us that it wasn't all that bad. :roll:

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Guess he forgot to mention the following in his article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/.../A52670-2004Oct21.html

At least 10 detainees released from the Guantanamo Bay prison after U.S. officials concluded they posed little threat have been recaptured or killed fighting U.S. or coalition forces in Pakistan and Afghanistan, according to Pentagon officials.

One of the repatriated prisoners is still at large after taking leadership of a militant faction in Pakistan and aligning himself with al Qaeda, Pakistani officials said. In telephone calls to Pakistani reporters, he has bragged that he tricked his U.S. interrogators into believing he was someone else.

The cases demonstrate the difficulty Washington faces in deciding when alleged al Qaeda and Taliban detainees should be freed, amid pressure from foreign governments and human rights groups that have denounced U.S. officials for detaining the Guantanamo Bay captives for years without due-process rights, military officials said.

"Reports that former detainees have rejoined al Qaeda and the Taliban are evidence that these individuals are fanatical and particularly deceptive," said a Pentagon spokesman, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Flex Plexico. "From the beginning, we have recognized that there are inherent risks in determining when an individual detainee no longer had to be held at Guantanamo Bay."

But I expected no balance from the OP's article in the first place.

I'll see your article and give you another. Of course, I wouldn't expect your article to have balance either. After all, it's better that 1000 innocent people die/get locked up/ get tortured wrongly rather then one American get hurt.

Link

Here's three "enemy combatants"

The Tipton Three were three British citizens who were captured in Afghanistan, and suspected of being members of al Qaeda, in part because they were thought, wrongly, to be in a videotape of a rally featuring bin Laden. After British intelligence cleared them of that charge (one of the three had in fact been working at a Curry's electronics store in Birmingham when the rally was taking place in Afghanistan), they were released. And after that, they participated in the movie The Road To Guantanamo. Apparently, this counts as "returning to the battlefield".

So 3 innocent people filming a movie is "returning to the battlefield"? And how do you remain an enemy combatant when you are *proven* to be innocent? What kind of total BS is that?

Another one:

"It turns out that clients of our firm, who were sent to Albania in 2006, were two of the 30. What fight had they returned to? Abu Bakker Qassim had published an op-ed in The New York Times. Adel Abdul Hakim had given an interview. These press statements were deemed hostile by the Department of Defense.

Add so is writing articles in the NYT that are critical of the US. I never knew that writing derogatory articles could make you "hostile" and "returning to fight us". Freedom of speech FTL?

This sort of shit is just Orwellian in scope. Innocent people still being called the enemy. Writing critical newspaper pieces gets you classed as "returning to battle".

What's next, anyone that doesn't kiss Bush's ass gets on the terrorist watch list?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Guess he forgot to mention the following in his article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/.../A52670-2004Oct21.html

At least 10 detainees released from the Guantanamo Bay prison after U.S. officials concluded they posed little threat have been recaptured or killed fighting U.S. or coalition forces in Pakistan and Afghanistan, according to Pentagon officials.

One of the repatriated prisoners is still at large after taking leadership of a militant faction in Pakistan and aligning himself with al Qaeda, Pakistani officials said. In telephone calls to Pakistani reporters, he has bragged that he tricked his U.S. interrogators into believing he was someone else.

The cases demonstrate the difficulty Washington faces in deciding when alleged al Qaeda and Taliban detainees should be freed, amid pressure from foreign governments and human rights groups that have denounced U.S. officials for detaining the Guantanamo Bay captives for years without due-process rights, military officials said.

"Reports that former detainees have rejoined al Qaeda and the Taliban are evidence that these individuals are fanatical and particularly deceptive," said a Pentagon spokesman, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Flex Plexico. "From the beginning, we have recognized that there are inherent risks in determining when an individual detainee no longer had to be held at Guantanamo Bay."

But I expected no balance from the OP's article in the first place.

I'll see your article and give you another. Of course, I wouldn't expect your article to have balance either. After all, it's better that 1000 innocent people die/get locked up/ get tortured wrongly rather then one American get hurt.

Link

Here's three "enemy combatants"

The Tipton Three were three British citizens who were captured in Afghanistan, and suspected of being members of al Qaeda, in part because they were thought, wrongly, to be in a videotape of a rally featuring bin Laden. After British intelligence cleared them of that charge (one of the three had in fact been working at a Curry's electronics store in Birmingham when the rally was taking place in Afghanistan), they were released. And after that, they participated in the movie The Road To Guantanamo. Apparently, this counts as "returning to the battlefield".

So 3 innocent people filming a movie is "returning to the battlefield"? And how do you remain an enemy combatant when you are *proven* to be innocent? What kind of total BS is that?

Another one:

"It turns out that clients of our firm, who were sent to Albania in 2006, were two of the 30. What fight had they returned to? Abu Bakker Qassim had published an op-ed in The New York Times. Adel Abdul Hakim had given an interview. These press statements were deemed hostile by the Department of Defense.

Add so is writing articles in the NYT that are critical of the US. I never knew that writing derogatory articles could make you "hostile" and "returning to fight us". Freedom of speech FTL?

This sort of shit is just Orwellian in scope. Innocent people still being called the enemy. Writing critical newspaper pieces gets you classed as "returning to battle".

What's next, anyone that doesn't kiss Bush's ass gets on the terrorist watch list?

From your article:

Since then, the DoD has changed the number of detainees it claims have returned to the battlefield from thirty to twelve, of whom six are new. (They did this before Scalia wrote his opinion, but oddly enough, he didn't mention this change.) The Seton Hall researchers (pdf):


"Of the twelve, five (5) are listed as ?killed? (one of whom is ISN 220, a Kuwaiti national whose story is spelled out below), and one is listed as ?at large.? There are five more listed as ?arrested? and only one listed as ?captured.? It is not clear what the distinction is, but it may indicate where the apprehension occurred ? ?on the battlefield? or elsewhere. The ?arrested individuals? included two Moroccans, two Russians, and one Turkish national, all of whom were arrested in their home country. There is no information about the charges filed, nor any information that these individuals attacked or plan to attack America. Further, it is not clear that actions against Morocco, Russia, and Turkey can be fairly characterized as "return[ing] to the fight""

So it's actually 12, not 10. Maybe the article I cited didn't get it right because it was written in 2004 and at the time the number was 10, who knows?

And to the trolls claiming a lack of "balance" on my part I suppose you're going to try and claim the WaPo had its nose up Bush's ass and that's why the wrote what they did? lol. What a bunch of characters in here. Stultifyingly predictable and partisan characters, but characters none-the-less.

 

[Jhhnn]

When history judges America on this whole WoT and Gitmo thing, we'll be found to be chumps of the most gullible kind.

That's because it's never really been about "fighting terrorism", at all, but about making a big PR splash for domestic political purposes, about convincing us that yes indeed, the Bush Admin is "tough on terror". Some of us even get a vicarious thrill at the idea of all them terrarists bein' beaten and tortured to spill their guts, providing actionable intelligence...

It's all a fantasy, of course, but that's what the Bush admin has specialized in ever since 9/11. There's a grain of truth in every boogeyman story- there has to be for it to be believable. And there have to be human sacrifices, as well, grist for the PR mill... which is what the detainees really are. The same effect could have been achieved rounding people up at random off the streets of Kandahar and the Afghan countryside. For all we know, that's pretty much what happened, anyway.

There's a price for freedom, and that price is allowing others the same when lacking strong evidence that they have engaged in what amounts to criminal activity. If we can't do that, we don't deserve freedom. The allegation that a few of those released have returned to the fray is self-serving and specious. Following that line of reasoning, we'd need to lock up a major portion of the world's population to keep ouselves safe, just to be sure, if ya know what I mean....

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Guess he forgot to mention the following in his article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/.../A52670-2004Oct21.html

At least 10 detainees released from the Guantanamo Bay prison after U.S. officials concluded they posed little threat have been recaptured or killed fighting U.S. or coalition forces in Pakistan and Afghanistan, according to Pentagon officials.

One of the repatriated prisoners is still at large after taking leadership of a militant faction in Pakistan and aligning himself with al Qaeda, Pakistani officials said. In telephone calls to Pakistani reporters, he has bragged that he tricked his U.S. interrogators into believing he was someone else.

The cases demonstrate the difficulty Washington faces in deciding when alleged al Qaeda and Taliban detainees should be freed, amid pressure from foreign governments and human rights groups that have denounced U.S. officials for detaining the Guantanamo Bay captives for years without due-process rights, military officials said.

"Reports that former detainees have rejoined al Qaeda and the Taliban are evidence that these individuals are fanatical and particularly deceptive," said a Pentagon spokesman, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Flex Plexico. "From the beginning, we have recognized that there are inherent risks in determining when an individual detainee no longer had to be held at Guantanamo Bay."

But I expected no balance from the OP's article in the first place.

Torture me and let me go... I will hunt you down and kill your whole family tree..

 

[herm0016]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

But I expected no balance from the OP's article in the first place.

Clue, Chicken -- The Constitution applies to ALL American citizens, all of whom are considered innocent until proven guilty no matter what the charges.

when did being a pow constitute being an American citizen? I am going to bet that most of the people we are talking about here have never been a citizen of the US. I do not agree with the things that have happened down there, but lets not start missing the facts. any american citizens there should get a real trial and rights, but the non-american citizens do not have a claim to those same rights.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Guess he forgot to mention the following in his article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/.../A52670-2004Oct21.html

At least 10 detainees released from the Guantanamo Bay prison after U.S. officials concluded they posed little threat have been recaptured or killed fighting U.S. or coalition forces in Pakistan and Afghanistan, according to Pentagon officials.

One of the repatriated prisoners is still at large after taking leadership of a militant faction in Pakistan and aligning himself with al Qaeda, Pakistani officials said. In telephone calls to Pakistani reporters, he has bragged that he tricked his U.S. interrogators into believing he was someone else.

The cases demonstrate the difficulty Washington faces in deciding when alleged al Qaeda and Taliban detainees should be freed, amid pressure from foreign governments and human rights groups that have denounced U.S. officials for detaining the Guantanamo Bay captives for years without due-process rights, military officials said.

"Reports that former detainees have rejoined al Qaeda and the Taliban are evidence that these individuals are fanatical and particularly deceptive," said a Pentagon spokesman, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Flex Plexico. "From the beginning, we have recognized that there are inherent risks in determining when an individual detainee no longer had to be held at Guantanamo Bay."

But I expected no balance from the OP's article in the first place.

Torture me and let me go... I will hunt you down and kill your whole family tree..

Yeah, because this is all about picking up random people and torturing them as if we had nothing better to do.

:roll:

Nice strawman and lie of ommission.

Were a few people picked up who probably weren't guilty, because of some sort of mistake, or possibly even malicious intent on the part of another? Of course. Just like some who loudly proclaimed innocence ended up back on the battlefield, gloating about their deception.

As much as we'd all love to have everything be perfect; to only and always have the guilty punished, it just doesn't fucking work that way. Should we also disband the police and the entire judicial system because they aren't always perfect and don't get it right 100% of the time either? Shall we allow the vast majority of criminals who ARE guilty the ability to run free because we might make a mistake or two along the way and apprehend an innocent man?

C'mon. What fantasy world of perfection do you guys live in? It sure isn't this one because this world is by no means perfect. If it were we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place.

 

[Lemon law]

GWB&co are incredible hypocrites on this whole issue. When one of their own stands accused of anything, they insist on innocent until absolutely proven guilty, but any charge, however tenuous, is enough to throw someone else in jail for many years without even a chance to question the charges. Such a President would not even be able to lecture someone as bad as Hitler on morality because GWB has long ago proved his administration is morally bankrupt.

Its simply why almost no one outside of the US considers GWB credible in any way. And while most of the world is waiting for the GWB term to end, the rest of the world basically humors GWB into thinking they even remotely are willing to follow his lead. At this point, any world diplomacy by passes Washington, because when GWB&co is included, no agreement is possible.

Our next President will have to play catch up to even partially rebuild the very damaged US international reputation.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
GWB&co are incredible hypocrites on this whole issue. When one of their own stands accused of anything, they insist on innocent until absolutely proven guilty, but any charge, however tenuous, is enough to throw someone else in jail for many years without even a chance to question the charges. Such a President would not even be able to lecture someone as bad as Hitler on morality because GWB has long ago proved his administration is morally bankrupt.

Its simply why almost no one outside of the US considers GWB credible in any way. And while most of the world is waiting for the GWB term to end, the rest of the world basically humors GWB into thinking they even remotely are willing to follow his lead. At this point, any world diplomacy by passes Washington, because when GWB&co is included, no agreement is possible.

Our next President will have to play catch up to even partially rebuild the very damaged US international reputation.

Almost no one outside the US? Who is judging the US on this issue? France? Germany? Russia? China? Woah! What great judges of moral authority and human character.

And those are just some of the major countries. Maybe Switzerland has some moral authority, in comparison, but they have their own reasons for doing what they do.

You give far too much credence to world opinion. We all do what what need to do in a time of doing. btw, since you bring up Hitler, FDR interred over 100,000 Japanese. Has history judged him harshly? Even Canada interred over 20,000 Japanese during WW2.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...se_Canadian_internment

World opinion is overrated.

 

[Lemon law]

I see TLC has to go all the way back to WW2 and the resultant hysteria of a international world war to find anything comparable to GWB&co.

But what is now Kaput is any US ability to morally lead a larger world community largely at peace. Compared to eight years ago, the relative leadership position the US formerly enjoyed is now totally flushed down the crapper.

TLC, you can apologize for GWB&co until you are blue in the face, but in MHO, GWB&co. are a total disaster, not only for the USA, but for the larger world.

 

[dahunan]

Abu Ghraib ring a bell...

TLC.. I do respect you.. but can you tell me what you would have done after being released from Abu Ghraib and found not guilty of any crimes whatsoever AFTER they tortured you and your brother or best friend and threatened your family when they came to your neighborhood and rounded you up like you were wild animals??

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I see TLC has to go all the way back to WW2 and the resultant hysteria of a international world war to find anything comparable to GWB&co.

But what is now Kaput is any US ability to morally lead a larger world community largely at peace. Compared to eight years ago, the relative leadership position the US formerly enjoyed is now totally flushed down the crapper.

TLC, you can apologize for GWB&co until you are blue in the face, but in MHO, GWB&co. are a total disaster, not only for the USA, but for the larger world.

I don't have to go all the way back to WW2. China? Russia? lol.

And won't you be flummoxed when I start apologizing for Obama? Hell, unlike Bush, I'm even voting for him.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I see TLC has to go all the way back to WW2 and the resultant hysteria of a international world war to find anything comparable to GWB&co.

But what is now Kaput is any US ability to morally lead a larger world community largely at peace. Compared to eight years ago, the relative leadership position the US formerly enjoyed is now totally flushed down the crapper.

TLC, you can apologize for GWB&co until you are blue in the face, but in MHO, GWB&co. are a total disaster, not only for the USA, but for the larger world.

I don't have to go all the way back to WW2. China? Russia? lol.

And won't you be flummoxed when I start apologizing for Obama? Hell, unlike Bush, I'm even voting for him.

How did Obama get into this?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Abu Ghraib ring a bell...

TLC.. I do respect you.. but can you tell me what you would have done after being released from Abu Ghraib and found not guilty of any crimes whatsoever AFTER they tortured you and your brother or best friend and threatened your family when they came to your neighborhood and rounded you up like you were wild animals??

No doubt I'd be angry.

Since we're painting scenarios here....what if you, supposing you were Shi'ite, got thrown in Abu Ghraib and just happened to be locked up with a Sunni who worked under Saddam and had a few people in your family murdered? What would you do?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I see TLC has to go all the way back to WW2 and the resultant hysteria of a international world war to find anything comparable to GWB&co.

But what is now Kaput is any US ability to morally lead a larger world community largely at peace. Compared to eight years ago, the relative leadership position the US formerly enjoyed is now totally flushed down the crapper.

TLC, you can apologize for GWB&co until you are blue in the face, but in MHO, GWB&co. are a total disaster, not only for the USA, but for the larger world.

I don't have to go all the way back to WW2. China? Russia? lol.

And won't you be flummoxed when I start apologizing for Obama? Hell, unlike Bush, I'm even voting for him.

How did Obama get into this?

Obama is everywhere.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: dahunan
Abu Ghraib ring a bell...

TLC.. I do respect you.. but can you tell me what you would have done after being released from Abu Ghraib and found not guilty of any crimes whatsoever AFTER they tortured you and your brother or best friend and threatened your family when they came to your neighborhood and rounded you up like you were wild animals??

No doubt I'd be angry.

Since we're painting scenarios here....what if you, supposing you were Shi'ite, got thrown in Abu Ghraib and just happened to be locked up with a Sunni who worked under Saddam and had a few people in your family murdered? What would you do?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well if I were that Sunni or that Shi'ite, there is little either could so to each other when locked in different jail cells. Which is where TLC totally misses the point, this was US on Iraqi war crimes and label it as nothing but. And while GWB has been somewhat successful in blaming just a few rouge US troops for Abu Ghraib, I firmly believe we will later discover GWB&co was in it up to their eyeballs.

But a few posts back TLC was posting to the effect world opinion means squat. But come the first of the year and maybe still on the GWB watch, the UN may or may not renew this US mandate to even continue the Iraqi occupation because the current UN one expires. And a similar Iraqi one expires at around the same time. And TLC, you can bet your bottom dollar that world opinion will matter then as various past sins come home to roost.

And if what I think is not only true but can also be proved, many people from inside GWB&co may well end up in the Hague on charges of international war crimes.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
You give far too much credence to world opinion. We all do what what need to do in a time of doing. btw, since you bring up Hitler, FDR interred over 100,000 Japanese. Has history judged him harshly? Even Canada interred over 20,000 Japanese during WW2.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...se_Canadian_internment

World opinion is overrated.

Since you bring that up....have you heard of Japan? In WWII they tortured POW's and civilians. And guess what, just because they did it to us, we knew it was wrong and didn't do it to them. It's a pity that our pathetic leaders don't have the guts to do the right thing and not torture people nowadays.

Guess what happened after the war? Japanese soldiers were arrested on war crimes for torture (and even *gasp* waterboarding).

What happened? The US found them guilty of war crimes and torture and were executed.

So how is torture and waterboarding OK now? Did something magically change?

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

So it's actually 12, not 10. Maybe the article I cited didn't get it right because it was written in 2004 and at the time the number was 10, who knows?

FTA:

Thus, at most?of the approximately 445 detainees who have been released from Guantánamo?three (3) detainees, or less than one percent (1%), have subsequently returned to the battlefield to be captured or killed. Two (2) other detainees (Abdul Rahman Noor and Mohammed Nayim Farouq), while not re-captured or killed, are claimed to be engaged in military activities, although the information provided by the Government in this regard cannot be cross-checked."

So 1% that were released have really returned to fight. Wow, so detaining 99% of innocent people is OK with you I guess?

I guess you support locking up forever all suspected rapists and murderers as well, even if they are found innocent, just to make sure they might do something illegal in the future right? It's the same thing.

Their conclusion says it best:

In this country, we assume that people are innocent until proven guilty. It should go without saying that innocent people will die because we adopt this principle. When we let people we suspect committed homicide go free because the government cannot prove the case against them, for instance, we run the risk that they will kill again.

Said by TLC:

Were a few people picked up who probably weren't guilty, because of some sort of mistake, or possibly even malicious intent on the part of another? Of course. Just like some who loudly proclaimed innocence ended up back on the battlefield, gloating about their deception.

As much as we'd all love to have everything be perfect; to only and always have the guilty punished, it just doesn't fucking work that way. Should we also disband the police and the entire judicial system because they aren't always perfect and don't get it right 100% of the time either? Shall we allow the vast majority of criminals who ARE guilty the ability to run free because we might make a mistake or two along the way and apprehend an innocent man?

I think you just made my point.....it's perfectly OK to you to have a 99% wrongly imprisonment of innocent people rate to prevent that 1% guilty people get off. Ceratinly all report show a huge disparity favoring locking up innocent people "just in case". It's isn't 50/50 or even close to it.

 

[StageLeft]

I think it's somewhat telling and that it's always been under the sheets. When push comes to shove, the justice many Americans like to have thought they had wasn't there. When times are trying one's character comes out and much of America doesn't have any. The US, gitmo aside, has knowingly shipped people off to torture-condoning countries so that they could be tortured. How this freedom and justice? Despicable. 911 has been pointing out the clothless emperor.[qWorld opinion is overrated.[/quote]Especially when it calls a duck a duck, right?