Durbin: "US Troops are Nazis"

[Tiger Al 0]

I see them as, essentially, prisoners of war and should be treated according to the guidelines of the Geneva Convention.

I disagree. The Geneva Convention does not apply to these terrorists. They were not part of a traditional army, not fighting for a country, and were not wearing uniforms when captured on the battlefield.

164184[/snapback]

Neither were many of those fighting for the South in the Civil War. Many who were captured in Vietnam weren't wearing uniforms, either. The spirit of the Geneva Convention should apply, regardless of minor loopholes one might find.

164187[/snapback]

Does the Geneva Convention apply to all people of all persuasions or should it apply to people who honor and act according to the Geneva Convention?

164192[/snapback]

I think it should apply to all people captured in a war by Americans as long as we're a member of the GC. Maybe I have a misunderstanding of the GC. Maybe it's kind of like an "honor among thieves" understanding that says that I won't steal (torture your prisoners) from you as long as you don't steal (tortune mine) from me.

You strike me as the sort of person who doesn't rape women. If that's the case, do you not rape women because, in America, women have the right NOT to be raped and therefore illegal, or is it because you think it's wrong? If it's because it's illegal, you might then be inclined to rape women in a country where it was perfectly legal. If, on the other hand, it's because you believe rape to be wrong, then your presence in a country where it's legal shouldn't change your behavior, should it? Right is right and wrong is wrong, Tigermike.

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

Now, boys, isn't this more fun than calling each other cons and dems?

As I am sure you know, Al, we are not signatory to the GC, even though we follow its tenants. Personally, I think we should support the governments in Afhanistan, Pakistan and Iraq (now) to the fullest extent possible and turn the criminals at Gitmo back over to them, turn and walk away. But that would be akin to supporting torture.

I am also not saying that the actions of the interrogators at Gitmo be compared to the others to "make it ok". I am saying that the methods being used are not, in my mind, torture. In yours, they obviously are. I can respect that.

We will have to agree to disagree and move on to the next topic.

[Tigermike 3,066]

I see them as, essentially, prisoners of war and should be treated according to the guidelines of the Geneva Convention.

I disagree. The Geneva Convention does not apply to these terrorists. They were not part of a traditional army, not fighting for a country, and were not wearing uniforms when captured on the battlefield.

164184[/snapback]

Neither were many of those fighting for the South in the Civil War. Many who were captured in Vietnam weren't wearing uniforms, either. The spirit of the Geneva Convention should apply, regardless of minor loopholes one might find.

164187[/snapback]

Does the Geneva Convention apply to all people of all persuasions or should it apply to people who honor and act according to the Geneva Convention?

164192[/snapback]

I think it should apply to all people captured in a war by Americans as long as we're a member of the GC. Maybe I have a misunderstanding of the GC. Maybe it's kind of like an "honor among thieves" understanding that says that I won't steal (torture your prisoners) from you as long as you don't steal (tortune mine) from me.

You strike me as the sort of person who doesn't rape women. If that's the case, do you not rape women because, in America, women have the right NOT to be raped and therefore illegal, or is it because you think it's wrong? If it's because it's illegal, you might then be inclined to rape women in a country where it was perfectly legal. If, on the other hand, it's because you believe rape to be wrong, then your presence in a country where it's legal shouldn't change your behavior, should it? Right is right and wrong is wrong, Tigermike.

164201[/snapback]

I think there are also rules in there somewhere to the effect of (a) wearing a uniform, ( fighting for a recognized country, © having an intention of adhering to the Geneva Convention, (d) NOT targeting civilians.

Where do the terrorists fit into that?

[Piglet 0]

It is obvious that you are putting words in my keyboard.  You infer that b/c I say that these people would "just as soon behead you than look at you" that I think as long as we stop short of beheading it's ok.  You are mistaken.  I believe my exact quote was I was fine with "making their lives uncomfortable," which is what we are doing.  Nice try, though.

164191[/snapback]

Fine. "Making their lives uncomfortable." Sounds good. I don't think anyone here wants the terrorists, or suspected terrorists, to feel great.

But ain't there a pretty big gulf between coddling and the conditions Durbin describes?

How's this for a standard? If we'd be outraged to find some other country doing it to our own POWs, we shouldn't do it either. Suppose those were a couple of marines, and we found them that way when liberating a prison camp in a country we were at war with. Would you think it was fair? Would it be harder to protest such treatment of our own troops if it was known we did similar things?

If America is held to a high standard, it's because we're the best country that's ever been, and if we want to stay that way, we act like the good guys.

[SupperClub 0]

How's this for a standard? If we'd be outraged to find some other country doing it to our own POWs, we shouldn't do it either.  Suppose those were a couple of marines, and we found them that way when liberating a prison camp in a country we were at war with. Would you think it was fair?  Would it be harder to protest such treatment of our own troops if it was known we did similar things?

If America is held to a high standard, it's because we're the best country that's ever been, and if we want to stay that way, we act like the good guys.

164214[/snapback]

Would you be outraged to find out that our POWs were subjected to listening to blaring rap music, subjected to hot or cold temperatures, woken up in the middle of the night, and had a female get in their "personal space?" This sounds a lot better than what they are actually subjected to if they are caught, huh? Remember our soldiers' dead bodies being drug through the streets and hung over a bridge? I didn't hear anything about the Geneva Convention then.

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

Remember our soldiers' dead bodies being drug through the streets and hung over a bridge?  I didn't hear anything about the Geneva Convention then.

164225[/snapback]

Actually, those were civilians, contractors for a company in Iraq. Last time (that I can recall) soldiers were drug through the streets was Mogadishu, Somalia. Sorry, I am a stickler for details (even though mine are wrong at times.)

[SupperClub 0]

You, sir, are correct. My apologies.

[Tiger Al 0]

How's this for a standard? If we'd be outraged to find some other country doing it to our own POWs, we shouldn't do it either.  Suppose those were a couple of marines, and we found them that way when liberating a prison camp in a country we were at war with. Would you think it was fair?  Would it be harder to protest such treatment of our own troops if it was known we did similar things?

If America is held to a high standard, it's because we're the best country that's ever been, and if we want to stay that way, we act like the good guys.

164214[/snapback]

Would you be outraged to find out that our POWs were subjected to listening to blaring rap music, subjected to hot or cold temperatures, woken up in the middle of the night, and had a female get in their "personal space?" This sounds a lot better than what they are actually subjected to if they are caught, huh? Remember our soldiers' dead bodies being drug through the streets and hung over a bridge? I didn't hear anything about the Geneva Convention then.

164225[/snapback]

You're minimizing what has been done in many cases. There have been cases of people being tortured to death which leads me to believe that the things you listed are simply some of the more minor events that we know about. People don't die due to loud music.

As for what was done to the civilian contractors, why should I expect barbarians to act anything less than barbaric? If I found out that the people who did that to them were Catholic nuns, then my reaction would be different. I would expect more from the nuns.

[SupperClub 0]

No, I am not minimizing what has been done. I am referring to the original quote from the senator, where he compares these things to a Nazi concentration camp. He didn't say anything about people being tortured to death, and if he did I would be able to draw a comparison to the 'gulags' he speaks of.

[Tiger Al 0]

Now, boys, isn't this more fun than calling each other cons and dems?

As I am sure you know, Al, we are not signatory to the GC, even though we follow its tenants.  Personally, I think we should support the governments in Afhanistan, Pakistan and Iraq (now) to the fullest extent possible and turn the criminals at Gitmo back over to them, turn and walk away.  But that would be akin to supporting torture. 

I am also not saying that the actions of the interrogators at Gitmo be compared to the others to "make it ok".  I am saying that the methods being used are not, in my mind, torture.  In yours, they obviously are.  I can respect that. 

We will have to agree to disagree and move on to the next topic.

164202[/snapback]

The answer to Supper Club's hypothetical AND your post can come down to this: IF a terrorist needs to be coerced by whatever means are necessary to gain vital information that would save lives or catch the 'masterminds' of terrorist activities then so be it. I have a few problems with what's been going on so far, though. It seems to be a foregone conclusion that anyone and everyone in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib were 'terrorists' although little or no effort has been made to know this for certain. Are they all choirboys? Doubtful. But, I also doubt that the average al Qaeda foot soldier has any relevent information, especially 2-3 years removed from the area, that would be helpful now, if ever. Under duress, people will basically tell you whatever you want to hear if that'll get you to stop whatever you're doing to them. This has also happened.

So, it seems to me to be a lot of effort that yields little or no benefit all the while making our job of convincing not one, but, two countries, that the USA really is selling something they've never had before and that it's something they should want. It's obvious to you and me that we're different and better but things like this make me wonder if that's the message they're getting.

[Tiger Al 0]

No, I am not minimizing what has been done.  I am referring to the original quote from the senator, where he compares these things to a Nazi concentration camp.  He didn't say anything about people being tortured to death, and if he did I would be able to draw a comparison to the 'gulags' he speaks of.

164245[/snapback]

This took 0.26 seconds to find.

[Tiger Al 0]

This guy was in Guantanamo. 0.23 seconds to find.

[DKW 86 7,451]

Link

January 25, 2002

Camp x-ray or Club Med?

After spending months in frigid Afghanistan caves subsisting on Allah knows what, the 158 detainees the United States is holding in tropical Guantanamo Bay must think they've died and gone to heaven.

Well, heaven without the 72 virgins.

The detainees should look at the balmy Camp X-ray -- replete with running water, three square meals a day and modern medical care -- as a sort of Taliban version of Club Med. Call it Club Gitmo.

Yet, some Americans and Brits have been hollering about the U.S. treatment of these tough guys. British newspaper headlines have screamed about U.S. "Torture!" and "Monstrous Inhumanity," while stories say prisoners are treated "like wild beasts" in "cages." Amnesty International issued a press release accusing the United States of "keeping prisoners incommunicado, (using) sensory deprivation, the use of unnecessary restraint and the humiliation of people through tactics such as shaving them ... in an effort to 'break' the spirit of individuals ahead of interrogation."

It should be noted that much of the uproar is over photographs of the detainees taken as they were being transported from airplanes to their cells. The military wisely shackles prisoners during transport: That's when it's easiest for violent people to hurt others.

Also, a British Foreign Ministry team, which spent three days at Club Gitmo, reported that three British citizens being held there had "no complaints about their treatment."

As The Washington Post reported, Foreign Office Parliamentary Secretary Ben Bradshaw also explained that there were "no gags, no goggles, no earmuffs and no shackles while (the prisoners) are in their cells."

Still, some people just have to bash the United States. And they apparently don't care if the criticism makes them look clueless as to what really is inhumane. Take the sensory deprivation charge. Does Amnesty International think that wearing a hood on an airplane is sensory deprivation, instead of a security measure? Isn't the Taliban code all about sensory deprivation?

As for the "unnecessary restraint," one detainee has announced that he wants to kill an American before he leaves Cuba and another detainee bit a guard, according to Pentagon spokesman Capt. Riccoh Player. So make that "necessary restraint."

I was embarrassed by some of the press corps' comments during Tuesday's Pentagon briefing. Talk about clueless. First, there's the reporter who likened living in the tropics without air conditioning to "torture."

Then there's the reporter who asked Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld if American Taliban John Walker will be treated the same as the detainees. "Will he be put in an 8-by-8-foot cell that has no walls but only a roof?" was the follow-up question.

I'd guess that's one journalist who's never been to a prison.

"In an 8-by-8-foot space, (on some ships) we would cram half a dozen sailors," was one U.S. official's reaction.

Then there's the status of the detainees. Some Brits and Amnesty International want them to be officially classified as POWs. The detainee status, however, gives the U.S. military the leeway to interrogate these former operatives about any future terrorist attacks.

White House spokesman Ken Lisaius rightly noted of the Club Gitmo guests that, "for the most part, they're members of al Qaeda, and if they were free, they'd engage in murder once again."

You could understand the outrage if the U.S. military were torturing or otherwise mistreating the detainees. Instead, Amnesty International and its comrades are outraged that the military is treating al Qaeda captives like prisoners. Oh, the horror.

You get the feeling that if Rummy booked these tough guys into a Motel 6, they'd complain that there's no room service.

Contact Debra Saunders

Link

I had a good time at Guantanamo, says inmate

By Rajeev Syal

(Filed: 08/02/2004)

An Afghan boy whose 14-month detention by US authorities as a terrorist suspect in Cuba prompted an outcry from human rights campaigners said yesterday that he enjoyed his time in the camp.

Mohammed Ismail Agha, 15, who until last week was held at the US military base in Guantanamo Bay, said that he was treated very well and particularly enjoyed learning to speak English. His words will disappoint critics of the US policy of detaining "illegal combatants" in south-east Cuba indefinitely and without trial.

In a first interview with any of the three juveniles held by the US at Guantanamo Bay base, Mohammed said: "They gave me a good time in Cuba. They were very nice to me, giving me English lessons."

Mohammed, an unemployed Afghan farmer, found the surroundings in Cuba at first baffling. After he settled in, however, he was left to enjoy stimulating school work, good food and prayer.

"At first I was unhappy . . . For two or three days [after I arrived in Cuba] I was confused but later the Americans were so nice to me. They gave me good food with fruit and water for ablutions and prayer," he said yesterday in Naw Zad, a remote market town in southern Afghanistan close to his home village and 300 miles south-west of Kabul, the capital.

He said that the American soldiers taught him and his fellow child captives - aged 15 and 13 - to write and speak a little English. They supplied them with books in their native Pashto language. When the three boys left last week for Afghanistan, the soldiers looking after them gave them a send-off dinner and urged them to continue their studies.

"They even took photographs of us all together before we left," he said. Mohammed, however, said he would have to disappoint his captors by not returning to his studies. "I am too poor for that. I will have to look for work," he said.

Mohammed said his detention began in November 2002 when he and a friend, both unemployed, left their farming community for Lashkar Gah, a nearby town. He said that as they stood outside a shop they were detained by a group of armed men who accused them of being members of the Taliban, the fundamentalist Islamic movement formerly in power in Afghanistan.

They were then handed over to US soldiers, who took them to the southern city of Kandahar, he claimed. They were taken to Bagram air base, where Mohammed was held in solitary confinement.

"They were asking me if I was Taliban. I said, 'No, I am innocent'. I thought they were going to release me but instead they put me on a plane," he said. "They asked me to wear a hood for part of the journey. When I got off the plane I was in Cuba."

While Mohammed praised the American soldiers who watched over him, he criticised the US authorities for failing to contact his parents for 10 months to let them know that he was alive. "They stole 14 months of my life, and my family's life. I was entirely innocent: just a poor boy looking for work," he said.

Mohammed and his fellow juvenile detainees returned to Afghanistan last week, after the intervention of the International Committee of the Red Cross. His words of praise for the American soldiers in Guantanamo Bay echo those of Faiz Mohammed, an elderly Afghan farmer who was detained at the base for eight months before being released in October 2002.

"They treated us well. We had enough food. I didn't mind [being detained] because they took my old clothes and gave me new clothes," said the farmer, who was partially deaf.

Club Gitmo: For Sunday, they're going to be having -- let me see -- orange glazed chicken, fresh fruit grupe, steamed peas and mushrooms, rice pilaf -- another form of torture for the hijackers. We treat them very well.

Link

I could go on and on, but you get the point...

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

No, I am not minimizing what has been done.  I am referring to the original quote from the senator, where he compares these things to a Nazi concentration camp.  He didn't say anything about people being tortured to death, and if he did I would be able to draw a comparison to the 'gulags' he speaks of.

164245[/snapback]

This took 0.26 seconds to find.

164252[/snapback]

This is ridiculous if this guy gets court martialed, based on what I read here. How is he responsible in any way with the death? Punching him? Geez, the guy is lucky that the SEALs didn't do more than punching him and taking his picture.

The CIA operatives that were in charge of the questioning not being charged? Equally ridiculous.

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

This guy was in Guantanamo. 0.23 seconds to find.

164254[/snapback]

I can't say a lot because I am getting this third hand and I don't know the security issues, but one of the guards at Gitmo did kill a prisoner once, when the detainees tried to stab another guard.

Opinion on that, Al?

[channonc 466]

Even if these cases of abuse are few and far between, they still warrant an investigation. I personally agree with TA, I really feel that we need to be setting the bar higher for this type of stuff. Not just pointing back at the other guy and saying "hey, what they did was worse."

However, I am still under the belief that most of what is going on at GITMO and in Abu Ghrab, was on the up and up. Its the few bad apples that need to be weeded out. We also shouldn't just hold people for the sake of holding them.

[DKW 86 7,451]

I get it now, if we do 1% bad, that is worse than someone else's 99% bad.

We do need to get rid of these guys, The terrorists are living better than our troops.

[Auburn85 432]

"I get it now, if we do 1% bad, that is worse than someone else's 99% bad."

Bingo....plus its the whole thing about blowing this 1% bad into as if it were some widespread problem or "crisis"

If anything Durbin's giving propaganda to the terrorists

[Auburn85 432]

and has anyone heard how these detainees are eating? From what I hear, they're eating well

[Jenny AU-92 0]

We also shouldn't just hold people for the sake of holding them.

164263[/snapback]

Why not? Here's a question for you. We know that of the people we HAVE released from Gitmo, fifty are already back in prison in Pakistan, re-arrested for terrorist activites.

Meanwhile, Pakistani interrogators found that more than 50 former Gitmo detainees, now in Pakistani jails...

Link

I recognize that in the US, you can't hold someone in prison just because you have a very strong gut feeling that if released, they probably might possibly will do something bad again. But what about these guys at Gitmo - already a whole mess of them ahve been rearrested for further terrorist activities. These people have, as their MISSION, and their SOLE PURPOSE in LIFE, to bring down The Great Satan - while there may not be PROOF of a specific act that each one of them is going to do to harm this country, you can say with some degree of certainty that they WILL try to do SOMETHING, whether it is in the US, or in Iraq if they are deported, or in Afghanistan or Malaysia, or whether it is a suicide bomb or an IED or an ambush. WE KNOW THEY WANT TO KILL US - THE METHOD IS UNIMPORTANT. In fact we have PROOF that even the ones we released are back on the warpath, undeterred in their mission. If they are in prison at Gitmo, we know for damn certain that THIS bunch of terrorists will not be doing any of the above. So why not keep on holding them for the sake of holding them and prevent attacks by THIS bunch of them?

[Tiger Al 0]

If anything Durbin's giving propaganda to the terrorists

What Durbin 'says' gives them propaganda but the things we're 'doing' are OK.

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

OR

Yep, maybe you're right...Durbin really does undermine our efforts. I can see where what he says would really piss off some Muslim kids.

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

Graner was/is a bad apple in a barrel. That goes for all his henchmen also. Abu Gharib was an embarassment and it should not be repeated.

There is a difference between what Durbin talked about and what the"crew" at AG did, in my opinion.

[AURaptor 1,128]

Maybe Durbin's just trying to drive the point home that this isn't how America should act. Do you people HONESTLY think he was calling the military Nazi's??? Come on, folks, get real.

164152[/snapback]

I'm a bit ashamed at how NICE we're treating these terrorist. . And yes, he WAS caling OUR Military NAZIs.

On a side note, I couldn't help but note that over @ Tommers Corner, this post got 16 replies, while here it's received 47.

[Piglet 0]

So if they're an easily proven, continuing threat to security, let's prove their threat in a tribunal, sentence them, and stick them in prison legally. And do it aboveboard. Then the terrorists will still be incapacitated, there will be safeguards for the innocent, and the hate-America crowd--foreign and domestic--won't have propaganda to use against us.

The fact that a bunch of released people are now in jail in Pakistan don't prove much. That's little better than saying so-and-so was in Saddam's jail, therefore he must have been a badass. Pakistan locks people up just 'cause the Grand Wazir said so.

[rexbo 104]

and has anyone heard how these detainees are eating? From what I hear, they're eating well

164269[/snapback]

Let's just send them my wife's cooking, now that will get the location of Osama in no time!!!