Sneaky Tactics: US breaks Geneva Convention

Originally posted by Seekerof
1. At the beginning of the trial, once more the brothers must insist on proving that torture was inflicted on them by State Security [investigators] before the judge.

2. Complain [to the court] of mistreatment while in prison.

- Of course I imagine it makes life a damned sight easier for any of the alleged AQ types if they can point to actual genuine cases of torture and a blanket denial of process and rights, huh?

......and using proxies to do your torturing for you - trip to sunny Egypt anyone? - hardly makes everything ok, right?

The UK is becoming more of a police state than the US.

- I do not disagree that we too are experiencing the security-nutters on this one too.

But given the amendments to the recent changes to the law (involving Judges, time limits and reviews etc) I doubt very much that the UK is anything like your Patriot Act 1 & 2 USA thank you very much.

If your reference is to "denial" of torture, may I remind you your own UK version of Guantanamo Bay: Belmarsh: Britain's Guantanamo Bay

- Sorry, for all it's faults I find the idea of attempting to equate Bellmarsh Prison with Guantanamo Bay risible.

For a start lets compare inmates held because of alledged AQ terrorist links hmmm?
Dare you?


[edit on 15-3-2005 by sminkeypinkey]

as posted by sminkeypinkey
- Of course I imagine it makes life a damned sight easier for any of the alledged AQ types if they can point to actual genuine cases of torture and a blanket denial of process and rights, huh?

Your referring to which, sminkeypinkey, US's 'Gitmo' or the UK 'Gitmo'...huh?

But given the amendments to the recent changes to the law (involving Judges, time limits and reviews etc) I doubt very much that the UK is anything like your Patriot Act 1 & 2 USA thank you very much.

Might want to re-read your UK Anti-Terrorism/Terror Act, perhaps?

For a start lets compare inmates held because of alledged AQ terrorist links hmmm?
Dare you?

Apparently Google is not working for you? You missed hitting the links I gave you and/or only looked at the first pages?
Maybe this will clarify things a bit?
Al-Qaeda held at Belmarsh

Whose in "denial" here, sminkeypinkey?




seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
Your referring to which, sminkeypinkey, US's 'Gitmo' or the UK 'Gitmo'...huh?

- In so much as it goes on in the UK too I'm referring to both.

But in terms of amount the US leaves the UK standing in number terms.

Might want to re-read your UK Anti-Terrorism/Terror Act, perhaps?

- I don't imagine you saw anything of the massive row this caused in the UK Parliament last week, nor the watering down of many of the most contentious measures.

Apparently Google is not working for you?

- No, I thought the comparison so ridiculous I didn't bother.

A handfull (12?) in Bellmarsh verses several hundred in Cuba (540 approx)? Please.

www.dailytimes.com.pk...

......you do know those previously held in Bellmarsh have now been released to a form of 'House arrest' with tagging, a curfew and controls over who they can associate with and the technology they may have access to?

www.dailytimes.com.pk...

Thankfully there is no real parallel between the UK and USA, only the most superficial of ones.

Whose in "denial" here, sminkeypinkey?

- Like I said at the begining, many Americans.......

.....especially those trying to equate the detention (and now subsequent release) of 12 already in this country compared to the transportation to a venue several thousand miles away and all that has gone on at G. Bay.

I didn't (you'll perhaps note) applaud - the much lesser example of - the same going on here in the UK, hmmmm?



[edit on 15-3-2005 by sminkeypinkey]

Originally posted by 00PS
The USA didn't sign the Geneva Convention? If that's the case then I am wrong...

The USA DID, however TERRORISTS DIDN'T.

There for, IT DOES NOT APLY TO THEM.

It takes TWO to TANGO as they say.

Originally posted by American Mad Man
The USA DID, however TERRORISTS DIDN'T.

There for, IT DOES NOT APLY TO THEM.

It takes TWO to TANGO as they say.

- The funny things is AMM that - as we found out with the Irish troubles - many of those initially labelled as 'terrorist' turn out to be nothing of the sort......

.....and in the meantime many of these supposedly 'vital' weapons for the WOT have been turned out to have been mostly used on your own citizens.

Simply saying 'well, they were barbarians so I became one' is as p*ss-poor and thin an arguement as possible as far as I can see.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Simply saying 'well, they were barbarians so I became one' is as p*ss-poor and thin an arguement as possible as far as I can see.

Well, first of all it is NOT American law or procedure to do what was done - that is why our soldiers ARE being courtmarshalled.

So don't even BEGIN to compare the US government with a bunch of nut jobs who hack every persons head off they can find.

It's a pathetic comparison.

And frankly, I don't even think that those pictures of 'humiliation' are even torture. How soft we have become. These people would cut your head off if they could. Mine too.

And we are worried about their feelings? Please

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Well, first of all it is NOT American law or procedure to do what was done - that is why our soldiers ARE being courtmarshalled.

- From what people like Amnesty tell us this is only the tip of the iceberg. A few squaddies sacrificed. I've heard too much about the lead given from the top (including the political top) so if you don't mind I'll reserve judgement before I go along with the idea of it just being a few rotten apples.

So don't even BEGIN to compare the US government with a bunch of nut jobs who hack every persons head off they can find.

It's a pathetic comparison.

- I didn't actually compare anyone with anything AMM, I cited the principle.

.....and (if it goes on as has been widely reported) I see little difference between casual executions by US and allied troops and so-called 'insurgent' beheadings.

And frankly, I don't even think that those pictures of 'humiliation' are even torture. How soft we have become. These people would cut your head off if they could. Mine too.

And we are worried about their feelings?

Please

- I'd say you are missing the point here AMM.

.......and get real, this whole sorry sage has involved a damned sight more than mere humiliation and some hurt feelings too. Still if you couldn't care less that such actions have led to greater risk to your troops, ok, odd if you ask me but they're your troops I guess.

We either abide by the rule of law or we don't.......and if we don't we have little right to bitch at those who also do not.

You can completely deny the worst 'excesses' (nice euphemism for when 'ours' do exactly what only 'they' are supposed to be doing) all you like and argue that we are becoming only a little like 'them' but the point is always that the more like 'them' we become the more like them we become.

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- From what people like Amnesty tell us this is only the tip of the iceberg. A few squaddies sacrificed. I've heard too much about the lead given from the top (including the political top) so if you don't mind I'll reserve judgement before I go along with the idea of it just being a few rotten apples.

You have 'heard' from where? There is absolutely nothing to show that our political heads (Bush, Chaney, Rice, Congress, whoever) had any say in this what so ever.

It is total bunk and you know it. Why in the hell would any politician give orders to humiliate prisoners. It just doesn't make sense and there is no evidance to back it up.

- I didn't actually compare anyone with anything AMM, I cited the principle.

Even the principle is lame. How can you call a few US soldiers who humiliated prisoners by taking embarrising photographs the same as a group of people who have, as their MO, to behead just about any prisoner they capture.

.....and (if it goes on as has been widely reported) I see little difference between casual executions by US and allied troops and so-called 'insurgent' beheadings.

Widely reported by whom? And again, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.

The DIFFERENCE - whether you want to admit to it or not - is the US DOES NOT CONDONE THOSE ACTIONS. We PUNISH OUR OWN for doing that when we find out about it.

Do insurgents do that? Do terrorists do that? NO! Of course they don't! We hold ourselves to a higher standard then they do.

We either abide by the rule of law or we don't.......and if we don't we have little right to bitch at those who also do not.

But we do abide by the law - that is the point! No laws were broken by our government, only low level workers for the government - and they are being courtmarshalled as we speak!

We have every right to bitch at a bunch of barbarians who hack off peoples heads every time they capture one.

You can completely deny the worst 'excesses' (nice euphemism for when 'ours' do exactly what only 'they' are supposed to be doing) all you like and argue that we are becoming only a little like 'them' but the point is always that the more like 'them' we become the more like them we become.

We are NOTHING like them.

HOW DARE you compare a government which punishes it's own for taking pictures - PICTURES - that hurt MURDERERS feelings with a bunch of people whos doctrine is to hack off the head of every infedel they find.

WE ARE NOTHING LIKE THEM. WE WILL NEVER BE ANYTHING LIKE THEM.

I'm enjoying the logic in this thread: Insurgents are not party to the Geneva Convention, ergo, we can treat them however we may wish, torture, rape, abuse, etc etc etc. That obviously justifies it, correct? The U.S., granted no convention, is still moraly wrong to treat prisoners as they have. The creation of GITMO was to divert the Genevan Convetions, or did we forget that? The U.S. blatantly went around the law.

Deep

Originally posted by ZeroDeep
The U.S., granted no convention, is still moraly wrong to treat prisoners as they have.

No, the US is NOT moraly wrong here. The US DOES NOT SUPPORT rape and torture.

Don't you get it? We are punishing our own for doing this! When we find out our guys took pictures of naked prisoners, we courtmarshalled them!

That is not the fault of the US government, it is the fault of the individuals who did it. Likewise, a corporation it's self is not responsable for the actions of a few of it's workers.

Originally posted by American Mad Man

Originally posted by ZeroDeep
The U.S., granted no convention, is still moraly wrong to treat prisoners as they have.

No, the US is NOT moraly wrong here. The US DOES NOT SUPPORT rape and torture.

Don't you get it? We are punishing our own for doing this! When we find out our guys took pictures of naked prisoners, we courtmarshalled them!

That is not the fault of the US government, it is the fault of the individuals who did it. Likewise, a corporation it's self is not responsable for the actions of a few of it's workers.

You are Mad...you don't know about the secret operations of our government post Korean war up untill present day now do you?

You won't see it on the history channel, nor the discovery channel nor anywhere inside your firkin TV. Only in books...the internet is full of info but is not as credible as the info in books people take time to publish.

Look at our interventions in South America for some prime example of America breaking the geneva convention.

Mad, if america is punishing troops for doing torture since it is wrong....why are you defending torture?

Sorry, person using banana in his/her avatar; like the peole said, these are no enemy combatants, the Geneva convention rules don't apply to them.

Edited to replace "banana-boy" with "person using banana in his/her avatar" upon advice of counsel.

[edit on 15-3-2005 by Off_The_Street]

News Flash:

The US Has broken the Geneva Conventions.

This is not just about Gitmo. This is not just about Abu Gharib. This is about the US and it's breaking of many international agreements but on topic - Geneva Conventions.

US Targets Iraqi Civilian News Organization
The head of the world's biggest journalists' organization said a U.S. bomb and missile attack on Iraqi television on Wednesday
www.commondreams.org...

Saddams Mutilated Sons on Display
US government has placed the death pictures of so called sons of Saddam Hussein, Uday and Qusay, on display as reported killed on 22nd July.
paktribune.com...

And the list goes on and on....

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Sorry, banana-boy; like the peole said, these are no enemy combatants, the Geneva convention rules don't apply to them.

Do you believe in torture?

You know when they made the Geneva Convention, I bet they were thinking this was to prevent anything from things like today happening.

But everyone has forgotten or has been bribed or scared not to mention it.

The war to end all wars ends with great international treaties...

Next we'll be dropping Nuclear bombs and tell people that's ok too because those people are sub-human...just like saying people lie outside the Geneva Convention.

The GC was for all people in an armed struggle.....


Those who interpret it like this are the same as blasphemers interpreting the bible to suit their self-served needs.

Bad, Wrong, Evil, and yes, the S word

[edit on 15-3-2005 by 00PS]

here's a good little joke:
why are the iraqis spending a year to write a constitution
why dont they just use americas, it worked for 200 years and they arent using it anymore

the terrorists are sub-human. i would definitely recommend nuking the countries the united states deem terrorist nations however it would not be a wise course of action because it would be uninhabitable for us when we build our new nations there.

I just called the terrorists, you know what they said.

The Terrorists:

Nuke All Infidels personally with their own tactical nuke with their name inscribed on it for they don't know that our oppressor wages war against us even in a way they would protest to yet they stand aside aiding and abetting our enemy. They have made the decison. They shall die.

That's scary huh...They think like you...oh wait - you have something in common...You are a terrorist too, no?

Originally posted by feklar
the terrorists are sub-human. i would definitely recommend nuking the countries the united states deem terrorist nations however it would not be a wise course of action because it would be uninhabitable for us when we build our new nations there.

Are we any better?