 |
So excon, what is the alternative to torture, and still get information in a timely manner?
I think the right wingers have made valid cases.
How about this; pleasure?
First we give them meth, opiods, sex, good food, cigarettes/ nicotine , caffeine [ chocolate ] , alcohol, etc...
Then we ask for information and if we don't get information, they get benadryl, tyelenol, celibacy, mre[s], chewing gum, and o'douls.
Grace and Peace
Follow the link to some methods that work very wellQuote:
Originally Posted by inthebox
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/...k%2082-104.pdf
Prisoner Abuse: Patterns from the Past
Wondergirl offered a batch of cookies...Quote:
Originally Posted by inthebox
these people don't have the same response mechanisms that we would consider to be normal..
offer fifty million dollars and you'll get a response from the west... offer fifty camels and you'll get the sand jerks attention. It will always be a matter of value systems. I really don't mean to demean, but our values and cultures are so far apart...
It’s been awhile since I’ve heard anything so racist…Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainRich
You collect a very jaundice view of society! You change your avatar from an image of Christianity to something that you wish to represent decadence! How can anyone trust where you're coming from?! You're very title... depicts your aversion from society!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_crow
TALK TO THE HAND, DARKSTUFF! YOUR STUPIDITY IS BLOCKED!!
Do I have to bring up the case of David Hicks again that all you right wingers have ignored over and over when I have brought it up in the past. Numerous threads I have discussed his case on and each time you simply skim over it.
You tortured him, got nothing and let him go on a guilty plea on charges you made up to prosecute him. The torture got nothing. As excon has pointed out this is just one of many cases.
Elliot you twisted Excons definition to suit your own argument. And it could be seen straight through. To relate his definition of torture to your summer camp was as ridiculous a thing as I have read in this thread. Ill go with the Con and say it was a win for him!
Win? Win for whom?
SK, Tell us where your David was , how he got selected for a trip to GITMO, what he said or didn't say to keep him there, what "we" did or didn't do, how he left, what happened to him once he left, and what's he up to now. Please be as explicit as you are compliant...
**edit** David Matthew Hicks (born 7 August 1975) is an Australian who, after five years detention by the United States government under suspicion of involvement with terrorism, became the first Guantánamo Bay detainee to be convicted under the US Military Commissions Act of 2006.
A true friend of the American people...
Ive brought it up before when you guys try and defend your pathetic president and his men. Ive brought it up to show the incompetence of your previous attorney general and his unlawful Military Commissions Act. Ive brought it up before when you guys have preached what a wonderful and comfortable place Gitmo is for these terrorists. Ive brought it up many times and each time it has been ignored. Frankly I can't be bothered going through it all over again for you to twist and distort it like you no doubt will. Ill provide a few links below that you will tear apart and we'll agree to disagree if you decide to read them.
He was tortured for nothing. You'll say it was for something but really know you got nothing.
Law Council of Australia - David Hicks - Five Years Without Justice
The David Hicks affidavit - World - www.smh.com.au
'New evidence' backs Hicks's torture claim. 31/10/2005. ABC News Online
You might also want to do some research on Major Michael Mori, his military attorney and the treatment he has received because he stood up for the rights of his client.
That's all I can be bothered with right now because any discussion here just gets twisted to support your current regime.
I've never been to GITMO.. But, neither have I been bombed out of of the Twin Towers... I guess I don't have enough perspective yet. Do you feel comfortable were you live? I'm not trying to twist anything! But based upon the links YOU'VE provided, I think I think that hick's had more to run from than to hide!
No where, NO WHERE, in anything I've read in these links, regarding this guy, did he say he knew that he put himself in harms way and admitted he engaged with people's opposed to the US and our endeavors. You concern yourself with how many times you brought this up...
American or un-American... Freedom wanting or not freedom wanting...
Again, I will ask: Who's side are you on?
Personally I think David Hicks was in custody took way too long, but the guy chose to plead guilty and signed official court documents denying any abuse. Has he changed his story, yet again?
Bobby
Your point being??Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainRich
All right, Skell, let's talk about David Hicks, shall we?
In 1999 David Hicks traveled to first to Kosovo to train with the KLA and then to Pakistan, where he learned guerrilla warfare from Lashkar-e-Toiba, including weapons training (including landmines), kidnapping techniques, and assassination methods. Here is a picture of him during his training with the KLA. (He's the one holding the RPG.)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...full_frame.jpg
In 2000, he traveled to Kashmir, where he fought against India for several months.
Later that year, Hicks attended a number of al-Qaeda training courses at various camps around Afghanistan, including an advanced course on surveillance, in which he conducted surveillance of the US and British embassies in Kabul, Afghanistan. On one occasion when al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden visited an Afghan camp, Hicks questioned bin Laden about the lack of English in training material and subsequently began to translate the training camp materials from Arabic to English.
After the September 11, 2000 attacks, Hicks returned to Afghanistan to rejoin his al-Qaeda associates to fight against US, British, Canadian, Australian, Afghan, and other coalition forces. He was captured by a "Northern Alliance warlord" on or about 9 December2001, near Kunduz, Afghanistan, and turned over to US Special Forces for $1000 on 17 December2001.
We're not talking about some innocent young kid who just got caught up in events. He was an active terrorist, an active operator. IF he was tortured (and we only have HIS word for that), well, you make your bed, you lay in it. He chose to become a terrorist. Afghanistan wasn't an isolated case... he was a terrorist in Kosovo, India, and Pakistan before going to Afghanistan.
So, cry me a river over the torture and long confinement of David Hicks. The guy's a f#*&ingterrorist scumbag. He had no problems with torture, murder, assassination, attacking civillians etc. He trained for it. He CHOSE to learn and then use those methods of combat. You reap what you sow. He chose terrorism. I've got NO sympathy for the guy. If it were up to me, he'd still be at Gitmo, with his testicles wrapped in copper wire with the leads attached to a car battery. And when I was finished with him, his corpse would be put in an unmarked grave, and he'd be buried with the carcass of a pig.
My question to you, Skell, is why you have any sympathy at all fo a murdering terrorist scumbag like David Hicks. So he spent five years in Gitmo in a small room. Boo effing hoo. It's a hell of a lot better than what he had planned for his victims.
Quote:
"He [Hicks] once told me in Afghanistan that if he were to go into a building of Jews with an automatic weapon or as a suicide bomber he would have to say something like 'there is no god but Allah' ect [sic] just so he could see the look of fear on their faces, before he takes them out," writes former Camp X-ray inmate Abbasi.
Detainment and torture of a terrorist? Boo hoo. I don't give a crap. He did and wanted to do a lot worse than that to innocent people. Hicks was anything but an innocent victim.
Elliot
Hello again, El:
I would have written this myself, but your home town paper beat me to it…… So, I borrowed.
How about another victim? Khaled el-Masri, an innocent German citizen of Lebanese descent who was kidnapped, detained and tortured in a secret overseas prison as part of the Bush administration's morally, physically and illegal anti-terrorism program.
Mr. Masri says he was picked up while vacationing in Macedonia in late 2003 and flown to a squalid prison in Afghanistan. He says he was questioned there about ties to terrorist groups and was beaten by his captors, some of whom were Americans. At the end of May 2004, Mr. Masri was released in a remote part of Albania without having been charged with a crime.
Investigations in Europe and news reports in this country have supported his version of events, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice acknowledged privately to her that Mr. Masri's abduction was a mistake, an admission that aides to Ms. Rice have denied. The Masri case, in other words, is being actively discussed all over the world. The only place it cannot be discussed, it seems, is in a United States courtroom.
In refusing to consider Mr. Masri's appeal, the Supreme Court has left an innocent person without any remedy for his wrongful imprisonment and torture. It has damaged America's standing in the world and established the nation as Supreme Enabler of the Bush administration's efforts to avoid accountability for its actions. These are not accomplishments to be proud of.
excon
[QUOTE=ETWolverine]
My question to you...is why you have any sympathy at all fo a murdering terrorist scumbag like David Hicks. QUOTE]
Because that is the disease of the self-proclaimed "enlightened" crowd that's running around today. Sympathy for the criminal, disdain for the victims.
Look, why do we even have the penal code? Is it because everyone lives with everyone else in peace and harmony? No. The criminals dictate the laws these days. Our laws and what we laughingly call the judicial system are totally REACTIVE in nature instead of PROACTIVE, as is the whole mindset of the rule makers.
Someone shoots up a school, so they make laws banning guns within X number of meters of a school. Well, if that ain't just pure genius! Have they looked up the definition of a criminal? If so, have they paused to think about just how much of a rip a criminal gives about their little law?
REACTION investigates and once in a while prevents the same person from doing the same thing twice.
PROACTION looks for the source of the crime before it happens and seeks to prevent it from ever occurring in the first place. This does happen, but because of the very nature of proaction, most people never know it happens, never know how close they may have come to being snuffed out by someone who cares less about their lives than they do about stepping on a bug.
So how do we be proactive? We use our assets: intelligence, prior histories, informants, and yes, all the various means of interrogation. We get information, and we ACT on it.
Hopefully that made some degree of sense. I have a lousy cold or something, and my head's all full of crud.
EXCON
You missed the point of the Masri case . He was suing for compensation. SCOTUS could not let the precedent of every jihadi who thinks he has a claim bringing a tort case to the courts. Masri got screwed by the CIA and the $75K he asked for is fair .But SCOTUS is correct .They can't give jurisdiction to anyone around the world for lawsuits in American courts for actions outside the US, especially against agents that are defending our national security. The correct venue for this is in the State Dept. They should work out a deal.
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Oh, I didn't miss anything. I think, perhaps, it's you who missed my point. But, let's address yours first. Do I think he should be compensated for the torture he endured having been INNOCENT and WRONGLY arrested?? Uhhhh, yeah!!
However, my point was that we scoop innocent people up and call them terrorists, without knowing a thing about them - and then we torture them.
My overall point, however, is that based upon nothing more than gossip, rumor and innuendo, we arrest people. I'm not suggesting that ALL the terrorists we've arrested are innocent. I'm suggesting that SOME are, as evidenced by the facts in this case.
Given the above, and taking the cowboy Wolverine's example again, it's a fantasy to believe that we would EVER KNOW that somebody KNEW something that we wanted to know. It's just not a possibility that I would entertain. Therefore, in my view, it's better to NOT torture hundreds of terrorists who know things, than to wrongly torture an innocent man who knows nothing.
excon
Actually it was a case of mistaken identity . Macedonia identified him . SCOTUS decided without dissent that the State secrets doctrine trumped his claim and that he had no standing in a US Court. . Masri should sue Macedonia .Quote:
My overall point being, that based upon gossip, rumor and innuendo, we arrest people.
Then it's a good thing that you are not a member of the intelligence community or in any way charged with the protection of this country. You would simply be the wrong person for that job. I don't know that I would be the right guy for that job, but your reticense to do whatever it takes to do that job would make you a VERY bad choice.Quote:
Therefore, in my view, it's better to NOT torture hundreds of terrorists who know things, than to wrongly torture an innocent man who knows nothing.
I'm glad that there are those who ARE willing to do whatever it takes.
To paraphrase a statement I once heard on this subject, "G-d forbid if everyone was willing to do whatever it takes to obtain information in the war on terror, and G-d forbid if NOONE was willing to whatever it takes to otain information in the war on terror."
There's a line from one of my favorite movies that sort of puts your position in perspective. The movie is Heartbreak Ridge, (Clint Eastwood, Warner Bros. 1986).
"Characters like you are an anachronism. You should be sealed in a case that says break glass only in the event of war."
I get that. People who really are willing to do ANYTHING to accomplish the mission, no matter how nasty, don't make for good houseguests.
But the war is already here. Time to break the glass and let the nasty guys out of the box to do their jobs.
Kipling also wrote about it in his poem Tommy.
I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o'beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
But it's ``Thank you, Mister Atkins,'' when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's ``Thank you, Mr. Atkins,'' when the band begins to play.
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy how's yer soul?"We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints:
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind,"You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires an' all:
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir," when there's trouble in the wind.
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"People don't like the guys who do nasty stuff to protect them. Killing, torturing, blowing stuff up... it's all very nasty and not the type of thing you want to deal with in polite company. "Real Americans" don't do that stuff. We're better than that. And anyone who is willing to do that stuff is a bad person. But when the planes start crashing into buildings, we demand that the nasty guys in uniform Do Something About It. And when they do something about it, they get reamed out for being too nasty. Personally, I'd rather just say "thank you" and let them get on with their jobs.
But it's "Saviour of 'is country," when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
But Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool - you bet that Tommy sees!
Elliot
excon
I simply can't agree that it is the policy of our government to 'scoop up people without knowing anything about them and torture them. Mistakes may be made, but as I've asked you before…what is the alternative and you have not replied?
There are of course individuals who do not adhere to policies, that is, individuals who believe American values and traditions are so superior to especially mid-eastern values and traditions that people from that heratige have no rights at all. In fact a couple of our board meambers are of that inclination. It's a pity but we can't judge all Americans by that standard, nor should we judge mid-eastern by the standard of terrorist.
.
Isn't that how Gitmo got populated, by "scooping" whoever looked Middle Eastern and was in the wrong place at the wrong time?
From Wikipedia: War in Afghanistan (2001–present) 775 detainees who have been brought to Guantanamo, approximately 420 have been released. (Why?) As of August 09, 2007, approximately 355 detainees remained at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. More than a fifth have been cleared for release but may have to wait months or years for their freedom because U.S. officials are finding it increasingly difficult to line up places to send them, according to Bush administration officials and defense lawyers. (They can't go home?) Of the roughly 355 still incarcerated, U.S. officials said they intend to eventually put 60 to 80 on trial and free the rest. (Why the delay for freeing the rest?)
So most of the detainees were illegally/incorrectly/unfairly incarcerated because they had been "scooped"?
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:47 AM. |