sick
-
http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/reports/docs/Gitmo-compositestatementFINAL23july04.pdf[^] read what the Gitmo prisoners go through. then ask yourself if you believe what happened at Abu Ghraib was an isolated incident, or just the work of a few bad apples. Software | Cleek
You are making the assumption that they have told the truth about the time spent at the camp. Whilst no one doubts that they may have been treated harshly it is a large leap to get to the levels of treatment described - note that these men will, no doubt, attempt to use the report to claim compensation The other side of the coin is that the US is entitled to use whatever means necessary to elicit intelligence from these people to try and ensure the future safety of the American people. Do these murdering terrorists and fanatics really feel that it is okay for them to take innocent lives in cruel, cowardly and degrading ways then, if caught, get a slap on the wrist, a cup of tea and a heated cell with cable?
-
http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/reports/docs/Gitmo-compositestatementFINAL23july04.pdf[^] read what the Gitmo prisoners go through. then ask yourself if you believe what happened at Abu Ghraib was an isolated incident, or just the work of a few bad apples. Software | Cleek
A wise man once said "The level of civilization attained by a nation can be judged by the treatment of its prisoners". Using this as an axiom, I would say the U.S. is now a barbarian nation.
-
A wise man once said "The level of civilization attained by a nation can be judged by the treatment of its prisoners". Using this as an axiom, I would say the U.S. is now a barbarian nation.
So you think it is better to let these poeple do what they want, kill whom thay want and do nothing to negate it? The US has a duty to its own citizens to protect them from outside aggression and are entitled to use whatever means to do so. You certainly wouldn't hold with that opinion if terrorism touched you or your family.
-
You are making the assumption that they have told the truth about the time spent at the camp. Whilst no one doubts that they may have been treated harshly it is a large leap to get to the levels of treatment described - note that these men will, no doubt, attempt to use the report to claim compensation The other side of the coin is that the US is entitled to use whatever means necessary to elicit intelligence from these people to try and ensure the future safety of the American people. Do these murdering terrorists and fanatics really feel that it is okay for them to take innocent lives in cruel, cowardly and degrading ways then, if caught, get a slap on the wrist, a cup of tea and a heated cell with cable?
Anonymous wrote: You are making the assumption that they have told the truth about the time spent at the camp yes, i am. Anonymous wrote: the US is entitled to use whatever means necessary to elicit intelligence from these people to try and ensure the future safety of the American people no, the US isn't. there are laws and treaties which govern the treatment of prisoners. in none of those laws and treaties are we allowed to use "whatever means necessary". Anonymous wrote: Do these murdering terrorists and fanatics really feel that it is okay for them to take innocent lives in cruel, cowardly and degrading ways then, if caught, get a slap on the wrist, a cup of tea and a heated cell with cable? ah, so you've tried and convicted them already, even though the US army has determined these guys were innocent. what was it that convinced you that couldn't convince the Army ? -c Software | Cleek
-
You are making the assumption that they have told the truth about the time spent at the camp. Whilst no one doubts that they may have been treated harshly it is a large leap to get to the levels of treatment described - note that these men will, no doubt, attempt to use the report to claim compensation The other side of the coin is that the US is entitled to use whatever means necessary to elicit intelligence from these people to try and ensure the future safety of the American people. Do these murdering terrorists and fanatics really feel that it is okay for them to take innocent lives in cruel, cowardly and degrading ways then, if caught, get a slap on the wrist, a cup of tea and a heated cell with cable?
Some people exaggerate, angling for a better deal, but there was a news story here in Canada on the son of an Al Qaeda member, named Khadr. He went undercover as a CIA asset, a mole to try to help the US. He was treated like everyone else. He told of the way the camp was run, the brutality, the fact that most were just people turned in by other Afghans claiming reward money. And took a polygraph test, which he passed with flying colors. http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/khadr/alqaedafamily7.html ----------------------------- All truth passes through 3 stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
-
Anonymous wrote: You are making the assumption that they have told the truth about the time spent at the camp yes, i am. Anonymous wrote: the US is entitled to use whatever means necessary to elicit intelligence from these people to try and ensure the future safety of the American people no, the US isn't. there are laws and treaties which govern the treatment of prisoners. in none of those laws and treaties are we allowed to use "whatever means necessary". Anonymous wrote: Do these murdering terrorists and fanatics really feel that it is okay for them to take innocent lives in cruel, cowardly and degrading ways then, if caught, get a slap on the wrist, a cup of tea and a heated cell with cable? ah, so you've tried and convicted them already, even though the US army has determined these guys were innocent. what was it that convinced you that couldn't convince the Army ? -c Software | Cleek
Chris Losinger wrote: yes, i am. Just how naive are you? Chris Losinger wrote: no, the US isn't. there are laws and treaties which govern the treatment of prisoners. in none of those laws and treaties are we allowed to use "whatever means necessary". If someone comes into my house with the avowed intention of harming me or my family then I will not hesitate to use whatever means necessary to ensure the safety of my family up to and including killing him. I will worry about the consequnces of these actions later once my family is safe. The US givt MUST do the same to protect its citizens. These are not 'nice' people who will give up thier intentions because some liberal wants to treat them with respect. They will kill as many of us as they can to achieve their ends. Chris Losinger wrote: ah, so you've tried and convicted them already, even though the US army has determined these guys were innocent. what was it that convinced you that couldn't convince the Army ? Why take the risk? Let them go and they'll come back to haunt you. This, of itself, may be barbaric but when it comes down to you or me it'll be me, everytime. So should it be for a govt protecting its own people.
-
Some people exaggerate, angling for a better deal, but there was a news story here in Canada on the son of an Al Qaeda member, named Khadr. He went undercover as a CIA asset, a mole to try to help the US. He was treated like everyone else. He told of the way the camp was run, the brutality, the fact that most were just people turned in by other Afghans claiming reward money. And took a polygraph test, which he passed with flying colors. http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/khadr/alqaedafamily7.html ----------------------------- All truth passes through 3 stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
-
Chris Losinger wrote: yes, i am. Just how naive are you? Chris Losinger wrote: no, the US isn't. there are laws and treaties which govern the treatment of prisoners. in none of those laws and treaties are we allowed to use "whatever means necessary". If someone comes into my house with the avowed intention of harming me or my family then I will not hesitate to use whatever means necessary to ensure the safety of my family up to and including killing him. I will worry about the consequnces of these actions later once my family is safe. The US givt MUST do the same to protect its citizens. These are not 'nice' people who will give up thier intentions because some liberal wants to treat them with respect. They will kill as many of us as they can to achieve their ends. Chris Losinger wrote: ah, so you've tried and convicted them already, even though the US army has determined these guys were innocent. what was it that convinced you that couldn't convince the Army ? Why take the risk? Let them go and they'll come back to haunt you. This, of itself, may be barbaric but when it comes down to you or me it'll be me, everytime. So should it be for a govt protecting its own people.
Anonymous wrote: Just how naive are you? give me a reason not to believe them. these stories are backed up by other people, including US soldiers who are facing court martial because of these things. Anonymous wrote: I will worry about the consequnces of these actions later once my family is safe. so, you can't prove they're in danger, but you'll know when they're safe ? time to invest in a better crystal ball. Anonymous wrote: Let them go and they'll come back to haunt you. well, they've already been let go. why don't you get on a plane to England and go shoot the fuckers down. anything else would be treason. Software | Cleek
-
So you think it is better to let these poeple do what they want, kill whom thay want and do nothing to negate it? The US has a duty to its own citizens to protect them from outside aggression and are entitled to use whatever means to do so. You certainly wouldn't hold with that opinion if terrorism touched you or your family.
that's not the point, Anonymous coward, the point is that if the USA wants to be the moral/justice/cultural/political/justice leader of the planet, they HAVE to show that they are better than the rest of us, and with those exceptions, I really HOPE that they are exceptions ( however horrible it is ), it makes it hard for other to use them as role model. You treat prisoner well and fair, in the context of them being in prison, they might eventually change their belief that terrorism and war and suffering is not a good thing after all, and that by living peacefully, in Afganistan, and prospering in their own way, both politically, religiously and socially will make them better persons, and in that case, for some, better muslims.
Maximilien Lincourt Your Head A Splode - Strong Bad
-
So you think it is better to let these poeple do what they want, kill whom thay want and do nothing to negate it? The US has a duty to its own citizens to protect them from outside aggression and are entitled to use whatever means to do so. You certainly wouldn't hold with that opinion if terrorism touched you or your family.
I think we should sit back and evaluate what we have accomplished. How much information can you wring out of people 90% of whom are mostly innocent, and the other 10% are dedicated terrorists willing to harikari themselves? Is it worth selling your soul as a civilized nation, on the offchance that it can yield intelligence?
-
Anonymous wrote: Just how naive are you? give me a reason not to believe them. these stories are backed up by other people, including US soldiers who are facing court martial because of these things. Anonymous wrote: I will worry about the consequnces of these actions later once my family is safe. so, you can't prove they're in danger, but you'll know when they're safe ? time to invest in a better crystal ball. Anonymous wrote: Let them go and they'll come back to haunt you. well, they've already been let go. why don't you get on a plane to England and go shoot the fuckers down. anything else would be treason. Software | Cleek
Chris Losinger wrote: give me a reason not to believe them. these stories are backed up by other people, including US soldiers who are facing court martial because of these things. Oh I don't know, beheading innocent people, blowing up innocent people, flying into the twin towers... Chris Losinger wrote: so, you can't prove they're in danger, but you'll know when they're safe ? time to invest in a better crystal ball. I wouldn't like to be your family - you'll wait till the first one dies before you'll take action. Chris Losinger wrote: well, they've already been let go. why don't you get on a plane to England and go shoot the f***ers down. anything else would be treason. I'm in England and I, along with many others, are disgusted and appalled that they were allowed back and then set free. These are men that were brought up here and afforded every opportunity and privilige that this country can offer than went abroad to fight with our enemies against troops from their own country. This is treason so, yes, I would deny them the right to live any longer and threaten my country.
-
that's not the point, Anonymous coward, the point is that if the USA wants to be the moral/justice/cultural/political/justice leader of the planet, they HAVE to show that they are better than the rest of us, and with those exceptions, I really HOPE that they are exceptions ( however horrible it is ), it makes it hard for other to use them as role model. You treat prisoner well and fair, in the context of them being in prison, they might eventually change their belief that terrorism and war and suffering is not a good thing after all, and that by living peacefully, in Afganistan, and prospering in their own way, both politically, religiously and socially will make them better persons, and in that case, for some, better muslims.
Maximilien Lincourt Your Head A Splode - Strong Bad
Maximilien wrote: that's not the point, Anonymous coward, the point is that if the USA wants to be the moral/justice/cultural/political/justice leader of the planet, they HAVE to show that they are better than the rest of us, and with those exceptions, I really HOPE that they are exceptions ( however horrible it is ), it makes it hard for other to use them as role model. Don't be childish - it is irrelevant who I am just as I can't be bothered to register your name since it has no significance for me. Who said that they wanted to be a role model? If we're not careful they'll begin to exhibit the same isolationism that they did prior to WWII. You cannot expect them to be the world's policemen and then moan every time something nasty happens. Maximilien wrote: You treat prisoner well and fair, in the context of them being in prison, they might eventually change their belief that terrorism and war and suffering is not a good thing after all, and that by living peacefully, in Afganistan, and prospering in their own way, both politically, religiously and socially will make them better persons, and in that case, for some, better muslims. In any case just becuase you treat a prioner fairly doesn't mean that they will chnage their ways and repecxt you; far more likely the opposite is true - they will see you as weak and simpering: an easy future target. You all need to grow up. If you had families, young children you would feel differently. And if you don't then god help your families because you clearly don't have the strength or reolve to survive in an increasingly hostile world.
-
First its not a newspaper, it's TV/Radio. Second I saw the interviews of the guy and he is an early 20's guy who doesn't really know how to lie effectively yet, so I would say everything he say is more or less true. ----------------------------- All truth passes through 3 stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
-
Chris Losinger wrote: give me a reason not to believe them. these stories are backed up by other people, including US soldiers who are facing court martial because of these things. Oh I don't know, beheading innocent people, blowing up innocent people, flying into the twin towers... Chris Losinger wrote: so, you can't prove they're in danger, but you'll know when they're safe ? time to invest in a better crystal ball. I wouldn't like to be your family - you'll wait till the first one dies before you'll take action. Chris Losinger wrote: well, they've already been let go. why don't you get on a plane to England and go shoot the f***ers down. anything else would be treason. I'm in England and I, along with many others, are disgusted and appalled that they were allowed back and then set free. These are men that were brought up here and afforded every opportunity and privilige that this country can offer than went abroad to fight with our enemies against troops from their own country. This is treason so, yes, I would deny them the right to live any longer and threaten my country.
Anonymous wrote: Oh I don't know, beheading innocent people, blowing up innocent people, flying into the twin towers... so, these people in the document i linked are connected to al-Q and the 9/11 gang? and you know this for a fact. what is your source for this startling information ? Anonymous wrote: I wouldn't like to be your family - you'll wait till the first one dies before you'll take action take action against who or what? against just any random brown-skinned person ? blow up anything with an arabic sign on it ? get a grip. Anonymous wrote: This is treason so, yes, I would deny them the right to live any longer and threaten my country. must be pretty easy to make big statements like that, from an anonymous account. Software | Cleek
-
First its not a newspaper, it's TV/Radio. Second I saw the interviews of the guy and he is an early 20's guy who doesn't really know how to lie effectively yet, so I would say everything he say is more or less true. ----------------------------- All truth passes through 3 stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Jeff Bogan wrote: First its not a newspaper, it's TV/Radio. Second I saw the interviews of the guy and he is an early 20's guy who doesn't really know how to lie effectively yet, so I would say everything he say is more or less true. Like the medium makes a diffrerence. Doesn't know how to lie because he's young? How naive are you, exactly? You think that no one under, say, thirty, can lie convincingly? With or without training? Finally, can I sell you some swamp land in Florida?
-
Anonymous wrote: Oh I don't know, beheading innocent people, blowing up innocent people, flying into the twin towers... so, these people in the document i linked are connected to al-Q and the 9/11 gang? and you know this for a fact. what is your source for this startling information ? Anonymous wrote: I wouldn't like to be your family - you'll wait till the first one dies before you'll take action take action against who or what? against just any random brown-skinned person ? blow up anything with an arabic sign on it ? get a grip. Anonymous wrote: This is treason so, yes, I would deny them the right to live any longer and threaten my country. must be pretty easy to make big statements like that, from an anonymous account. Software | Cleek
Chris Losinger wrote: so, these people in the document i linked are connected to al-Q and the 9/11 gang? and you know this for a fact. what is your source for this startling information ? Same as your sources: paper, tv, radio. What other sources do you have? What do you need to see before you'll sit up and take action to protect you and yours? Chris Losinger wrote: take action against who or what? against just any random brown-skinned person ? blow up anything with an arabic sign on it ? get a grip. What on earth are you talking about? There are specific threats to western culture and freedom. I don't care what colour they are or what culture thay embrace as long as they threaten my culture they should be dealt with. Would you rather wait until it is too late to take action? Chris Losinger wrote: must be pretty easy to make big statements like that, from an anonymous account. Doh, of course it is. So I signed on. Have a nice day.
-
Chris Losinger wrote: so, these people in the document i linked are connected to al-Q and the 9/11 gang? and you know this for a fact. what is your source for this startling information ? Same as your sources: paper, tv, radio. What other sources do you have? What do you need to see before you'll sit up and take action to protect you and yours? Chris Losinger wrote: take action against who or what? against just any random brown-skinned person ? blow up anything with an arabic sign on it ? get a grip. What on earth are you talking about? There are specific threats to western culture and freedom. I don't care what colour they are or what culture thay embrace as long as they threaten my culture they should be dealt with. Would you rather wait until it is too late to take action? Chris Losinger wrote: must be pretty easy to make big statements like that, from an anonymous account. Doh, of course it is. So I signed on. Have a nice day.
Tony Blair wrote: Same as your sources: paper, tv, radio. What other sources do you have? i have the fact that the US Army, after detaining these guys for 2 years, has released them. since the Army would clearly be more inclined to detain people they thought were even a little dangerous than they would to release them, i have to believe the Army doesn't think they're any danger. Tony Blair wrote: There are specific threats to western culture and freedom hyperbole and empty sloganeering does nothing to fight the actual enemy, it only clouds the issues. Tony Blair wrote: Would you rather wait until it is too late to take action? take action against who or what? on what basis? Software | Cleek
-
Jeff Bogan wrote: First its not a newspaper, it's TV/Radio. Second I saw the interviews of the guy and he is an early 20's guy who doesn't really know how to lie effectively yet, so I would say everything he say is more or less true. Like the medium makes a diffrerence. Doesn't know how to lie because he's young? How naive are you, exactly? You think that no one under, say, thirty, can lie convincingly? With or without training? Finally, can I sell you some swamp land in Florida?
As with everything in life, believing someone is a judgement call. If I can actually hear and see the person who has been through it, I am more likely to believe it. Other clues like youth, no reasons to lie, ideology help as will. Your argument that everything in the newspaper is suspect, while I agree with to some degree, means that everyone is a liar, out to get me for some reason. I think some people manipulate the news, but I think it would be too great a blow to their credibility to actually lie on critical matters. As an aside let me introduce you to a little concept called "Ad Hominem". It means when a debater falls back on attacking the person rather than the issue. It also means you couldn't come up with a valid response to my argument. ----------------------------- All truth passes through 3 stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
-
As with everything in life, believing someone is a judgement call. If I can actually hear and see the person who has been through it, I am more likely to believe it. Other clues like youth, no reasons to lie, ideology help as will. Your argument that everything in the newspaper is suspect, while I agree with to some degree, means that everyone is a liar, out to get me for some reason. I think some people manipulate the news, but I think it would be too great a blow to their credibility to actually lie on critical matters. As an aside let me introduce you to a little concept called "Ad Hominem". It means when a debater falls back on attacking the person rather than the issue. It also means you couldn't come up with a valid response to my argument. ----------------------------- All truth passes through 3 stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Jeff Bogan wrote: As an aside let me introduce you to a little concept called "Ad Hominem". It means when a debater falls back on attacking the person rather than the issue. It also means you couldn't come up with a valid response to my argument. Couldn't the same be said of those that patronise others... And doesn't your robust attack just deflect from the weakness of your own position?
-
Tony Blair wrote: Same as your sources: paper, tv, radio. What other sources do you have? i have the fact that the US Army, after detaining these guys for 2 years, has released them. since the Army would clearly be more inclined to detain people they thought were even a little dangerous than they would to release them, i have to believe the Army doesn't think they're any danger. Tony Blair wrote: There are specific threats to western culture and freedom hyperbole and empty sloganeering does nothing to fight the actual enemy, it only clouds the issues. Tony Blair wrote: Would you rather wait until it is too late to take action? take action against who or what? on what basis? Software | Cleek
Chris Losinger wrote: i have the fact that the US Army, after detaining these guys for 2 years, has released them. since the Army would clearly be more inclined to detain people they thought were even a little dangerous than they would to release them, i have to believe the Army doesn't think they're any danger. Political expediency. Chris Losinger wrote: hyperbole and empty sloganeering does nothing to fight the actual enemy, it only clouds the issues. Not at all - we are under direct threat from islamic extremists whose avowed cause is to destroy western culture. This is sad since the vast majority of muslims are peaceful, law abiding citizens who contribute much to our cultures. Until that threat dissipates we are under direct threat. Or didn't 911 happen? Chris Losinger wrote: take action against who or what? on what basis? It is tiring to repeat oneself since you are now arguing for the sake of it (much like I am). As Mr Spock said, 'The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.' That is as true to day as the day he will say it. Sorry, have to get back now, Gordon is calling from next door; something about a rate rise. Those devils at the Bank of England...