Not-So-Bad Gitmo

[hist2004]

May 27, 2005

Not-So-Bad Gitmo

By Deroy Murdock

While Newsweek has retracted its deadly tall tale about interrogators shoving the Koran down a toilet to rattle Guantanamo detainees, the magazine’s “flush to judgment” fits what Manhattan Institute scholar Heather MacDonald calls the prevailing “torture narrative.” Possibly harmless Muslims languish without trial in U.S. custody. America’s soul dies a little as each GI’s sucker-punch shatters one more Arab’s jaw. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

“You people are no better than and no different than the Nazi concentration camp guards,” a Red Cross representative said in April at a U.S. detention facility in Iraq, according to a Pentagon source quoted in a May 23 Wall Street Journal editorial. Amnesty International Wednesday called Gitmo “the Gulag of our times.”

Journalists and Bushophobes should stop crying for these Islamo-fascists long enough to read a largely overlooked Pentagon document on Guantanamo detainees. They appear pampered, chatty, and lethal.

“Americans are very kind people,” one English-challenged detainee said in the March 4 paper. “If people say there is mistreatment in Cuba with the detainees, those type speaking are wrong, they treat us like a Muslim not a detainee.”

“I’m in good health and have good facilities of eating, drinking, living, and playing,” remarked another. “The food is good, the bedrooms are clean and the health care is very good.”

In a February 16 Gitmo dispatch, an American Forces Press Service report described the treatment of Camp Delta’s roughly 520 detainees from about 40 nations. Troublemakers wear prison-style orange jumpsuits and mainly are confined to rudimentary accommodations. But those who follow camp rules wear white outfits and exercise seven to nine hours daily, often playing soccer and volleyball. In quieter moments, “chess, checkers and playing cards are the most requested items,” Rhem wrote. As for reading, “A security official explained Agatha Christie books in Arabic are very popular and that camp officials are working to get copies of Harry Potter books in Arabic.”

Detainees eat culturally sensitive meals and follow arrows painted on dorm floors to face Mecca. “Prayer calls are broadcast over loudspeakers five times a day,” Rhem added.

Such conditions may have loosened tongues. The report — drearily titled “JTF-GITMO Information on Detainees” — explains that interrogating these men “has expanded our understanding of al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations and continues to prove valuable.” Among these findings:

Detainees “provide useful information on locations of training compounds and safe houses, terrain features, travel patterns and routes used for smuggling people and equipment, as well as for identifying potential supporters and opponents.” U.S. questioning has “expanded our understanding of the extent of their presence in Europe [and] the United States…”

“Detainees provide information that helps sort out legitimate financial activity from illegitimate terrorist financing operations,” the report says.

One detainee “identified a complex detonation system…that had been used in the Chechen conflict, and now is being used on IEDs [Improvised Explosive Devices] in Iraq, helping U.S. forces to combat this lethal weapon.”

Despite this apparent cooperation, enemy combatants remain viciously anti-American and dedicated to mayhem, even after release.

“I will arrange for the kidnapping and execution of US citizens living in Saudi Arabia,” one detainee threatened, if freed. “They will have their heads cut off.”

“There is no need to ask for forgiveness for killing a Jew,” another said. “Israel should not exist and be removed from Palestine.”

One detainee reportedly warned that “upon his release from GTMO, he would use the Internet to search for the names and faces of MPs so that he could kill them.”

Among 167 detainees freed from Guantanamo, the Pentagon has identified “about 12” who have resumed terrorist operations. Last October, two Chinese engineers were kidnapped in Pakistan. “Former detainee Abdullah Mahsud, their reputed leader, ordered the kidnapping,” the report states.

“Another released detainee assassinated an Afghan judge,” the document continues. “Several former GTMO detainees have been killed in combat with U.S. soldiers and Coalition forces.”

So, a number of Osama bin Laden’s buddies find Gitmo relatively comfortable. They provide intelligence that helps U.S. and European soldiers, spies, and cops keep themselves and us alive. Meanwhile, many detainees ache to get out, so they can kill Americans.

That’s the Pentagon’s story, anyway. They have yet to retract it.

Regards,
Hist2004

[RGRBOX]

huh...

good read... make you wonder if just taking them out back and blowing their brains out would be serve...

[Slug69]

Before anyone posts anymore, please do a search on the author "Deroy Murdock" and see what organization he contributes to.

About the "About 12 former detainees" the Pentagon mentions, all they say is "Involved in anti-coalition activities" not "resumed terrorist operations." I suggest to any reader of this post to take it with a grain of salt and investigate the claims.

The Pentagon report itself doesn't detail any names except the one mentioned in the story, and that name came only from press reports. (Fox News and Washington Post.) The person in question is an amputee, so even the cripples are just as lethal!

[hist2004]

Before anyone posts anymore, please do a search on the author "Deroy Murdock" and see what organization he contributes to.

Relevance?


About the "About 12 former detainees" the Pentagon mentions, all they say is "Involved in anti-coalition activities" not "resumed terrorist operations." I suggest to any reader of this post to take it with a grain of salt and investigate the claims.

Isn’t it the same thing? Why should we take it with a grain of salt? What are your sources?

Regards,
Hist2004

[Slug69]

Relevance?

Agenda and credibility.


Isn’t it the same thing? Why should we take it with a grain of salt? What are your sources?

Regards,
Hist2004

Because they don't detail what the hell the "Anti Coalition activities" are. I would have thought the Pentagon would have been putting any concrete evidence about violence and terrorist acts perpetrated by these 12 on public display, not buried in a pdf file on the defenselink website authored by HFORD, whoever that is. For all we know, the pentagons idea of anti coalition activity could also include non-violent, passive demonstrations.

You should take it with a grain of salt because Mr. Murdock has embellished the report changing the Pentagons wording to "resumed terrorist activities."

Chinese whispers by someone who wants to make a mountain out of a mole hill to suit their own agenda.

[hist2004]

Agenda and credibility.

Question- isn’t the article about treatment of Enemy combatants taken from the battlefield who were fighting the United States, out of uniform, and not representing any country, and how they’re being treated in captivity? Perhaps you disagree with the US war on terror..if
you do, say so…Instead of dealing with facts of the article you immediately try to discredit
the Author instead of dealing with how these people are being treated.

Let’s discuss credibility for a moment, and look at a few anti-US remarks, talk about an agenda:

“Possibly harmless Muslims languish without trial in U.S. custody.” These people were taken
off the battlefield, in case Heather MacDonald was wondering.

““You people are no better than and no different than the Nazi concentration camp guards,” a Red Cross representative said in April at a U.S. detention facility in Iraq, according to a Pentagon source quoted in a May 23 Wall Street Journal editorial. Amnesty International Wednesday called Gitmo “the Gulag of our times.”
Red Cross, being the International Red Cross, a far left leaning organization not to be confused with the American Red Cross. Nazi concentration camp guards???? Does anyone
actually believe that? What a disgrace to associate our troops with those animals.

“Americans are very kind people,” one English-challenged detainee said in the March 4 paper. “If people say there is mistreatment in Cuba with the detainees, those type speaking are wrong, they treat us like a Muslim not a detainee.”
“I’m in good health and have good facilities of eating, drinking, living, and playing,” remarked another. “The food is good, the bedrooms are clean and the health care is very good.”

“Detainees eat culturally sensitive meals and follow arrows painted on dorm floors to face Mecca. “Prayer calls are broadcast over loudspeakers five times a day,” Rhem added.”

“Chinese whispers by someone who wants to make a mountain out of a mole hill to suit their own agenda.”
I could look at your comment and make the same assumption.

The mistake the Bush Administration has made is not holding Military Tribunals for these
people to put them where they’ll never harm the US again.

Food for thought….don’t always believe the New York Times…L.A. Times and company who
hate the Bush Administration so much they do so at the detriment of their own country.

Regards,
Hist2004

[Slug69]

Question- isn’t the article about treatment of Enemy combatants taken from the battlefield who were fighting the United States, out of uniform, and not representing any country, and how they’re being treated in captivity? Perhaps you disagree with the US war on terror..if
you do, say so…Instead of dealing with facts of the article you immediately try to discredit the Author instead of dealing with how these people are being treated.

The "facts" of the article are in question because the author has embellished a statement from the "Pentagon" document. He has interpreted the document the same way a fanatical muslim interprets the Koran. He's a scumbag.

What is your idea or definition of a battlefield? It is clearly not the same as mine.

Rumsfeld himself has already agreed just because people are out of uniform doesn't mean they don't represent a country. It had to be dragged out of him in a TV interview. BTW, the article doesn't talk about the out of uniform business, probably because it is a non issue.

I have never argued against the war on terror, only it's execution.


Let’s discuss credibility for a moment, and look at a few anti-US remarks, talk about an agenda:

“Possibly harmless Muslims languish without trial in U.S. custody.”


These people were taken
off the battlefield, in case Heather MacDonald was wondering. So, are you saying there were no detainees wrongly detained? Pfffttt...


““You people are no better than and no different than the Nazi concentration camp guards,” a Red Cross representative said in April at a U.S. detention facility in Iraq, according to a Pentagon source quoted in a May 23 Wall Street Journal editorial. Amnesty International Wednesday called Gitmo “the Gulag of our times.”
Red Cross, being the International Red Cross, a far left leaning organization not to be confused with the American Red Cross. Nazi concentration camp guards???? Does anyone actually believe that? What a disgrace to associate our troops with those animals.

That far left leaning organization is the same far left leaning organization that ensures United States Prisoners of War are treated fairly and receive their mail and are properly fed. Twit.


“Chinese whispers by someone who wants to make a mountain out of a mole hill to suit their own agenda.”
I could look at your comment and make the same assumption.

You haven't actually come out and said you believe this article 100%. Are you afraid of being a laughing stock? The article has zero credibility with me because I believe the author is deliberately trying to skew things wrongly. I also think the Pentagon pdf is a bit suspect too, otherwise there would have been a more public presentation of this report.


The mistake the Bush Administration has made is not holding Military Tribunals for these
people to put them where they’ll never harm the US again.

Fair enough. But have you thought why there haven't been summary court martials for a lot of these people caught on the "Battlefield?" Because very few of them have been caught in the traditional battlefield sense and a lot of them have been unarmed at the time of capture. The officers who capture these people aren't 100% certain about their status or they genuinely believe they might have intelligence value. AFAIK I haven't heard of any summary court martials yet at all.


Food for thought….don’t always believe the New York Times…L.A. Times and company who
hate the Bush Administration so much they do so at the detriment of their own country.

Regards,
Hist2004

I am not a subscriber or reader of those newspapers, but they certainly have more credibility as newspapers than the twit who embellished that article.

[hist2004]

I believe the article is accurate-the enemy combatants being held there
are being treated with more respect than our soldiers would ever be….

The International Red Cross is anti-US sorry if you don’t believe that..

Are any of the people held at GITMO non-combatants?? Hardly, they’re
highly vetted before being processed and sent there…

Afraid of being a laughing stock??? Check my posts for the past year,

Those newspaper organizations have zero credibility…only an anti-Bush
Administration agenda….

Regards,
Hist2004

[Weasel]

The International Red Cross is anti-US sorry if you don’t believe that..

Regards,
Hist2004

I´m curious. How do you come to this conclusion?

[Freibier]

tool

[Conga]

The International Red Cross is anti-US sorry if you don’t believe that..



rofl

[Slug69]

I believe the article is accurate-the enemy combatants being held there
are being treated with more respect than our soldiers would ever be….

Ask the FBI if they are being held with respect. Field agents sent to gather information have come away concerned about the methods and treatment used to glean information from these detainees. For instance, do you think a trained Al Queda operative will give out any information just by draping an Isreali flag around them? Come on man. It is the being held thing that bothers me. We have only seen two or three of the detainees charged with crimes out of over 600 and most of them have been there longer than 3 years. I believe this is completely wrong. The US Government says they will release them when the war is over in accordance to normal POW regs or if they no longed deem them to be a threat to the US. Pfffttt.... I somehow don't see the terrorists of this world signing a surrender document on the back of the Missouri. It should all be dealt with with leadership from law enforcement agencies with the army as firepower only. The leadership should come from police investigation.


The International Red Cross is anti-US sorry if you don’t believe that..

If you truly believe this, why does the IRC make it's reports of abuse only available to US Govt. eyes only? The reports that we have seen have all been found to be leaked by humanitarians in the US Govt. who believe the world should know what is going on. They weren't leaked by the IRC. I will remind you again, many American Soldiers will attest to the integrity of the IRC, without the IRC POW's the world over might have disappeared without a trace, including many Americans. I am sorry you believe the International Red Cross is Anti-US. I would like to see what makes you think this to be the case.


Are any of the people held at GITMO non-combatants?? Hardly, they’re
highly vetted before being processed and sent there…

Highly vetted by who? People who get monies for dobbing in people? People who might be the baker in the village where Al Quaeda was based? You know what is funny to watch? The press conference each time they release detainees by the Pentagon. Where the speaker is asked by Journalists, "Why are they being released?" The speaker says because they have been deemed to not be a threat to the US any longer. The Journalists will then ask "How do you know they aren't going to be a threat?" The speaker squirms. The journalist then asks "Were any of these people being released today never a threat to the US?" - The speaker never answers yes or know to that question.

It disgusts me the US uses methods that it's own constitution forbids. The last time the US prosecuted a war in an un-American fashion, they had to withdraw. Vietnam being the place that stands out the most. The US has never been so poorly led as it is now. They have involved itself in a war with too few troops in a country that has overland borders with at least four countries that have populations hostile to the US. I mean, hello? How stupid can you be?


Afraid of being a laughing stock??? Check my posts for the past year,

No thanks. Don't have time. So it is a given then you support what this article reported 100%. Even though I have clearly pointed out the author didn't directly quote the original Defenselink document and deliberately chose to change the wording?


Those newspaper organizations have zero credibility…only an anti-Bush
Administration agenda….

Regards,
Hist2004

I have seen many people here say that about those newspapers. What the hell happened? I am a firm believer in dealing with issues in a matter of fact way. Bad things can be exposed if you are patient. I thought CBS was a very conservative organization with Dan Rather at the helm. He obviously let his dislike of GW fall into the trap of not checking his sources. This, to me, was one of the saddest days in the US Media. In their zeal to get something concrete on the prez they fell on their faces. Far as I am concerned, if there wasn't going to be impeachment proceedings over what came out of the 9/11 investigations, Mr. Bush is untouchable.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

I thought CBS was a very conservative organization with Dan Rather at the helm. He obviously let his dislike of GW fall into the trap of not checking his sources. This, to me, was one of the saddest days in the US Media. In their zeal to get something concrete on the prez they fell on their faces.

rofl

When did you start watching CBS, the day before Rather's ginned-up story? He and CBS "News" have been a running joke for years. There are internet sites devoted solely to Rather's off-the-cuff remarks during election coverage dating back to the 80's that clearly revealed his bias and agenda. The Bush papers were the last straw, not the first. It was a simple case of Rather getting sloppy as his mind continued to dissolve. If this is the standard by which you judge news organizations, I'm afraid you've long ago missed the boat.

[b33f]

The International Red Cross is anti-US sorry if you don’t believe that..

Regards,
Hist2004

I´m curious. How do you come to this conclusion?

Didn't ya read this, hippie?


““You people are no better than and no different than the Nazi concentration camp guards,” a Red Cross representative said in April at a U.S. detention facility in Iraq, according to a Pentagon source quoted in a May 23 Wall Street Journal editorial. Amnesty International Wednesday called Gitmo “the Gulag of our times.”

What a load of bull!

[Slug69]

Ummm, there have been a few documented cases of prisoners these past couple of years beaten to death by US guards/interrogators. That sounds like a typical Nazi guard thing doesn't it?

This is where you go: "AH HA! but not Guantanamo Bay guards."

The FBI has letters from it's field agents sent there concerned about how some of the prisoners have been treated. Some had evidence of being beaten and tortured and that is what the FBI reported. Course, what do field agents know? They only reported there were middle eastern men learning to fly airplanes in the US so they could hijack aircraft...

[mi35d]

<<That far left leaning organization is the same far left leaning organization that ensures United States Prisoners of War are treated fairly and receive their mail and are properly fed. Twit.>>

Hmmm...like in places such as Korea or possibly Vietnam? Apparently you need to read about a fun resort that was four star certified by the International Red Cross called, "The Hanoi Hilton". Yep. Treated fairly? So being hanged by your wrists tied behind your back for a week, I'd say that's reeeeal fair. Mail??? Properly fed??? The POW's in VietNam were lucky if they recived a daily bowl of rice.

OR how about Japanese POW camps? The Red Cross did a bang up job! Suvival rates for Western prisoners were as low as 26% in certain camps. Glad they were there to help out.

Meanwhile, where is the outcry from the Red Cross concerning the treatment of civilians and military prisoners at the hands of insurgents? (Maybe they've forgotten the whole - hacking of the heads thing.)

Twit.

[Weasel]

““You people are no better than and no different than the Nazi concentration camp guards,” a Red Cross representative said in April at a U.S. detention facility in Iraq, according to a Pentagon source quoted in a May 23 Wall Street Journal editorial. Amnesty International Wednesday called Gitmo “the Gulag of our times.”

What a load of bull!

One red cross representative = the red cross? rofl

But yes, if humanity and peace is anti-US then the Red Cross and Amnesty International are anti-US. woot

[stoked]

"hist2004 wrote:

The International Red Cross is anti-US sorry if you don’t believe that.. "

Isn't their nickname the Red Crescent? On the one hand, liberals say, "oh everyone hates America". On the other hand it's "oh, what makes you think they're anti-American".

[Sayeret]

Before anyone posts anymore, please do a search on the author "Deroy Murdock" and see what organization he contributes to.

About the "About 12 former detainees" the Pentagon mentions, all they say is "Involved in anti-coalition activities" not "resumed terrorist operations." I suggest to any reader of this post to take it with a grain of salt and investigate the claims.

I don't find the idea of people going back to continue fighting for their belief after being in a prison that implausible. Many soldiers during World War II escaped POW camps and fought rejoined their comrades and started fighting again.


The Pentagon report itself doesn't detail any names except the one mentioned in the story, and that name came only from press reports. (Fox News and Washington Post.) The person in question is an amputee, so even the cripples are just as lethal!

I remember reading a journal from a soldier who fought in the Soviet-Afghan War. He said that wounded soldiers were much worse than healthy ones because the wounded ones have nothing to loose and will do whatever they can to hurt or kill you.

[Sayeret]

Ummm, there have been a few documented cases of prisoners these past couple of years beaten to death by US guards/interrogators. That sounds like a typical Nazi guard thing doesn't it?

The Nazis did a lot more than just beat to death concentration camp victims. The comparison is very crude and rather immature. Back when I was in 9th grade I remember hearing people compare Bush to Hitler. If you want people to respect your opinion you can't compare things to such extremes.

[Mailman]

““You people are no better than and no different than the Nazi concentration camp guards,” a Red Cross representative said in April at a U.S. detention facility in Iraq, according to a Pentagon source quoted in a May 23 Wall Street Journal editorial. Amnesty International Wednesday called Gitmo “the Gulag of our times.”

What a load of bull!

One red cross representative = the red cross? rofl

But yes, if humanity and peace is anti-US then the Red Cross and Amnesty International are anti-US. woot


Ummm, there have been a few documented cases of prisoners these past couple of years beaten to death by US guards/interrogators. That sounds like a typical Nazi guard thing doesn't it?

And some suddenly equals all? rofl

The double standards never cease to amaze me.

Mailman

[Dexx]

Its funny how criticism is equated with being anti-US. Hm? "Either you are with us or against us, don't question anything, we are always right!" Those sayings aren't the brightest ones and so are you. Some may say: Typical American arrogance :)

[Slug69]

Hmmm...like in places such as Korea or possibly Vietnam? Apparently you need to read about a fun resort that was four star certified by the International Red Cross called, "The Hanoi Hilton". Yep. Treated fairly? So being hanged by your wrists tied behind your back for a week, I'd say that's reeeeal fair. Mail??? Properly fed??? The POW's in VietNam were lucky if they recived a daily bowl of rice.

OR how about Japanese POW camps? The Red Cross did a bang up job! Suvival rates for Western prisoners were as low as 26% in certain camps. Glad they were there to help out.

Meanwhile, where is the outcry from the Red Cross concerning the treatment of civilians and military prisoners at the hands of insurgents? (Maybe they've forgotten the whole - hacking of the heads thing.)

Twit.

Ok, now let me get this straight...are you saying the ICRC was running these POW camps in Vietnam and WW2?

Let me point out a few things to you little boy.

1. US pilots captured by North Vietnam were never afforded POW status because the US and North Vietnam refused to declare war on each other. The North Vietnamese always threatened to try US Pilots as common criminals or "Pirates" was their term because they bombed and killed North Vietnamese. They never went through with this threat.

The North Vietnamese as well as the South Vietnamese didn't have much respect for "Neutral" agencies because they had no experience with them. They tortured many pilots and soldiers until they couldn't get any more out of them. The ICRC did not torture these people. Once the US Govt. found out individual names of people being held in North Vietnam they put pressure on North Vietnam militarily and politically as well as going the ICRC channels in Switzerland. Once POW's were identified by the US Government (How they found out about them is an amazing story of mail going out by hand through visitors and journalists from other countries visiting the jails - including Jane Fonda.)

The final repatriation of US Pow's was facilitated by the ICRC.

2. The ICRC was not running Japanese POW Camps during WW2, the Japanese were. Did you really think the ICRC was even able to go near a Japanese POW camp?

3. If you care to take a look at the article, the Nazi Guard comment was said in confidence as all discussions with government officials and ICRC. The actual release of the ICRC comments came from a pentagon official, not the ICRC. The ICRC never releases POW inspection reports to the public, only to the warring countries officials.

4. To all the other halfwits commenting on the Nazi Guard thing, I want to be sure you hear me again. "I believe during World War 2, Nazi Guards probably beat someone to death maybe even more than once." Of course they did worse than that, but what was said by the ICRC official along the lines this is something that could be expected of a Nazi Guard, seems pretty valid to me.

5. I personally don't hold the ICRC responsible for the beheadings of people in Iraq. I am pretty confident they weren't there with these scumbags because none of them seem to be part of a recognized state...

Grow up. The ICRC is doing it's best to protect all people, including Americans. Don't put **** on the people who will eventually be used to repatriate your own countrymen. It makes you look kind of dumb really.

[Slug69]

I don't find the idea of people going back to continue fighting for their belief after being in a prison that implausible. Many soldiers during World War II escaped POW camps and fought rejoined their comrades and started fighting again.

I would expect someone who ESCAPED from a POW camp to maybe fight again. It is a bit different to someone who is RELEASED.

A bad analogy. Why doesn't the Pentagon detail these 12 peoples names so we can verify things? The Pentagon seems to be able to give names and places quite easily for any other things they are sure about. Why not this?


I remember reading a journal from a soldier who fought in the Soviet-Afghan War. He said that wounded soldiers were much worse than healthy ones because the wounded ones have nothing to loose and will do whatever they can to hurt or kill you.

I doubt the US released this guy in a "Wounded" state. I am sure the US would have given him the best treatment possible for any injuries he may have suffered, as evidenced by the stellar performance of US Medical teams in the field and in their Hospitals.

[Slug69]

Triple posting because my pc is swapping quotes around + one of my replies was very long. Please accept my apologies.


And some suddenly equals all? rofl

The double standards never cease to amaze me.

Mailman

Hmmm, lets see, who do you believe? The ICRC or that bastion of truth and Security, the Pentagon?

Again I point out that the quote is secondhand coming from a Pentagon official about what one person in the ICRC said while inspecting a POW camp IN IRAQ, not Gitmo, so really have a close look at what is being said. The conditions at detention centres in Iraq and the many murders (3 known and 8 others under investigation) that occured there by US guards could easily lend itself to that sort of criticism.

The author of the document is talking about Gitmo but drops in the comment from the ICRC about prison camps in IRAQ hoping you won't notice. It is a classic subject association technique, crudely used here to imply the ICRC are talking about conditions in Gitmo.

Absolute scumbag.

Back on topic about Gitmo, the FBI memos from field agents also confirm what fears the ICRC have about the treatment of prisoners there. Ok, that is the ICRC and the FBI being anti-American now, right?

FFS.

[b33f]

““You people are no better than and no different than the Nazi concentration camp guards,” a Red Cross representative said in April at a U.S. detention facility in Iraq, according to a Pentagon source quoted in a May 23 Wall Street Journal editorial. Amnesty International Wednesday called Gitmo “the Gulag of our times.”

What a load of bull!

One red cross representative = the red cross? rofl

But yes, if humanity and peace is anti-US then the Red Cross and Amnesty International are anti-US. woot
That's why it says "representative" there, his opinion represents that of the Red Cross, otherwise he wouldn't represent it. Can you follow me this far?

The reason for this is so ppl don't have to question every single RC member to get the overall opinion.

If someone wants to represent Humanity and Freedom he has to do something ACTIVE to make sure it is granted for each and every individual. The U.S. tries to do that, the AI just talk. As soon as the AI buys an aircraft carrier and/or goes in for the kill, i'll take my statement back.

Diplomacy has rarely provided the punch line.

[Conga]

The U.S. tries to do that, the AI just talk.

AI at least says stuff that is true.

[mi35d]

Ok, now let me get this straight...are you saying the ICRC was running these POW camps in Vietnam and WW2?

Let me point out a few things to you little boy.

1. US pilots captured by North Vietnam were never afforded POW status because the US and North Vietnam refused to declare war on each other. The North Vietnamese always threatened to try US Pilots as common criminals or "Pirates" was their term because they bombed and killed North Vietnamese. They never went through with this threat.

The North Vietnamese as well as the South Vietnamese didn't have much respect for "Neutral" agencies because they had no experience with them. They tortured many pilots and soldiers until they couldn't get any more out of them. The ICRC did not torture these people. Once the US Govt. found out individual names of people being held in North Vietnam they put pressure on North Vietnam militarily and politically as well as going the ICRC channels in Switzerland. Once POW's were identified by the US Government (How they found out about them is an amazing story of mail going out by hand through visitors and journalists from other countries visiting the jails - including Jane Fonda.)

The final repatriation of US Pow's was facilitated by the ICRC.

2. The ICRC was not running Japanese POW Camps during WW2, the Japanese were. Did you really think the ICRC was even able to go near a Japanese POW camp?

Well, first of all, I didn't need to post some sort of personal snide remark as you did so here we go, "little fag", look back and see what I wrote - I made no mention of Nazis, etc. You've grouped several people's posts into one attack on me. Typical leftist bull****.

Secondly, **** you and your threats in PM's. Ooooh, I'm shaking! I have my opinion and I'm not going to delete it - I'm still waiting for you to "destroy me". You're a coward. You basically prove my point - by stating that the US servicement were tortured and mistreated. The IIRC had nothing to do with their safe conduct home until 1973 when it was a situation of overwhelming international pressure and the massive bombing campaigns in 1972. The IRC has been a paper tiger throughout every conflict. They inspected Japanese camps in WWII (hence my comment about them in WWII) and they inspected camps in Vietnam, etc. They wagged a finger or two but for the most part gave tacit approval of the conditions. Care packages and medical supplies that never make it to the prisoners doesn't mean they did their jobs.

I never said that the IRC ran the camps. My comment was concerning posts praising the IRC as some paragon of virtue. They have done little to ease the sufferings of US and foriegn prisoners over the years and to believe otherwise is foolish.

Throughout my tenure here as a forum member I have been respectful of my fellow members. If you can't remain civil then take your ass elsewhere.

[Slug69]

Well, first of all, I didn't need to post some sort of personal snide remark as you did so here we go, "little fag", look back and see what I wrote - I made no mention of Nazis, etc. You've grouped several people's posts into one attack on me. Typical leftist bull****.

You were the one who waded into my argument with hist004 and called me a twit. You hadn't posted anything in this thread before. That means you started the name calling...twit.

I did say, "to all the other halfwits" who made remarks about the Nazi guard comment. It wasn't directed at you personally. The moderators don't like people double posting let alone triple posting like I had to do.


Secondly, f*** you and your threats in PM's. Ooooh, I'm shaking! I have my opinion and I'm not going to delete it - I'm still waiting for you to "destroy me". You're a coward. You basically prove my point - by stating that the US servicemen were tortured and mistreated. The IIRC had nothing to do with their safe conduct home until 1973 when it was a situation of overwhelming international pressure and the massive bombing campaigns in 1972. The IRC has been a paper tiger throughout every conflict. They inspected Japanese camps in WWII (hence my comment about them in WWII) and they inspected camps in Vietnam, etc. They wagged a finger or two but for the most part gave tacit approval of the conditions. Care packages and medical supplies that never make it to the prisoners doesn't mean they did their jobs.

I will never be able to destroy you if you can't take in what I and a few others have posted here. I gave you a chance to remove your post privately but you decided to embarrass yourself anyway.

The ICRC had everything to do with their safe conduct home and nothing to do with their mistreatment. The arrangements were made through ICRC officials and no one else. Yes, if it wasn't for international pressure and the bombing campaigns probably nothing would have happened. The use of the ICRC channels was the quickest way of getting them out. If they weren't there how would they have been released? I believe the US captives would have stayed a day or two longer hmmm? Yes, the ICRC has been a paper tiger. It has no power at all except to inform the heads of state of the warring parties involved.

They wagged a finger or two. That is all they do. I don't know how many times I have to reiterate to people this: THE ICRC ONLY MAKES IT'S REPORTS AVAILABLE TO THE PARTIES INVOLVED. THEY DO NOT RELEASE POW INSPECTION REPORTS TO THE PUBLIC. I am curious to know which prison camps were inspected by the ICRC being run by the Japanese. I suspect they were the ones in Japan which were a lot better than the ones in the occupied countries.

It's official, you can write, but you cannot read...


I never said that the IRC ran the camps. My comment was concerning posts praising the IRC as some paragon of virtue. They have done little to ease the sufferings of US and foriegn prisoners over the years and to believe otherwise is foolish.

If it wasn't for the ICRC which is made up of caring human beings even from belligerent countries who are willing to report the bad things that happen, to HQ in Switzerland, most captured US Soldiers would never be seen again or would have had far worse treatment.


Throughout my tenure here as a forum member I have been respectful of my fellow members. If you can't remain civil then take your ass elsewhere.

Don't come in out of the blue in between someone els's argument, call someone a twit, then not expect the same in kind.

[Rifleman]

Under the rules of war any and all of them could have been executed by firing squad. IMO they all got off easy....too easy.

We should have declared war and shot these pukes for being the spies and merc's that they are and we would have avoided all this sore pussy, boo hooing.

[Weasel]

The U.S. tries to do that, the AI just talk.

AI at least says stuff that is true.

Remember, the US is a peaceful nation. AI belongs to the axis of evil. p-)

[Kilgor]

Jeez.. gitmo being compared to gulags and nazi guards.

What crack are these ****tards at the red cross smoking ?

Dont they read books or watch ww2 documentries ?

[mi35d]

Oh, this is sooo, sad. Hardly worth the effort, but I feel I must.

This is a FORUM. People are having discussions. If you want to have a private conversation with Hist2004 then feel free and PM. Otherwise, everyone who feels like it can add their comments.

As for the "twit" comment, it was in reply to your comment aimed at Hist2004. I don't know him nor was it in defense of him. We can all hold our own here. But, it was meant to display disbelief at your naive view of the IRC and your need to make a mild, yet still vocal, personal slap.

Your posts are a continuous litany of vitriol - no facts but opinion. Clearly you see this as being your right and privilege, meanwhile the rest of us aren't allowed to express our own views on world politics lest we suffer from your ramblings.

I gave you a chance to remove your post privately but you decided to embarrass yourself anyway. No, you threatened me in your PM like a bully on a playground. I've dealt with far greater threats in my life than the likes of you.

I haven't done anything to embarrass myself, therefore I haven't felt the need to delete or edit anything. Nor will I. Once again, I understand the concept of a political forum whereas you sadly do not. If someone disagrees you start verbal attacks mixed with your ranting opinion.

I will never be able to destroy you if you can't take in what I and a few others have posted here. You're right - you won't be able to "destroy me" as you are clearly intellectually inferior. Let's see, as long as I and others believe EXACTLY as you believe then we're o.k. in your book?

Back to the topic at hand - the release of US POW's in Vietnam had nothing to do with the IRC. It was part of the Paris peace accords. Simple, over, done.

If it wasn't for the ICRC which is made up of caring human beings even from belligerent countries who are willing to report the bad things that happen, to HQ in Switzerland, most captured US Soldiers would never be seen again or would have had far worse treatment.

O.k. I'll make this even easier for you: Lets go back to WW2. The Swiss checked out the German concentration camps at the behest of other world governments and said that there was nothing wrong going on. This isn't speculation, this is history. Meanwhile, these "caring human beings", while turning a blind eye, were more than willing to launder money and hide gold, etc. for the Germans. This is an organization that you would have us believe is only looking out for the best interests of detainees and has absolutely NO political agendas.

Don't come in out of the blue in between someone else’s argument,

So, when you're planning on starting a flame war with someone, could you invite me ahead of time so when I make my comments in an OPEN FORUM you won't accuse me of "coming out of the blue"?

Lastly, here's a tip if you ever decide to be a lawyer - you don't make arguments and then agree with 90% of the other person's statements. It makes your case empty.

[Slug69]

Oh, this is sooo, sad. Hardly worth the effort, but I feel I must.

This is a FORUM. People are having discussions. If you want to have a private conversation with Hist2004 then feel free and PM. Otherwise, everyone who feels like it can add their comments.

As for the "twit" comment, it was in reply to your comment aimed at Hist2004. I don't know him nor was it in defense of him. We can all hold our own here. But, it was meant to display disbelief at your naive view of the IRC and your need to make a mild, yet still vocal, personal slap.

Your posts are a continuous litany of vitriol - no facts but opinion. Clearly you see this as being your right and privilege, meanwhile the rest of us aren't allowed to express our own views on world politics lest we suffer from your ramblings.

I gave you a chance to remove your post privately but you decided to embarrass yourself anyway. No, you threatened me in your PM like a bully on a playground. I've dealt with far greater threats in my life than the likes of you.

I haven't done anything to embarrass myself, therefore I haven't felt the need to delete or edit anything. Nor will I. Once again, I understand the concept of a political forum whereas you sadly do not. If someone disagrees you start verbal attacks mixed with your ranting opinion.

I will never be able to destroy you if you can't take in what I and a few others have posted here. You're right - you won't be able to "destroy me" as you are clearly intellectually inferior. Let's see, as long as I and others believe EXACTLY as you believe then we're o.k. in your book?

Back to the topic at hand - the release of US POW's in Vietnam had nothing to do with the IRC. It was part of the Paris peace accords. Simple, over, done.

If it wasn't for the ICRC which is made up of caring human beings even from belligerent countries who are willing to report the bad things that happen, to HQ in Switzerland, most captured US Soldiers would never be seen again or would have had far worse treatment.

O.k. I'll make this even easier for you: Lets go back to WW2. The Swiss checked out the German concentration camps at the behest of other world governments and said that there was nothing wrong going on. This isn't speculation, this is history. Meanwhile, these "caring human beings", while turning a blind eye, were more than willing to launder money and hide gold, etc. for the Germans. This is an organization that you would have us believe is only looking out for the best interests of detainees and has absolutely NO political agendas.

Don't come in out of the blue in between someone else’s argument,

So, when you're planning on starting a flame war with someone, could you invite me ahead of time so when I make my comments in an OPEN FORUM you won't accuse me of "coming out of the blue"?

Lastly, here's a tip if you ever decide to be a lawyer - you don't make arguments and then agree with 90% of the other person's statements. It makes your case empty.

You are hilarious.

Now you are saying the ICRC had something to do with money laundering? I thought that was the Swiss banks who to this day still shelter monies gained from criminal activities.

I guess your logic is because the ICRC headquarters are in Switzerland they must be one in the same! Well then, because the UN is based in New York they must be run by the US! I did a search using the terms: Red Cross money laundering during world war 2 - and didn't find anything remotely close to what you implied. What was interesting was it came up with money laundering accusations at GWB grandfather!

You are an embarrassment to this forum. Scram! Don't come back until you get your facts straight and can point out a miss-truth posted by me.

[mi35d]

What is it with you and your desire to have anyone who doesn't agree with your brand of politics leave the forum? If you want to play that game, I'll reduce my self to your 2nd grade level - I've been here longer; YOU leave. :bash:

Once again, your threats are empty and foolish. They just continue to prove that you only value your own opinion and are as closed minded as you claim I and others are on various topics.

Your profile suits you - "armchair general and knowitall".

Btw, YOU mentioned the Swiss in general in referance to the IRC. So, I generalized as well in response. This grows old. Don't you have some pictures of Mud Marines to post?

[Mailman]

Slug said, I did a search using the terms: Red Cross money laundering during world war 2 - and didn't find anything remotely close to what you implied. What was interesting was it came up with money laundering accusations at GWB grandfather!

Are you saying the Swiss did not launder money for the Germans or confiscate the savings of Jews who went missing?

Mailman

[2RHPZ]

I didn´t intend to post anymore in this section from known reasons but now I have to do that. Please, don´t attack members like hist2004, go to read his recent posts, try to go out of this Idiotic Political Section shell for a while, look from the window at the real world. Then stay in your chairs and let the right guys to do their job, that in the final, will save even your world ... not just their one. Most of you guys have no clue how hard it is out there in the field ... to deal with the scum, so STFU and stay in your synthetic, guileless world.

CAG 147

[Slug69]

Under the rules of war any and all of them could have been executed by firing squad. IMO they all got off easy....too easy.

We should have declared war and shot these pukes for being the spies and merc's that they are and we would have avoided all this sore pussy, boo hooing.

We don't know how many of these detainees were caught with weapons in hand on the battlefield. I think any ranking officer who comes across people in this manner and deems them to be spies and sabatouers can do something like a field court martial and have them wacked. I think though, many of them were kicked down to the US from other govt. soldiers/police.


Mailman - Are you saying the Swiss did not launder money for the Germans or confiscate the savings of Jews who went missing?

No, if you had read my post, I was defending the ICRC from the pathetic claim that they had something to do with Swiss banks confiscating the savings of Jews who went missing as well as laundering money for the Germans.


mi35d - Btw, YOU mentioned the Swiss in general in referance to the IRC. So, I generalized as well in response. This grows old. Don't you have some pictures of Mud Marines to post?

I said Switzerland, where the headquarters is. You should have known this because you are the one who claimed to have the superior intellect. You associated the Red Cross with Swiss Banks and their horrible actions during the war.


CAG 147 - Please, don´t attack members like hist2004, go to read his recent posts, try to go out of this Idiotic Political Section shell for a while, look from the window at the real world. Then stay in your chairs and let the right guys to do their job, that in the final, will save even your world ... not just their one. Most of you guys have no clue how hard it is out there in the field ... to deal with the scum, so STFU and stay in your synthetic, guileless world.


The post that started this thread was very misleading. I pointed out the word shifting, the fact that people in the Pentagon don't give a crap about confidentiality (They have released material on the internet before that was never meant to be - The report on the shooting of the Italian General is the most recent I remember.) The Red Cross reports are only shown to the Pentagon for these detention centres run by the US. And the Pentagon chooses to release snippets that THEY want to release so some imbecilic **** can blog about this and even further embellish the truth with pure utter bull****.

I have never said STFU to anyone on this forum. While our guys are out there dealing with the scum, there are even greater scum prostituting the truth the way they want us to see it. Islamofascists included.

The treatment of detainees in a bad way just adds people to the IED making queue. It is important that we are seen as being the best bunch of people to look up to. (While this is the case, as we all know, it is the bad news that gets out.)

[abncougar]

““You people are no better than and no different than the Nazi concentration camp guards,” a Red Cross representative said in April at a U.S. detention facility in Iraq, according to a Pentagon source quoted in a May 23 Wall Street Journal editorial. Amnesty International Wednesday called Gitmo “the Gulag of our times.”

What a load of bull!

One red cross representative = the red cross? rofl

But yes, if humanity and peace is anti-US then the Red Cross and Amnesty International are anti-US. woot


Ummm, there have been a few documented cases of prisoners these past couple of years beaten to death by US guards/interrogators. That sounds like a typical Nazi guard thing doesn't it?

And some suddenly equals all? rofl

The double standards never cease to amaze me.

Mailman


great point, good thing you picked that out.

[abncougar]

Exhibits a double standard in human rights, condemning the United States for human rights violations around the world

Opposed American invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq
"As a strategy, the war on terror is bankrupt of vision and bereft of principle" - Secretary-General Irene Khan

On May 28, 2003 Amnesty International, a purportedly apolitical human rights organization, turned forty years old. On that day it released its annual report on human rights abuses across the globe during the year 2002. For 311 pages, Amnesty documented the horrors of execution, torture, abduction, rape, starvation, repression, and mass murder that darken many corners of the world. In one sad country after another, Amnesty found that mankind was suffering greater abuses in 2002 than they had in 2001, and Amnesty found a culprit to blame for the ever-declining state of human rights in the world: the United States of America.


The Amnesty report stated: "The 'war on terror,' far from making the world a safer place, has made it more dangerous by curtailing human rights, undermining the rule of international law and shielding governments from scrutiny. It has deepened divisions among people of different faiths and origins, sowing the seeds for more conflict. The overwhelming impact of all this is genuine fear - among the affluent as well as the poor." "While claiming to bring justice to victims in Iraq," the report added, "the United States has actively sought to undermine the International Criminal Court, the mechanism for universal justice."


Claiming that America's war on terrorism was the most egregious assault on human rights in half a century, Amnesty's Secretary-General Irene Khan added, "As a strategy, the war on terror is bankrupt of vision and bereft of principle. Sacrificing human rights in the name of national security, turning a blind eye to abuse abroad and using pre-emptive military force where and when the powerful choose to act has damaged justice and freedom, and made the world a more dangerous and divided place."


The Amnesty report condemned the U.S. because "more than eighteen months after the war in Afghanistan ended, millions of Afghans, including returning refugees, face an uncertain and insecure future." And during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Amnesty had sympathetic words for Saddam Hussein's government and criticism of the coalition's efforts to effect a regime change. It went to great lengths, moreover, to remind people that it did not take sides in international conflicts, and that its only concern was for the suffering masses.

In short, Amnesty gives America the lion's share of the blame for the degenerative state of the world. Its report can be accurately described as a lengthy attack on the United States and the Bush administration's war on terror. Indeed the organization recently went so far as to compare President Bush unfavorably to Osama bin Laden and the architect of Cambodian genocide, Pol Pot.

Rather than blame the United Nations for its complicity in human rights deteriorations anywhere on the globe, Amnesty's report excuses the UN of any culpability - because the U.S. war on terror is causing "new resources" to be "directed to security police and 'counter-terrorism' agencies [at the expense of] the UN's human rights machinery which has been grossly under-funded for years."

While the Amnesty document mentions countries such as Cuba and Libya only in the context of their respective reports on human rights abuses, the United States is mentioned countless times across the entire report for alleged complicity in many abuses across the globe. The U.S. is soundly criticized for its stance on the death penalty (part of the "axis of executioners," with China and Iran), for its supposedly poor treatment of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, and for its opposition to the International Criminal Court. And each time Amnesty mentions one of the above points, it concludes that the behavior of the United States caused the rest of the world to behave abusively.

Amnesty's annual report also impugned Britain, Spain, and France for passing anti-terrorism laws that the group characterizes as "regressive." Ms. Khan said, "There were terrible abuses in the past - Rwanda, Cambodia, in the Balkans. . . . But what we are now seeing is a pervasive culture of abuse that has spread like a cancerous growth, and that is what is so dangerous today."

Local chapters of Amnesty were signatories to a February 20, 2002 document, composed by the radical group Refuse & Resist, condemning military tribunals and the detention of immigrants apprehended in connection with post-9/11 terrorism investigations. Titled "National Day of Solidarity with Muslim, Arab and South Asian Immigrants," the document read, in part, "[T]hey [the U.S. government] are coming for the Arab, Muslim and South Asian immigrants. Based on their racial profile, over 1500 have been rounded up and the government refuses to say who they are, where they are jailed and what the charges are!!! Already, a Pakistani man has died in custody. Who will be next? The recent 'disappearances,' indefinite detention, the round-ups, the secret military tribunals, the denial of legal representation, evidence kept a secret from the accused, the denial of any due process for Arab, Muslim, South Asians and others, have chilling similarities to a police state. We will not allow our grief for the tragedy of September 11 to be used to justify this new repression. We are clear that being an immigrant is not a crime; Muslims, Arabs and South Asians are not terrorists."

Amnesty was also a signatory to a March 17, 2003 letter exhorting members of the U.S. Congress "to oppose the Domestic Security Enhancement Act (DSEA), also known as 'Patriot [Act] II,'" which was then under consideration. These signatories stated that the new legislation "fail[ed] to respect our time-honored liberties," and "contain[ed] a multitude of new and sweeping law enforcement and intelligence gathering powers . . . that would severely dilute, if not undermine, many basic constitutional rights." In addition, Amnesty has given its organizational endorsement to the Community Resolution to Protect Civil Liberties campaign, a project of the California-based Coalition for Civil Liberties (CCL). The CLL tries to influence city councils to pass resolutions creating Civil Liberties Safe Zones; that is, to be non-compliant with the provisions of the Patriot Act.

Amnesty's UCLA chapter endorsed the 2002 Market Workers Justice Campaign of the activist coalition Communities in Solidarity with Immigrant Workers. This campaign called for increased wages and benefits for Korean and Latino immigrant workers, including those living illegally in the United States.

Amnesty's University of Oklahoma chapter endorsed a May 1, 2003 document titled "10 Reasons Environmentalists Oppose an Attack on Iraq," which was published by Environmentalists Against War.

Moreover, Amnesty International endorsed the Civil Liberties Restoration Act (CLRA) of 2004, which was introduced by Democratic Senators Ted Kennedy, Patrick Leahy, Russell Feingold, Richard Durbin, and Jon Corzine, and Democratic Representatives Howard Berman and William Delahunt. The CLRA was designed to roll back, in the name of protecting civil liberties, vital national-security policies that had been adopted after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Amnesty International U.S.A. is a member of OneWorld Network, an umbrella organization of more than 1,500 leftwing groups that, according to the OneWorld website, seek "to promote sustainable development, social justice, and human rights."

Amnesty International U.S.A. was a signatory to a November 1, 2001 document characterizing the 9/11 attacks as a legal matter to be addressed by criminal-justice procedures rather than military means. Ascribing the hijackers' motives to alleged social injustices against which they were protesting, this document explained that "security and justice are mutually reinforcing goals that ultimately depend upon the promotion of all human rights for all people," and called on the United States "to promote fundamental rights around the world."

On May 25, 2005, Amnesty International-USA Director William Schulz announced that his organization "calls on foreign governments to uphold their obligations under international law by investigating all senior U.S. officials involved in the torture scandal [a reference to allegations that War on Terror prisoners being held in Guantanamo Bay have been subjected to abuse by American military personnel]. . . . The apparent high-level architects of torture should think twice before planning their next vacation to places like Acapulco or the French Riveria because they may find themselves under arrest as Augusto Pinochet famously did in London in 1998."

from discoverthenetwork.org

[RGRBOX]

Just to add my two cents in about Switzerland... most of the prisons here are filled with bankers... don't make the mistake of thinking that the smartest people, nor the best banking is here. As for the ICRC... I deal with these people everyday at my business, trying to help prepare them for some of their far away missions, and these people are brain dead... "Yes, I want a pair of waterproof, g-tex 10" upper boots for my mission in the Congo. this way my feet stay dry": :cantbeli: