Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
L410Turbolet
Posts: 6300
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 9:12 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 9:57 am



Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 198):
I think that McCain's stance to torture or torture-like practices comes from the fact that the North Vietnamese have used similar practices on him and his comrades while he was imprisoned in Hanoi.

He definitely has the moral authority to make a qualified judgment on the issue... unlike "someone" who has never seen combat because daddy got him out when things were about to get serious.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 12:56 pm



Quoting Klaus (Reply 193):
Here you go: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill (by LHStarAlliance Mar 8 2008 in Non Aviation)#174. (The trailing "#174" appended to the thread URL instead of the slash jumps directly to post #174 within the thread.)

True but I was hoping for a two key solution - lazy bugger me you know!  Big grin Old saying in the north of England, lazyness is nothing unless it is well done.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 193):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 192):
A closing thought, come Feb 2009, the hang em high brigade will have a bit of readjusting to do as a more realistic policy is wheeled out - I hope!!

Even under McCain things will most likely improve significantly - probably not as much as I'd hope, but still noticeably.

Well, while I have reservations about McC on many things, I don't really doubt his sincerity on this issue. He definitely knows which skeletons he would be looking for.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 195):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 192):
If you had taken up my challenge to find out how and where they were captured,

I read your leftist blogs. They do not produce facts, only suppositions based on third party hearsay.

Not what I was looking for but not exactly a blog either, I told you I don't read blogs, that is your domain Rj. I do find it worse than tedious to have to dig this most distasteful material out Rj but you seem to be insisting.

There are some other sites that I cited a couple of years ago that no longer turn up in Google but no doubt I can find in a.net archives. What is odd, is that few of the current references found by Google are post 2005.
http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/us_l...w/etn/statements/abu-yr-042605.htm

"# More than 11,000 people are currently in U.S. detention in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay.
# As of March 2005, there were 8,900 detainees in main facilities and 1,300 in transient facilities in Iraq.
# The U.S. was holding approximately 600 detainees in Afghanistan.
# There are approximately 520 detainees held at Guantanamo Bay"

That would be about 21,000 top grade enemies according to the Rj theory. However, we know that in some detention systems, residence times are of the order of one to five months (not Gitmo) and those discharged are considered not to have committed any major offences. However we also know that many of those have been subject to interrogation methods which most of us here seem to think amount to torture. We also know 2005 data:
"Deaths in Custody: 108 People Have Died in U.S. Custody, U.S. Government Acknowledges

* The U.S. government has acknowledged 28 confirmed or suspected homicides of detainees in U.S. custody. Only one of these homicides occurred at Abu Ghraib.[1]
* At least 45 detainees have died in U.S. custody since Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld was informed of the abuses at Abu Ghraib on January 16, 2004.[2]
* 63 of the 108 detainee deaths occurred at locations other than Abu Ghraib"

As to innocence or guilt:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/mar/19/terrorism.afghanistan
"There we met Dr Rafiullah Bidar, regional director of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, established in 2003 with funding from the US Congress to investigate abuses committed by local warlords and to ensure that women's and children's rights were protected. He was delighted to see foreigners in town. At his office in central Gardez, Bidar showed us a wall of files. "All I do nowadays is chart complaints against the US military," he said. "Many thousands of people have been rounded up and detained by them. Those who have been freed say that they were held alongside foreign detainees who've been brought to this country to be processed. No one is charged. No one is identified. No international monitors are allowed into the US jails." He pulled out a handful of files: "People who have been arrested say they've been brutalised - the tactics used are beyond belief." The jails are closed to outside observers, making it impossible to test the truth of the claims.

Last November, a man from Gardez died of hypothermia in a US military jail. When his family were called to collect the body, they were given a $100 note for the taxi ride and no explanation. In scores more cases, people have simply disappeared."

So if you lack the information, it is a lack of willingness to look. Other than that it is the closure of facilities to independent witnesses. The Red Cross have seen but cannot report, although even they had difficulty accessing Gitmo - now why was that.

And do you seriously dispute the stories of the Tipton three?

For heaven's sake Rj, can we not agree that the US policies have, in some part, been regrettable and self defeating and move on to look at the more positive sides of progress as UH60 has been doing.
 
miamiair
Posts: 4249
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:42 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:25 pm



Quoting LHStarAlliance (Thread starter):
The fathers of the American Constitution would turn over in their grave if they knew what going on.

After seing this:



Different times call for different measures. And if the information obtained will prevent this from happening, so be it. I am not adovacating grabbing any achmo off of the street, but if you are a combatant or an operative, be prepared to sing.
Molon Labe - Proud member of SMASH
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15079
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:33 pm



Quoting Miamiair (Reply 202):
And if the information obtained will prevent this from happening, so be it. I am not adovacating grabbing any achmo off of the street, but if you are a combatant or an operative, be prepared to sing.

But that is exactly what they ARE empowered to do - grab anyone off the street. "Probable cause" doesn't even enter into it.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
Klaus
Posts: 21642
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:34 pm



Quoting Miamiair (Reply 202):
Different times call for different measures.

You mean the american propositions of freedom and the rule of law were just fake, not real commitments for when it really counts?

So what should the USA really stand for, if not for that?

Quoting Miamiair (Reply 202):
And if the information obtained will prevent this from happening, so be it. I am not adovacating grabbing any achmo off of the street, but if you are a combatant or an operative, be prepared to sing.

And you too don't have an issue with innocent people being inadvertently subjected to torture in your name? (For a moment ignoring the issue of torture itself.)
 
Elite
Posts: 2309
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 6:31 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:35 pm



Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 203):

That is the power they are given, but do you think that is what they will do? No, they grab people who they suspect of having information. They won't do that because they think waterboarding is fun.
 
miamiair
Posts: 4249
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:42 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:42 pm



Quoting Klaus (Reply 204):
And you too don't have an issue with innocent people being inadvertently subjected to torture in your name? (For a moment ignoring the issue of torture itself.)

Reading comprehension...

I said if it is for a combatant/operative, I am all for it.
Molon Labe - Proud member of SMASH
 
Klaus
Posts: 21642
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:48 pm



Quoting Miamiair (Reply 206):
Reading comprehension...
I said if it is for a combatant/operative, I am all for it.

My reading comprehension is not the problem here - I was simply addressing the real issue, which is quite different from your wishful thinking.
 
LHStarAlliance
Topic Author
Posts: 2096
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 9:15 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:49 pm



Quoting Miamiair (Reply 202):

Hey man that's terrible and very very sad . And we have to get all those a**holes who have participated in this , so they become the punishment they deserve , I'd even agree with the Dead penalty , but give them a good lawyer and allow them to defend them selves , that's what we claim to countries like Iran or Russia ... if the US uses Torture , it's just another reason for the terrorist to find more young people , and to shed the hatred against the US in the World .
Boycott The Olympic Games In Beijing !
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15079
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:57 pm



Quoting Elite (Reply 205):
That is the power they are given, but do you think that is what they will do? No, they grab people who they suspect of having information. They won't do that because they think waterboarding is fun.

So we have to rely on them being nice people ? No checks, no balances, no judicial review ? You clearly have much deeper faith in the competence and fair play of your intelligence operatives than I do. The point of equality before the law is that it applies to everyone. Not 'different times require different measures'. Everyone, all the time.

Quoting Miamiair (Reply 206):
I said if it is for a combatant/operative, I am all for it.

And who decides whether they are a combatant/operative ? Isn't that what the interrogation is supposed to determine ? What happens if some faceless arbitrary beauracrat for reasons of his own decides that you are a "combatant/operative" - would you not want the chance to have that decision reviewed and overturned, or would you gladly cooperate in the waterboarding knowing that these were different times and that different measures had to apply, and that this was for your own safety ? I guess what you're really implying is "...as long as it's not me."
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:58 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 197):
Would you support revisiting the Geneva Convention, or perhaps writing an entirely new document, that specifically deals with how civilized nations should treat captured enemy combatants (ie: terrorists, insurgents, transnational fighters)?

No. The Conventions are clear. If you pick up arms against a sovereign state outside of the uniformed military service of another sovereign state, you are labeled and outlaw, pirate, spy, or saboteur and as such relinquish the rights and guarantees of a uniformed military person. It's been that way for over two centuries for a reason. It works and is fair to those that do wear the uniform.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 197):
Because surely you can agree that the current situation of "constant limbo" for captured terrorists is neither fair to them, nor worthy of a nation who's bedrock principles are founded on the rule of law.

The only constant state of limbo is wondering when the next round of "lets feel sorry for them" is going to come around. You are right it is not fair to them, they should know that harsh punishment awaits them with no hope of salvation from a civilian court. We have a law now and I don't understand why you want to weaken it.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 201):
I don't read blogs, that is your domain Rj.

The only blogs I read are the ones you link too.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 201):
I do find it worse than tedious to have to dig this most distasteful material out Rj but you seem to be insisting.

If I use a quote or base my case on material other than my opinion I source it, I expect the same of others.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 201):
That would be about 21,000 top grade enemies according to the Rj theory.

Incorrect. A top grade enemy would be a high level commander that has intimate knowledge of several operations or cells. There are not 21,000 of those. Compared to the U.S. prison population of 2.1 million as of 2007, 21 thousand is a drop in the bucket. Australia has a larger prison population than 21,000. And I see that your government is in the business of religious discrimination and persecution of its inmates as well.
http://www.jointogether.org/news/hea...07/us-prison-population-still.html
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]+Features12006?OpenDocument
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/141610

Quoting Baroque (Reply 201):
However we also know that many of those have been subject to interrogation methods which most of us here seem to think amount to torture.

We do? Where's the proof?

Quoting Baroque (Reply 201):
So if you lack the information,

I don't lack information. I've provided the information to back up my statements all through this and other threads. You are providing innuendo and hearsay as well as also trying to take the topic from one about how we will continue to use aggressive interrogation techniques when deemed necessary to one of how there are all sorts of goat herders rotting in our detention camps.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 201):
For heaven's sake Rj, can we not agree that the US policies have, in some part, been regrettable and self defeating and move on to look at the more positive sides of progress as UH60 has been doing.

No. It is not United States policy that we are following but international treaty and law. Again, they should know in no uncertain terms that a harsh fate awaits them if they decide to pursue a terrorists life.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 4:03 pm

I give up, Rj seems to think:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/141610
that an argument about one guy complaining of dress rules in an Aus prison on a charge of murder is relevant to the mistreatment of many prisoners who the US has not been able to charge with any offence. And FWIW, I think the Aus prison population is far too high.

Let us start with Arar
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/02/14/050214fa_fact6
now when you have explained why Canada felt it necessary for them to apologise and give him some millions in compensation, we can move on to some others.

Still no explanation for the Tipton three however.

The New Yorker will be interested to be accused of being a blog I guess.

This is an unusual blog being in the form of a PDF from Human rights first.
The Horrors Of Extraordinary Rendition (by 9V Dec 6 2006 in Non Aviation)?threadid=1455249&searchid=1456568&s=Murder+in+custody#ID1456568
cites
http://www.humanrightsfirst.info/pdf/06221-etn-hrf-dic-rep-web.pdf
Extracts and comment
"The lack of understanding by some on this thread of what is going on and the callous interpretation of illegal detention and torture to the point of death is nothing short of astonishing. My thanks to the many posters who do understand.

The stories from Habib and from the UK survivors of Guantanamo are bad enough, but they are the stories of the survivors. We are not going to hear from those who did not survive, how ghastly was their treatment?

Try this quotation from the pdf document cited above:
"Abed Hamed Mowhoush turned himself over to U.S. forces in Iraq on November 10, 2003, about a month before U.S. forces captured ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, and at a time when pressure on Army intelligence to produce information was at its height.
.......

The interrogations
By the time Mowhoush, 57, arrived at FOB Tiger in
mid-November, his four sons had been in U.S. custody for approximately 11 days, held in a prison outside Baghdad.

.....
The new team beat Mowhoush with sledgehammer
handles;33 as one soldier testified, eight to ten
of the non-military forces .interrogate[d] Mowhoush and .beat the crap. out of him.. Specialist Jerry Loper, a guard at the Blacksmith Hotel, was standing outside the interrogation room the night of November 24 when some of the beatings were going on, and described hearing the thudding sound of Mowhoush being hit. .It
wasn.t like they were hitting a wall,. said Loper, .[t]here were loud screams..35 After Mowhoush.s death, an Army autopsy revealed the effects of the beatings:
Mowhoush had .massive. bruising and five broken
ribs.
....
Mowhoush.s next session included having his hands
bound, being struck repeatedly on the back of his arms, in the painful spot near the humerus, and being doused with water. all these, according to Welshofer and others who later testified, drawn from the lessons of techniques learned in SERE.43 Later that evening, Chief Welshofer arranged for a short meeting between Mowhoush and his youngest son, Mohammed, then 15 years old; Welshofer hoped the meeting would compel Mowhoush to convey more useful information.
.......
By November 26, Welshofer was ready to try yet
another technique . stuffing his subject into a sleeping bag until Mowhoush was prepared to respond. Welshofer had already proposed the sleeping bag technique to his Company commander, Major Jessica Voss, who authorized its use.49 Much later, trial testimony would make clear that the technique had been used on at least 12 detainees. It proved catastrophically ineffective in Mowhoush.s case. During his final interrogation, Mowhoush was shoved head-first into the sleeping bag, wrapped with electrical cord, and rolled from his stomach to his back. Welshofer sat on Mowhoush.s chest and blocked his nose and mouth.
At one point, according to Loper, Mowhoush started to clinch and kick his legs, .almost like he was being electrocuted. It was at this point Mowhoush gave out, dying (according to the autopsy report) of asphyxia due to smothering and chest compression."

"The day after his death, the U.S. military issued a press release stating that Mowhoush had died of natural causes.""

You really need to read that PDF Rj.

I will not go on but the other cases do for 130 pages.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 5:46 pm



Quoting Klaus (Reply 174):
If that was actually true, the entire american ideology of freedom, the rule of law and everything good the USA was supposed to stand for would just be bogus and nothing but worthless embellishments.

Which is simply not true. Very strange that I have to tell you this.

Kluas , I share your dream... I really do. I also envision America based on freedom, self reliance and setting the standards of peaceful coexistence and prosperity and safety to all. The reality in this world is completely different however.

History has proved that these ideals are not reality , its like opening your house up to everyone in the neighbourhood as a free open area to be used as they wish. Some people will join your idea , they will be respectful they will share in the good will . Then you have the wolves .. the black hats , the people who will prey on your weakness and openness. The idea of America being a open free society and available to anyone is like religion and communism... they sound great until you add humans.

Sadly I am afraid that America has long passed the notion that we can shine as this example to the world. What we are in now is a street fight that is out of control. Everyone now has grand ideas of what America should be and what America should do ... but their own histories prove that killing and death are part of humanities existence and denying it is absurd.

Now America is at a crossroad for sure , we have a opportunity to "change" temporarily the course. I can not say that a morally strategic position to pull back is not valid. But , I also appreciate the merit of the current administrations willing to street fight. If the new administration wants to swing back to the more diplomatic strategy then it will make it easier for other Allies to "join" us. This is the true strength of America , our ability to elect new leaders and change course. Destiny will once again be in the hands of the guys in the black hats , their actions will write the next chapter I guess.
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 5:49 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 210):
No. The Conventions are clear. If you pick up arms against a sovereign state outside of the uniformed military service of another sovereign state, you are labeled and outlaw, pirate, spy, or saboteur and as such relinquish the rights and guarantees of a uniformed military person

If some country arrests you for taking up arms against them and decides to "interrogate" and then imprison or execute you, wouldn't you deserve the opportunity to present evidence that you did not take up arms against them?
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:42 pm



Quoting Baroque (Reply 211):
The lack of understanding by some on this thread of what is going on and the callous interpretation of illegal detention and torture to the point of death is nothing short of astonishing. My thanks to the many posters who do understand.

Would you care to point out where, according to the law and treaties we have signed, we are interrogating these prisoners illegally?

Quoting Baroque (Reply 211):
that an argument about one guy

So it's a numbers game, I get it, three is the minimum number to justify a complaint then?

Quoting Baroque (Reply 211):
Still no explanation for the Tipton three however.

It appears they were never water boarded and perhaps they now know not to enter a possible combat area without official sanction. I have little sympathy for them since they crossed the border into Afghanistan after September 11th when it was clear we were going into attempt to capture Bin Laden. Talk about stupid. Several of their assertions have been debunked or investigated by multiple agencies and not found to have been true.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/mar/14/terrorism.afghanistan

Quoting Baroque (Reply 211):
You really need to read that PDF Rj.

How about this part of it:

"Chief Warrant Officer Lewis Welshofer
Testifying during his Court Martial for Death of Iraqi General Abed Hamed Mowhoush
January 19, 2006
"

Which of course you didn't bother to mention. You left it as no one was ever brought to account.

Again, this thread is about the legal use of aggressive interrogations. In the case of the Tipton three, they were part of a large group and eventually released, they could easily have been killed well before their capture and could have avoided the entire affair if they had used their heads. In the second case the soldier involved was tried and convicted of negligent homicide.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Wed Mar 12, 2008 3:24 am

Maybe it's time to end this thread.

The bottom line is this: George W. Bush and his policy of stooping down to the level of those we fight, in order, oestensably, to protect "freedom" has made some of these goons sympathetic figures to some-all because he and his hangers' on around this nation are scared of every shadow that moves.

Thanks, Mr. Bush, for diminishing the "land of the free and the home of the brave" once more.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:05 am



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 215):
Maybe it's time to end this thread.

I agree.

There is a summary of sentences for cases for deaths in custody which I found yesterday, but cannot recognise today. From memory, highest rank sentenced, Major, longest sentence, 5 years.

On arguably a more positive note:
http://www.socialjusticejournal.org/SJEdits/106Edit.html
"Elliott Currie (1998: 185-6) notes that in the late 1960s, successive U.S. commissions into crime and urban disorders "called for a balanced approach to crime," recognizing that "a strong and efficient criminal justice system" must be matched by broader social reform in the form of improved equity and social justice. Their message was that, "we could never imprison our way out of America's violent crime problem." To defeat violent crime and urban unrest would mean "attacking social exclusion." The alternative direction at "the crossroads" was to neglect social disadvantage, the material reality of poverty and marginalization, and hit offenders hard with harsher laws, zero-tolerance policing, and uncompromising prison regimes. Successive U.S. administrations went down this road, leading to "bursting prisons, devastated cities, and a violent crime rate still unmatched in the developed world.""
......
"The connection between prisoner abuse in Iraq and prisoner abuse in the U.S. is not a matter of conjecture or persuasion. Tony Platt and Gregory Shank (2004: 2-3) note that the team leader tasked with reopening Iraq's prisons previously "had been forced to resign as director of the Utah Department of Corrections...after an incident in which a mentally ill inmate died after guards left him shackled to a restraining chair for 16 hours." He was then appointed to an executive post with the Management and Training Corporation, "one of whose jails was strongly criticized in a Justice Department report a month before the department sent him to Iraq." On arrival he "identified Abu Ghraib as the best site for the U.S. prison." Further, John J. Armstrong, appointed assistant director of operations of U.S. prisons in Iraq "was forced to resign in 2003" from his post as Connecticut corrections commissioner following the death of two prisoners."

Along similar lines, we cannot defeat terrorism by a policy of imprisonment and torture.
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Wed Mar 12, 2008 12:53 pm



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 215):
Thanks, Mr. Bush, for diminishing the "land of the free and the home of the brave" once more.

Then I guess we can also say thanks Mr. Clinton, Mr. Bush 41, Mr. Reagan, Mr. Carter, Mr. Ford, Mr. Nixon, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Eisenhower, and Mr. Truman. I'll only stop there since it was during the Truman administration that the CIA was officially begun from its roots as the OSS during WW2. All these fine gentleman could have introduced an executive order during their terms as Chief Executive banning all manner of interrogations. All did not, for the same reason that Sen. McCain does not want to. They are smart enough to know that tying both hands behind your back is not the ideal way to protect yourself.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:24 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 210):
No. It is not United States policy that we are following but international treaty and law. Again, they should know in no uncertain terms that a harsh fate awaits them if they decide to pursue a terrorists life.

And the US will do everything to go after terrorists, such as accusing 15 year olds of things they did not do, then backin up the false accusation by altering official reports of battles to support the charges. (The kid was accused of throwing a grenade that killed a US solder. The kid was sent to Guantanamo. The official report on the battle said that the guy who threw the grenade was killed. Two months later the report was altered to say that the kid threw the grenade.)

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/washington/politics-guantanamo.html

If we're going to lock up children we should at least do it without forging documents to make them look guilty.

Given cases like this, how can we just trust the US gov't that the "terrorists" are really terrorists?
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:02 pm



Quoting Analog (Reply 218):
And the US will do everything to go after terrorists, such as accusing 15 year olds of things they did not do, then backin up the false accusation by altering official reports of battles to support the charges.

And you know this kid is innocent because you were there right? Reports are routinely altered when new information comes to light. What tune would you be singing if the initial reports had the kid throwing the grenade and then new information coming to light that he was innocent? We sentence 15 year olds as adults in this country every year.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:24 pm

Even the US government admits that it incorrectly declared people held in Guantanamo to be enemy combatants. This case, for example. Given that Bush incorrectly declares people to be enemy combatants, why should we accept his word for those declarations? Why accept the logic that they have no rights because they are enemy combatants; they are enemy combatants because the President says so, when the President says so on the word of foreign bounty hunters?

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 219):
And you know this kid is innocent because you were there right?

The accusations of falsification were made by a US Navy Lt. Commander. I doubt that a guy in that position would accuse US soldiers of crimes to protect a terrorist. Do you?

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 219):
We sentence 15 year olds as adults in this country every year.

That doesn't make it right, but that's not really the issue.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 219):
What tune would you be singing if the initial reports had the kid throwing the grenade and then new information coming to light that he was innocent?

Well, given that the report apparently was modified to support the charges, I'm a lot more suspicious of that than I'd be if the report was modified to exonerate him, simply because the former serves the purposes of those who support the status quo. In general it's easier and more logical to be suspicious of people modifying documents to serve their interests and the interests of their bosses. It's harder to be suspicious of changes or "corrections" that go against the interests of the person making the changes.
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:49 pm



Quoting Analog (Reply 220):
The accusations of falsification were made by a US Navy Lt. Commander.

Who is his defense lawyer. His feelings don't matter, it's his job to get his client off. He has yet to prove that the revised report is not the correct version.

Quoting Analog (Reply 220):
simply because the former serves the purposes of those who support the status quo.

Case closed. Don't bleed on your shoes.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 3:47 am

Someone on this board either totally lacks imagination or else is Chaney using a pseudonym, and I ain't on about Analog!
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 3:53 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 210):
The only constant state of limbo is wondering when the next round of "lets feel sorry for them" is going to come around. You are right it is not fair to them, they should know that harsh punishment awaits them with no hope of salvation from a civilian court. We have a law now and I don't understand why you want to weaken it.

I'm sorry, but I am just really disappointed to hear you say that. I honestly thought you had more honor than this.  Sad

We're a nation of laws, and a deep respect for justice. I am reading a book about the Founding Fathers, and it amazes me how dedicated they were to these ideals. Not only were they deeply respectful towards the rule of law, they were civil and humble - even to British after we defeated them.

So to hear you so snidely reject those ideals... is saddening.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 5:24 am



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 221):
Case closed. Don't bleed on your shoes.

What's wrong with my logic?
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 1:34 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 223):
So to hear you so snidely reject those ideals... is saddening.

You mean the founding fathers that agreed with hanging traitors and spies after a military trial found them guilty? Unless of course the local commander did not provide summary justice. Of sending the Navy and the Marines to take out the Barbary Coast pirates? Or inserting in the Constitution that the Congress shall have the power to write letters of marque? Or the founding fathers that whole heartedly believed in class distinction and used corporal punishment on their own troops to maintain order? No, my honor is quite intact thank you very much.

Quoting Analog (Reply 224):
What's wrong with my logic?

What "interest" does the United States government have in falsifying the records against one 15 year old boy? Yet had they gone ahead and let him go, well no one would or should question that. Either the report supports the charges using the evidence at hand or it doesn't. It is up to the court to decide that, not his defense lawyer.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 2:01 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 225):
No, my honor is quite intact thank you very much.

And I disagree.

My question wasn't just regarding the possibility of revising the Geneva Convention. I asked if you that if you still thought the convention should remain untouched, then do would you support writing a separate document? -- A document which would clearly spell out our obligations, methods, and courses of action, when it came to terrorist captives. Yet out of either laziness, or blindness, you failed to respond to that part of the question.

Your argument that the current system was sufficient, coupled with your disappointing refusal to accept the reality that detainees are suspended in an indefinite state of limbo... all shows a lack of proper respect for the rule of law, one of the bedrock principles of our society.

There is nothing wrong with us creating a coherent pact - along the lines of the Third Geneva Convention - that outlines how we will deal with detainees. A pact that outlines how they will be detained, how they will be interrogated, how they will be tried, and what rights they will be afforded. And please, do not spit that tired argument at me, about how they are cold blooded killers and deserve no such treatment. Even the most brutal killers in America are handled under an established system, governed by a guiding set of laws and rules.

And while you may live in a world of denial - I believe many of us not motivated by ideology - are willing to accept that the detainees certainly live a life of indefinite limbo. The question of whether certain practices are legal, or illegal, change with the wind - the question of trials is a story of on-again/off-again - and the line that separates appropriate and inappropriate is constantly moving. All of which could be eliminated by us creating a Convention for the Treatment of Detainees. By us relying on what has held this nation together for 200+ years: the rule of law.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 3:23 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 226):
Yet out of either laziness, or blindness, you failed to respond to that part of the question.



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 226):
Your argument that the current system was sufficient,

Well you are contradicting yourself right off the bat here. As I have stated, repeatedly, the laws in place i.e. the military tribunal, are sufficient enough for the detainees. They are not soldiers of a foreign army, nor have they committed crimes on U.S. soil which would place them in a different category than the one they find themselves in.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 226):
coupled with your disappointing refusal to accept the reality that detainees are suspended in an indefinite state of limbo...

Only because some people have raised a hue and cry over the military tribunal system.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 226):
all shows a lack of proper respect for the rule of law, one of the bedrock principles of our society.

You have yet to cite where the law is not being followed. You are advocating for new law. Had not court and political objections been raised by those who some how feel that these detainees deserve the rights of citizens the whole process would have been much farther along than it is now.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 226):
There is nothing wrong with us creating a coherent pact - along the lines of the Third Geneva Convention - that outlines how we will deal with detainees.

We already have rules for them. What part of that don't you seem to understand?

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 226):
And please, do not spit that tired argument at me, about how they are cold blooded killers and deserve no such treatment.

But they are foreign citizens and as such, are not entitled to the protections of the Constitution since they did not commit their crimes on U.S. soil.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 226):
All of which could be eliminated by us creating a Convention for the Treatment of Detainees.

I still don't see the point, the rules and law to deal with them are already there. They have been there all along.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 226):
By us relying on what has held this nation together for 200+ years: the rule of law.

And by that I can only surmise you wish to treat them as we would criminals in this country and that is where we disagree. You want to afford them the same style of rights and court rules as we give our civilian citizens. I don't agree. A military tribunal is what they deserve and all they should get. Are you prepared to dispute that a panel of duly appointed military officers cannot render a just verdict after hearing the evidence of both sides?

You can continue to impugn my honor all you wish, doesn't bother me in the slightest. What you are advocating is wrong. We have a system in place, it would work just fine if people would stop wringing their hands over it. Unfortunately, as you yourself point out, these detainees have lived in limbo, not because the government wants them to stay that way, but because of one legal and political challenge after another to the system that is in place. Rather than let the system work, one lawyer or politician after another has felt the need to throw a monkey wrench into the gears thereby stopping the whole works. You talk about wanting the rule of law, well they are hell bent on perverting it. Any further conventions would end up being nothing more than a granting of citizenship to detainees and if you can't see that, then who is actually blind?
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 3:45 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 226):
There is nothing wrong with us creating a coherent pact - along the lines of the Third Geneva Convention - that outlines how we will deal with detainees. A pact that outlines how they will be detained, how they will be interrogated, how they will be tried, and what rights they will be afforded. And please, do not spit that tired argument at me, about how they are cold blooded killers and deserve no such treatment. Even the most brutal killers in America are handled under an established system, governed by a guiding set of laws and rules.

And while you may live in a world of denial - I believe many of us not motivated by ideology - are willing to accept that the detainees certainly live a life of indefinite limbo. The question of whether certain practices are legal, or illegal, change with the wind - the question of trials is a story of on-again/off-again - and the line that separates appropriate and inappropriate is constantly moving. All of which could be eliminated by us creating a Convention for the Treatment of Detainees. By us relying on what has held this nation together for 200+ years: the rule of law.

Super UH. Were it not for your posts I would begin to think I was in the wrong universe. However, it is nice to realise that most (maybe all) of the military legal folk who have expressed an opinion agree and can see the dangers of the "hang em high" approach. Hanging is not a really good solution, and even if it was, proving rather than asserting they were guilty would be a desirable pre-requisite.

Our SBS news tonight had an item on one of those arrested over the Bali bombing as having taught the bombers how to construct the explosives has repented and is now trying to persuade his former followers of the error of their ways. Interesting and probably transitional times.
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 6:26 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 225):
What "interest" does the United States government have in falsifying the records against one 15 year old boy? Yet had they gone ahead and let him go, well no one would or should question that. Either the report supports the charges using the evidence at hand or it doesn't. It is up to the court to decide that, not his defense lawyer.

The US government jailed the boy and afterwards changed documentation to support the detention. My logic is that after-the-fact alterations of official records should be more suspect if they favor the person or organization making the changes. In such a case the motive to falsely alter documents in ones favor is obvious, whereas there is no obvious motive when one alters documents to hurt oneself. While logic applies very broadly, but it certainly is never conclusive in and of itself.

For example, if a defendant in a criminal case makes gives a signed statement saying "I did criminal act X." and later in the trial says "I didn't do X, I did Y." How would you react if Y was worse than X? I'd tend to believe it more than if X was much worse than Y. Wouldn't you, if you were sitting on a jury?

Another example: You're walking out of a store and the clerk runs after you and says he/she messed up the change. Which would you be more suspicious of: the clerk saying the error was against you and hands you $10, or if the clerk says he/she gave you too much change and demands $10.

It's just common sense.
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:45 pm



Quoting Analog (Reply 229):
It's just common sense.

It's also for a court or tribunal with access to all the facts to decide, not a defense lawyer or a newspaper.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:16 pm



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 230):

It's also for a court or tribunal with access to all the facts to decide, not a defense lawyer or a newspaper.

So the accused "terrorists" do deserve a fair trail!
 
RJdxer
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:14 am

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:10 pm



Quoting Analog (Reply 231):
So the accused "terrorists" do deserve a fair trail!

I never said they didn't. The difference between myself and others is that I believe a fair trial can be had in front of a military tribunal using the rules of such.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever. I'm going to Texas!
 
NorthstarBoy
Posts: 1416
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:53 pm

RE: Bush To Veto Waterboarding Bill

Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:28 pm



Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 30):
But you said these weren't soldiers. And resistance in any invasion is inevitable and shouldn't come as a surprise. Or be treated as a crime.

i agree, except of course, the mentality of the US government is that we are inherently superior. we view any resistance to what we want to do, the foisting of our lifestyle on an unwilling world, the injection of our values upon the rest of that world, resistance to those actions, and any interference with our interests (god forbid) as being extremely irritating. we expect, as the self superior "global parents" that we feel we are, that if we "have to get involved" that the army of the other country will immediately cease any and all resistance, put their hands in the air, put their weapons on the ground and do exactly as we say without question. When they don't, or when they dare to resist the imposition of our innate superiority on them, we get angry. Really, we're no different than the european colonizers of the previous centuries, the US and Europe believe that they are the "parents" and the third world are the "children" so of course we feel the moral imperative to immediately step in when those "children" get out of line, and if those "children" resist, it's dealt with harshly, and in our minds righteously, because of course we don't believe that they have any right to resist. After all, we're superior, and we take the attitude that they should not question our superiority, nor try to resist it, but just accept it, afterall what we're doing is "for their own good." It's assininely arrogant.
Yes, I'd like to see airbus go under so Boeing can have their customers!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: af773atmsp, B717fan, casinterest, JJJ, JoseSalazar, LCDFlight, ltbewr, Newark727, petertenthije and 70 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos