The prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

[marmaladePRO]

" even when that wrongdoing is proven." i think a statement like that might suggest a new thread... if'n you all want to get into that one?
*note to self... define the term "current events" for future reference*

 

[strathyboy]

Maybe we need a "Not quite current events, yet still relevant events" Area.

 

[marmaladePRO]

*LOL ha ha ha* i really enjoyed that termanology Strathy, thanks... if you were in my office with me here, you'd hear a real belly laugh... i'll pass that along to the admins
very valid, your welcome to discuss that if you'd like to in the same civil manner you fellows have already exhibited, but i would recommend a new thread, if only to give new posters the chance at getting involved *from the ground floor*... this thread is still titled "> The prisoners at Guantanamo Bay." and as such describes the thread to passers by... you'll likely find others who would like to participate in another thread that haven't read this entire thread yet. wouldn't you agree?

 

[strathyboy]

Maybe I will start a new thread. But I'm afraid it would seem as if my only purpose in bringing it up would be to put down Americans. If anyone else is interested, start one up, and I'll be there.

 

[BK_30]

Hey Strathyboy..not to nit pick, but if they only started protesting that American's where dying...why did they call my father a baby killer? why did they throw rotten eggs at him, spit on him?....
I'm not saying America hasn't been in the wrong or made wrong choices it's a goverment run by men so of course they have...I am saying I think you may not have all the facts on what Americans to do Americans they don't agree with..

 

[Blynn]

Bk 30

I am sure this has nothing to do with this thread, but I just wanted to let you know that my father also served in Vietnam. He was drafted at the age of 19 and the thing that hurt him the most was being spit on at the airport as he was arriving home

Our Vietnam Vets were not treated very well.

God Bless,
Roberta

 

[JohnR7]

As a Johnny come lately, I will add my two cents, for whatever it is worth. It's one thing to decide what the government should do. I know for years the clinton adminstration was after china about human rights and prisoner rights.

As a Christian, our only objective is to see people come to a saving knowledge of the truth. I would think that the better we treated them, and they more of the grace of God we showed them, the better our chances were to bring them to God.

From what they say, these are the most hardened and the worst of the lot. But those are usually the one that have the best testimony for God, when they do get saved. Thanks, JohnR7

 

[strathyboy]

"why did they call my father a baby killer? why did they throw rotten eggs at him, spit on him?.... "

I guess that's what happens when the American people get to see all the unedited footage from Vietnam. I'm not blaming the soldiers, since they were just doing their duty, which is commendable, but there were over a million North Vietnamese killed over the 10 years the US had a large number of troops over there. I'm sure not all of that million was soldiers. The US also dropped more bombs on Vietnam than had been dropped by all sides in WW2. (If I remember correctly, the US averaged 4800 bombing sorties over North Vietnam and Laos per month).
I'm not sure why the Americans would spit on their own soldiers (nobody ever accused the American public of being the brightest in the world); they should have spit on the government that put the soldiers in that situation.
I always hate to see veterans of any war treated badly, as the US did to it's vets from Vietnam. The WW2 vets got everything they needed.

 

[Blindfaith]

Good afternoon everyone. This is my first post here, and I hope to have a positive experience in these forums.

My take is this; in order for there to be POW's, there has to be a war. Yes, we're in a war, but someone pointed out in a different forum that there hasn't been a formal Declaration of War. I tried finding out if there has been, but I haven't been able to come up with anything on the Net. So....if there were a delcared war, I'm assuming those detainees would be facing a military tribunal, or am I off base here?

As far as the detainees creature comforts, I guess we could put them in some caves; that might make it seem more like home

Strath; I'm sorry to see that you think so little of the United States. Personally, I'm very thankful I'm able to raise my children here, in a country that does whatever it takes to keep its citizens safe (or as safe as they can). I see that you live in Canada. Would you rather have Afghanistan for neighbors instead of Americans?

Peace in Christ,
Terri

 

[strathyboy]

I know it's a lot to ask to read this whole thread (if I hadn't been involved in it, I would never bother to read all this ), but the answer is back a few pages when we were arguing about the validity of the Geneva Accord.
Whether it was a declared war or not is not really relevant, since the Geneva convention states only that there be conflict, or that one side believes that there is a conflict. Also, the Vietnam and Korean "wars" weren't really wars either, they were Police Actions or some such thing.
Also, even though the members of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda didn't sign the convention, the US did, and only one side in a "conflict" needs to have signed it to have it apply.
In any case, Bush has recently stated that the detainees will be given everything that is given to POW's under the Geneva Convention, so that solves the human rights part of the issue. (Even though it's odd that Bush wouldn't call them POW's when he's giving them everything a POW gets).

I (as you might have noticed ) have some beefs with the US government. They have, in the past taken actions that are completely unnecessary, and cannot be justified in terms of keeping America safe. These actions tend to be dismissed or ignored by many Americans, and this is where I have run into problems with Americans on the forums.
It's tough to say if I'd rather have Afghanistan as a neighbour. Probably not, I suppose. But if we did have them, we would be dominating their economy and not vice versa.

In any case, welcome to the forums. Hopefully you'll enjoy yourself.

 

[TheBear]

Canada.....such a beatiful and unblemished country....I think I will renounce my US citizenship, and move to that uncorrupt country to the north.

 

[strathyboy]

Yeah, you should come on up. Then we can play hockey and make fun of the Canadian government together.

 

[TheBear]

The Canadian government, already under pressure for handing over Afghan captives to U.S. forces, suggested on Monday that parts of the Geneva Convention on prisoners of war might be outdated, prompting complaints that it was blindly toeing Washington's line.

Defense Minister Art Eggleton, under daily attack over the role of the forces, told Parliament on Monday that parts of the convention were not necessarily relevant at a time when the nature of armed conflicts had changed. "The Geneva Conventions were written at an earlier time. Not all of them are easily applicable to the conditions that exist today," he said.

Canada has been a key ally of the United States in its war on terrorism, sending troops to Afghanistan and joining its southern neighbor in beefing up border security. But some developments have been controversial, including the issue of whether Al Qaeda fighters taken captive in Afghanistan should be treated as prisoners of war.

Last week Eggleton revealed that Canadian commandos had handed over three prisoners to U.S. forces, outraging those who said the captives should have been kept in Canada's hands until it was clear they would be treated as prisoners of war.

Foreign Minister Bill Graham, an international law expert, told reporters he felt parts of the convention might benefit from a fresh interpretation, including more clarity about the nature of nonconventional warfare. "For example, if one had been able to arrest those who perpetrated the Sept. 11 massacres on an aircraft and they had failed in their attempt, could one of them have said 'Oh, this was a war action, we're entitled to be treated as prisoners of war?' I don't think so," Manley said. (Reuters)

ooops! It looks like my northern neighbors are just as divided on this issue, as anywhere else.

John

 

[strathyboy]

Yep, that sounds just like the Canadian government I know and love.
What it doesn't tell you about is the proposed anti-terrorist legislation the government up here is trying to pass. Basically, this bill would give the government a whole crapload of power, such as being able to hold someone indefinitely, ignore various rights, etc. And also, there is no sunset clause in it. So it never expires.
Generally speaking, Canadian government policy is to do whatever the US says and whatever the US is doing. Needless to say, I dislike this.
I think almost everybody in the "civlized world" is split on what to do about this sort of thing. Half the people fully endorse what the US is doing, and the other half think they've gone too far.

 

[TheBear]

Hello strathyboy,

If I were you, I'd ask the admin to remove your flag from this forum. After all, isn't it a trademark infringement, according to the Canadian government? The Canadian flag is a government trademark, not for individual use. Isn't this true?

John

 

[TheBear]

But, I must admit, Canada does have some good hockey. I might take you up on your offer.

 

[strathyboy]

"The Canadian flag is a government trademark, not for individual use. Isn't this true? "

I don't know. Possibly. I don't know how that relates to the endless amounts of merchandise we have up here with the Canadian flag on it.

If you have freedom of speech in the US, why is it illegal to burn the American flag?

And yes, we do have some pretty good hockey up here. We invented it after all, we should be good at it.

 

[TheBear]

Commercial use of emblems:

Use of the arms and of the flag of Canada for commercial purposes:

The arms and the flag of Canada are protected by the The Trade Marks Act (Statutes of Canada Chapter T-13) against unauthorized use for commercial purposes.
"9. (1) No person shall adopt in connection with a business, as a trade mark or otherwise, any mark consisting of, or so nearly resembling as to be likely to be mistaken for......

e) the arms, crest or flag adopted and used at any time by Canada or by any province or municipal corporation in Canada in respect of which the Registrar has at the request of the Government of Canada or of the province or municipal corporation concerned, given public notice of its adoption and use..."


The hockey is good, though.

 

[Blindfaith]

Hi Strath..thanks for replying to my post. Yes, you busted me; I didn't read each and every post *blush*. So far, my experience (all of one post) here has been good.

Everyone here raises some very good points. I'm not totally knowledgeable in the laws of the Geneva treaty, so I'm just gonna shut up . I do know this; I'm thankful to be an American woman, where I have opportunities that many women do not elsewhere. If I were an Afghan woman, I would have been shot many, many, many years ago.

Peace,
Terri

 

[Egoinos]

On January 26, 2002, Egypt's leading government daily, Al-Ahram, published an article by the columnist Anis Mansour alleging that American's "torture" of Al Qaeda prisoners is "worse than what Hitler did to his rivals from among the Jews and Christians." The following are excerpts from the article:

"The Americans transferred the prisoners from Afghanistan to the Guantanamo Bay base in Cuba. I saw this base in 1963, during the Tricontinental Conference in Havana. It's a nice base. No one expected it to be turned into a base for torturing Al-Qa'ida members from Afghanistan, in a way unprecedented in history - worse than what Hitler did to his rivals from among the Jews and Christians."

"Hitler's soldiers burned, strangled, and then killed. But America's prisoners were transferred in planes, on [a trip] lasting twenty hours. Under normal circumstances, the trip would not have been exhausting. But what was done to the prisoners is abominable!"

"They are blindfolded, their ears covered, and their noses sealed. They can't see, can't hear, and can't smell; they are in masks of iron. Their hands, arms, necks, and legs are shackled in heavy choke chains."

"Twenty hours of sensory deprivation is sufficient to damage the senses of any man. If the Americans add another 20 hours, [one doesn't know] whether he is alive or dead. If we then remove the shackles, he will not know how - or where - to walk!"

"In the solitary confinement cells, the darkness is absolute. Suddenly, [the Americans] shine a brilliant light and make aggressive [loud] noise for a few moments; then quiet and darkness are restored. Those moments are enough to make the prisoners blind, deaf, and brain-damaged."

"[Even] America's friends have condemned this inhuman treatment of the prisoners of war. But U.S. Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld, said: 'They are not prisoners of war, and the Geneva Convention does not apply to them.' He claimed that they are criminals who violated the law, and were members of bin Laden's gang."

"[He says that] the Americans blocked the prisoners' ears out of pity, so that the noise of the plain would not bother them. Their noses were covered so that they would not spread their contagious diseases to the soldiers guarding them. This pressure on their nerves makes them easily turn over any dangerous information they have."

"These prisoners of war cannot go to American courts to demand that the Constitution be applied, because they are not on American soil - rather, at Camp X-Ray, which is designed to turn them from men to beasts within hours!"

Source: The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI)
http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/arab/egypt_prisoners.asp

The Red Cross won't release their data on how well the prisoners are being treated. It is part of their policy not to do so.