Rights of Detainees -- What do you think?

[qiphlow]

buncha goddamn hypocrites. i shudder to think what their fate will be in the next life.

[klonk]

MClatchy has detailed stories and articles on the topic.

General who probed Abu Ghraib says Bush officials committed war crimes

"After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes," Taguba wrote. "The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."

One of the Iraqis, identified by the pseudonym Laith, was arrested with his family at his Baghdad home in the early morning of Oct. 19, 2003. He was taken to a location where he was beaten, stripped to his underwear and threatened with execution, the report says.

"Laith" told the examiners he was then taken to a second site, where he was photographed in humiliating positions and given electric shocks to his genitals.

Finally, he was taken to Abu Ghraib, where he spent the first 35 to 40 days in isolation in a small cage, enduring being suspended in the cage and other "stress positions."

He was released on June 24, 2004, without charge.

One of the advantages of habeus corpus is that it relieves the government of responsibility to react to BS stories like this. If there is no public account made for the prisoner, he may say whatever ridiculous thing he likes. I have beaten my head against the wall for years arguing, mainly to those deaf to my arguments, that civilized behavior turns out, in the end, to be good for civilization.

[Michael]

As far as civilization goes, we seem to be stuck in a phase of the learning curve that is particularly steep...for some people. I guess we need to help them get over the wall, clear the final hurdle, etc.

[qiphlow]

let's start by taking the entire membership of the PNAC and throwing them into a deep, deep hole. then go from there.

[klonk]

I was always taught that if you were caught fighting out of uniform, you deserved whatever you got, and you usually got it promptly. You are at the mercy of your captors, in situations like that. America, it would seem, has lots of mercy to throw around, and showers it upon people who, in our previous wars, wouldn't be around to complain.

Just stop it. All the bitching, which is politically motivated and no more than that. Election silly season has overtaken common sense. There are people who are actively seeking and relishing the thought of no more YOU. Gitmo? Pah.

[Michael]

At least half of those released from Gitmo were not involved in anything illegal or threatening to the USA. The first group of 6 prisoners from the UK that Blair got Bush to release were set free with almost no action from the police or courts.

I've been complaining about the illegal prisons since they were made known to the public and I'm complaining on a basis of violation of human rights with concern about how our military may be treated in the future as a result, as well as how American citizens may be and are being treated as a result. For me there was no political motivation at the beginning, but it was one of the first reasons I had for wanting to get rid of Bush.

[I-mon]

There are people who are actively seeking and relishing the thought of no more YOU. Gitmo? Pah.

your head is all messed up man.

[qiphlow]

I was always taught that if you were caught fighting out of uniform, you deserved whatever you got, and you usually got it promptly. You are at the mercy of your captors, in situations like that. America, it would seem, has lots of mercy to throw around, and showers it upon people who, in our previous wars, wouldn't be around to complain.

Just stop it. All the bitching, which is politically motivated and no more than that. Election silly season has overtaken common sense. There are people who are actively seeking and relishing the thought of no more YOU. Gitmo? Pah.

and a big reason they relish that particular thought is that our government swears up and down that they treat their prisoners fairly, but really they don't at all.

[klonk]

There has been a lot of unsubstantiated talk about abusing prisoners, secret prisons, etc. Where is the substantiation? Oh, I see, there's no substantiation because it's all, you know, secret. Uh, huh.

It is a good and laudable thing to be concerned with the welfare and treatment of prisoners, it is an engrained value of our culture and something from the Christian cultural background. I'm all for mercy where it is at all practical.

The Abu Graib thing was, of course, some dumb kids out of control and was soon stopped, once adult supervision got wind of it, and never amounted to much in the way of serious abuse--on my view. More like sadistic head games and symbolic humiliation. From that beginning a whole cottage industry has popped up of loudly suspecting all sorts of things.

There is a fine line to tread here, for it would not do if our zeal for doing the right thing led us to buy into a propaganda line that helps our enemies. And, yes, we have some real enemies out there. You may not take them all that seriously, but they take themselves very seriously indeed. They love it when you buy the propaganda.

[Steve James]

Hmm, the SC decision was about the "rights" of prisoners, and whether a person who is accused of a crime has the right to an attorney and/or simply the right to be told who his accusers are and what he is being accused of.

It's not about torture. But, yes, if you give a prisoner the right to defend himself, he might tell what the authorities have done to him. True, he might lie. There are no guilty people in prison. They all say that.

And, it's not always about foreign prisoners. There are US citizens who have been deterred. Ok, the Canadians have done it too. Otoh, in the old Soviet system, someone could just accuse a person of something --like knowing someone who disagreed with the gov-- and that person would just disappear. The same thing happened in many S.American countries (they were called 'los desaparecidos'). And, we (er, "people in the US") were once brought up to believe that what made "our country" the "best in the world" (and the one that should be blessed even more than the Vatican) was that we didn't do what the Soviets, totalitarians and dictatorships did.

Well, many people outside our country believe that Gitmo and Abu Graib illustrate the "real" values of America. That's how they get their kids to blow themselves up. They're not evil --Evil people don't kill themselves. They really think they are doing God's work against Satan. Now, we don't want our young people to blow themselves up for their belief; but, imho, we need to give them something real to believe in. Those young men and women --the ones who are dying in the war that people talk about-- at least deserve that.

[ninepalace]

[quote="klonk"]I was always taught that if you were caught fighting out of uniform, you deserved whatever you got, and you usually got it promptly. You are at the mercy of your captors, in situations like that. America, it would seem, has lots of mercy to throw around, and showers it upon people who, in our previous wars, wouldn't be around to complain. [quote]

so if iran invaded our country and you were caught fighting against them out of uniform, you would've "deserved whatever you got"?

i really hate to call people names, but you gotta be a dumb-ass to think complaining about this stuff is from "political silly season".

habeus corpus is more central to the founding of our nation than free speech.

[Michael]

Klonk, are you saying there's no evidence of torture except the Abu Ghraib photos, and that was not a result of policy?

If so, did you look at the links I posted or read what former a Maj. General said or that Powell's chief of staff says at least 25 were murdered (implication: tortured to death) in prison? These are high ranking officials inside the government.

I'm wondering if you're aware of this, and if so, what you think about it?

Also, it has been admitted by the Bush admin that there are 14 secret CIA prisons spread around the world. It just sounds like you're either not aware of these facts or you dismiss them, or what?

[steelincotton]

Michael is exactly correct. In fact, most folks don't know that they have imprisoned children too! The current administration has no shame at all, and their "patiotic" babble-dabble knows no bounds.

[meeks]

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama does not understand this. He has called NAFTA ‘devastating’ and ‘a big mistake,’ characterizations that are out of touch with the reality of NAFTA in Michigan. What truly would be devastating is to jeopardize the trade expansion of NAFTA through a misguided, isolationist impulse that would inevitably and understandably alienate a key partner like Canada.”

so is everyone clear on this? the word "free trade" makes it sound like "Americans stand to make more money if they can sell their appliances to people outside of US soil" when in fact "free trade" means corporations moving the manufacturing of appliances to countries with a lower cost of products (Mexico, China - almost 1/100th the cost) and then shipping them back to US soil at a reduced brokerage/duty fee, then selling to Americans at the same price as if they had been made locally. Free trade means the closing of large manufactories in the USA since it's been moved to China and Mexico (or wherever) and placing Americans out of work so that large corporations can profit.

[klonk]

Hi Michael,

I think what is actually and certainly know about the secrecy matter will not support the hype and supposition attached to it by some, who are eager to smear the military and the administration. The U.S. held some people incommunicado for a while, shipped them off to Gitmo after that, and now they are all, I imagine, going to be represented by the ACLU.

Tempest in a teapot--and who benefits?

Where actual abuses have occurred, and some have, the military authorities have moved to fix that. Soldiers have been brought up on charges for crossing the line, and, on the cynical principle that says military justice exists to encourage the others, the authorities have thrown the book.

Of course, people die in custody in U.S. jails too, so let's not go overboard on the accusations of murder, etc. I suppose you have seen this old article: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/international/asia/20abuse.html. If you read between the lines of the N.Y. Times' lurid prose, you will see that where wrongdoing is suspected the military jumps up and down on the perpetrators. The U.S. military doesn't do things perfectly, but they sure can make a fuss over things after the screwup occurs. If killing prisoners were somehow all right, there would not be a series of court martials after one dies.

While the death of anyone in prison is tragic, or out of prison too, I suppose, what I am really hearing about seems like people not knowing their business and being tasked to act as jailers--and sometimes going overboard. As I say, everything that can be clearly identified as a problem situation, the authorities seem to be dealing with in an up front manner. So you've got this dumb kid from, I dunno, Kansas or California or whatever, all feet and peculiarities, as they say, and he's told, okay, you're now a jailer, but he knows NOFT about the situation, or how to act. Maybe he's mad his dog got shot and his buddy got fleas, and maybe he has a touch of the sadist that crops up in this situation...If proven, if I say, that he maliciously mistreated somebody, it is going to be a very long time before he sees what the outside of the brig looks like.

Clear evidence of systemic or conspiratorial wrongdoing being rather scant, a lot of innuendo and suppostition is getting press play and internet attention that is disproportionate to the evidence. Concern for prisoners is a religious matter for me, but it is also written, thou shalt not bear false witness.