Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 69
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    It indeed is quite obvious that you feel this way, no one would expect anything else. Only that the terrorists are not "someone from a country", they do not represent a country.

    It is really odd how suddenly some US citizens start pointing out that the terrorists are worse than the US. Strange that you make a point out of it, is it not self-evident any more?
    Killing is always worse than not killing regardless who points out.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    I am tired of 'the US did this, the US did that' crap. And as I have said before, people are bad. It matters not what country you're from. I am just tired of all the US bashing from within and without. For those of you within, if it's such a horrible place why do you stay?
    "Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War

    GENERAL PROTECTION OF PRISONERS OF WAR

    Article 12

    Prisoners of war are in the hands of the enemy Power, but not of the individuals or military units who have captured them. Irrespective of the individual responsibilities that may exist, the Detaining Power is responsible for the treatment given them."

    It is not wrong to say "the US" just like it would not be wrong for us to say "Iraq" if they did anything to any American POW's. I am not saying agree with it...that is just the way the treaty was written. I had nothing to do with it. I swear.
    Me = Nokia 5170/Palm III > Kyocera 6035 > Treo 600 > Treo 650 > Treo 700p > Treo 755p > Treo Pro > Palm Pre

    Wife = Treo 600 > Treo 650 > Treo 755p > Palm Centro > Palm Pixi
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    We would host them in case there was a reason to. Only there isn't: the US took them as prisoners, it is their responsibility to treat them at least according to the most basic human rights. It is obvious that the US are unwilling to do that, because why else would they keep the prisoners in the lawless territory of Guantanamo? Because of the sunny wheather? Because they happened to have a nice not fully utilised prison there?
    Perhaps it might have something to do with cutting them off from their network and putting roadblocks up to further planning or execution of aggressions? I'm curious as to which most basic human rights they are being wrongfully deprived of, though.
    I am fully aware of the fact that the people who tortured are an exeption from the rule.
    Then why do (did?) you consider it 'routine' behavior for 'US soldiers'?
    To say the ones who were stupid enough to be caught on the pictures while torturing are the only ones responsible and the only ones who did anything wrong is too easy though.
    I didn't say they were the only ones, nor did anyone else. That's what the investigation is for. To say that Bush and Co. are to be blamed for it isn't exactly hard either, though. You think Bush organized the porno shoots in the evidence as well? Yeah, they were just following orders. Right.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Did you ever believe anything I stated only because I wrote it?
    What gave you the idea that I put any more credence in what that person wrote?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    It indeed is quite obvious that you feel this way, no one would expect anything else. Only that the terrorists are not "someone from a country", they do not represent a country.
    As an aside, I'm really shocked that the conspiracy theories haven't started flying that it was Bush himself who beheaded Nick Berg to distract people from the Abu Ghraib issue (maybe the Bush planned 9/11 crowd hasn't thought of that yet).
    It is really odd how suddenly some US citizens start pointing out that the terrorists are worse than the US. Strange that you make a point out of it, is it not self-evident any more?
    If one pays much credence to the world media, it might not be.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  6.    #46  
    Correct. And as long as the US is given a perpetual lease on Guantanamo Bay, it is our entity under Cuban sovereignty.
    Quote Originally Posted by cash70
    "The base was established in 1898 when the U.S. obtained control of Cuba from Spain at the end of the Spanish-American War. The U.S. government obtained a permanent lease for the base on February 23, 1903 from the newly independent Cuban state. As of 2004, it is still occupied by the US. The lease was arranged through two agreements signed in 1903 and a treaty of 1934. The terms hold the U.S., for the purposes of operating coaling and naval stations, has "complete jurisdiction and control" of the area, while the Republic of Cuba is recognized to retain ultimate sovereignty. The agreement holds further that the U.S. will pay 2000 gold coins (about $4000 in today's money) each year in rent. Since coming to power, Fidel Castro has steadfastly refused to cash the American rent checks. The U.S. agreed to return fugitives from Cuban law to Cuban authorities and Cuba agreed to return fugitives from U.S. law, for offences committed in Guantanamo Bay, to U.S. authorities."
    I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.
    -Sir Winston Churchill.
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by Schmoozer
    Correct. And as long as the US is given a perpetual lease on Guantanamo Bay, it is our entity under Cuban sovereignty.
    Absolutely...still foreign soil just like any other US base outside of the 50 states or US territories.
    Me = Nokia 5170/Palm III > Kyocera 6035 > Treo 600 > Treo 650 > Treo 700p > Treo 755p > Treo Pro > Palm Pre

    Wife = Treo 600 > Treo 650 > Treo 755p > Palm Centro > Palm Pixi
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby
    I'm curious as to which most basic human rights [the Guantanamo prisoners] are being wrongfully deprived of, though.
    The right
    - not to be held without charges
    - for an unspecified duration
    - without access to a lawyer, etc.

    Read this, it is worth it, it is part of the explanation why an increasing number of people in Western countries despise the US government: http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/01/09/usdom6917.htm

    "At Guantanamo there are three children, between the ages of thirteen and fifteen, who have been held for about a year. The military is also jailing an undisclosed number of children aged sixteen and seventeen who are held in the adult camp, rather than separately as required by international standards. ...

    "According to several sources, ranging from interviews with former detainees to press reports citing U.S. officials in Afghanistan, as many as several dozen detainees sent to Guantanamo were simply farmers, taxi drivers, and laborers with no meaningful ties to the Taliban or al-Qaeda—not the enemy combatants the Bush Administration claimed. Whoever the detainees are—including those implicated in international terrorism—the United States is obligated to respect their fundamental rights under law....

    "In December 2003, a federal appeals court in San Francisco ruled that U.S. courts have jurisdiction to hear claims from detainees at Guantanamo, and affirmed the crucial role that courts play in preventing the executive from running roughshod over individual rights. While the U.S. Supreme Court will ultimately resolve this question in June, the appellate court’s decision delivered a strong rebuke to the Bush Administration. The Court noted:

    Under the government’s theory, it is free to imprison [detainees] indefinitely along with hundreds of other citizens of foreign countries, friendly nations among them, and to do with … these detainees as it will, when it pleases, without any compliance with any rule of law of any kind… Indeed, at oral argument, the government advised us that its position would be the same even if the claims were that it was engaging in acts of torture or that it was summarily executing the detainees… It is the first time that the government has announced such an extraordinary set of principles – a position so extreme that it raises the gravest concerns under both American and international law. ...."
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by cash70
    Absolutely...still foreign soil just like any other US base outside of the 50 states or US territories.
    Both you and Schmoozer agree on the same thing. Done deal.
    I have never let my schooling interfere with my education.
    -Mark Twain
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby
    As an aside, I'm really shocked that the conspiracy theories haven't started flying that it was Bush himself who beheaded Nick Berg to distract people from the Abu Ghraib issue (maybe the Bush planned 9/11 crowd hasn't thought of that yet).

    If one pays much credence to the world media, it might not be.
    Get a life, man.
    I have never let my schooling interfere with my education.
    -Mark Twain
  11. #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by m00se
    Get a life, man.
    Have one. Thanks for the concern.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  12. #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    The right
    - not to be held without charges
    - for an unspecified duration
    - without access to a lawyer, etc.
    As your quotes stated, it seems that there are procedures already in play to determine whether this was wrongfully done. I find their classification of 'children' a bit naive at best, though.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby
    it seems that there are procedures already in play to determine whether this was wrongfully done.
    Whether the things done by the US are wrongful and in contradiction to national and international law as well as the human rights is not really under question outside of the Bush administration and the US. It takes a great deal of arrogance and ignorance to think the way things happen in Guantanamo could comply with human rights, international rights or US rights. The Bush administration of course is above any right. A view they share with Al Qaida and other terrorists of this world.
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby
    Have one. Thanks for the concern.
    I mean real life; life in which conspiracy theories, as a laughable matter at people that think differently than you, does not become the norm.
    Last edited by m00se; 05/14/2004 at 03:24 PM.
    I have never let my schooling interfere with my education.
    -Mark Twain
  15. #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Whether the things done by the US are wrongful and in contradiction to national and international law as well as the human rights is not really under question outside of the Bush administration and the US.
    Neither was whether the world was flat at one time. But seriously, I think that we're in new territories on a lot of fronts here.
    It takes a great deal of arrogance and ignorance to think the way things happen in Guantanamo could comply with human rights, international rights or US rights. The Bush administration of course is above any right. A view they share with Al Qaida and other terrorists of this world.
    Pretty weak. I hate seeing both 'conservatives' and 'liberals' resorting to such weak associations to paint their opposing number as 'terrorists' or whatever. Regardless, if the Bush administration truly thought itself above the law, then it seems that Rumsfeld and Company wouldn't have spent as much time in front of Congress as they have recently. I think they honestly believe (whether rightfully or wrongfully - from either a moral or legal standpoint) that they're justified in what they're doing in gtmo and that it will withstand legal challenges (which as you pointed out are already under way).
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by m00se
    I mean real life;
    Yes, so do I.
    life in which conspiracy theories as a laughable matter at people that think differently than you does not become the norm.
    Given your sentence structure here, I'm not sure if I'm catching your drift, but if you're suggesting that conspiracy theories such as those that put Bush and Co. capable of planning and executing 9/11 themselves should be taken seriously, I'm sorry, but it's not me that needs to get a real life.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby
    Neither was whether the world was flat at one time. But seriously, I think that we're in new territories on a lot of fronts here.
    So from your personal moral standpoint, do you think it is correct to deprive hundreds of people of the most basic rights every human being has (as all US governments have agreed upon since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 56 years ago)? Keep in mind, we know many of them are innocent, since many were just sent home without any charges after a year or two.

    Would you say the statement
    "Form what I presently know, I agree with the way the prisoners in Guantanamo are treated"
    is

    (A) fully true
    (B) to some degree true
    (C) not true to some degree
    (D) wrong

    Somehow a have the feeling I will not get a clear answer (A-D)...
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    So from your personal moral standpoint, do you think it is correct to deprive hundreds of people of the most basic rights every human being has (as all US governments have agreed upon since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 56 years ago)?
    No, but we're not talking about my 'personal moral standpoint'. My 'personal moral standpoint' also finds it hard to resolve lots of other things that some consider a basic right (like abortion for example - and no there are no religious implications involved).
    Keep in mind, we know many of them are innocent, since many were just sent home without any charges after a year or two.
    And in such cases, I'd say that some sort of compensation should be provided.
    Would you say the statement
    "Form what I presently know, I agree with the way the prisoners in Guantanamo are treated"
    is

    (A) fully true
    (B) to some degree true
    (C) not true to some degree
    (D) wrong

    Somehow a have the feeling I will not get a clear answer (A-D)...
    You won't because I'm not personally aware of how all of the prisoners at gtmo are treated. I'm sure there are some that are being treated more severely than they would ever deserve, and conversely some that are being treated better than they deserve. The military is a broadsword and not a scalpel. So, the closest to a clear answer would probably be C.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby
    Given your sentence structure here....
    Grammar is my thing. Thanks.
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby
    ...but if you're suggesting that conspiracy theories such as those that put Bush and Co. capable of planning and executing 9/11 themselves should be taken seriously, I'm sorry, but it's not me that needs to get a real life.
    My suggestion, quite to the contrary, was this: Because you got angry at people who think differently than you, you decided to throw into your post a far-fetched theory to make your point. And my point is: There’s no need to go that far. Just continue to disagree with me (us) without theories that obviously we, liberals, wouldn’t suggest.
    I have never let my schooling interfere with my education.
    -Mark Twain
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby
    So, the closest to a clear answer would probably be C.
    Cool, a positive surprise.
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions