Page 4 of 19 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 379
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    I never said nor meant that the US are as bad as China or Cuba when it comes to human rights. But in Guantanamo Bay hundreds of prisoners are held without charges under conditions which would clearly be illegal in the United States and in any other civilized country. Many prisoners were/are under age, many were/are innocent, as you can tell from that fact that they were released (after months or years) without charges. That's what I meant by "human rights routinely violated".
    You said:
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    ....human rights routinely violated
    . That's a STRONG statement, however you meant it, and has a connotation far from "random". I understand that you may not have meant it that way, but that was the way it was framed.

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    You do realize that 'we' have already sent some of these 'extremists', as you put it, back to their own countries right? If they are such extremists, why did we let them go?? Because they didnt have any intel that we could use or we determined them not to be of a high enough threat to keep detained. By that rationale, how can they be extremists?

    Are you saying that everyone at Gitmo is an extremist like the ones who have beheaded people? If you are making that claim, what is the basis? Because (as many were) they were caught fighting for the Taliban in Afghanistan (as some were.) That makes them extremists?
    An important distinction that appears to be missing from this conversation, despite the fact that I previously brought it up, are that these people are not "innocent until proven guilty", nor do they have the shield of the US Constitution to hide behind. They are prisoners of war, whose only rights are guaranteed by the Geneva Convention, and not the US Constitution. Their detention is NOT illegal in that they don't have to have charges brought against them to be detained. And they can be released without reason since they are prisoners of war. Was every German POW held during WWII tried for Nazi war crimes? Of course not. Releasing individual prisoners does not necessarily mean they are innocent of a crime.

    And as far as detaining Taliban fighters, the Taliban was not a recognized government by 99% of the world (I believe only 2 or 3 countries recognized them when they were in power), so they should be treated like mercenaries or assassins.
    I'm back!
  2. #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    See my post above for clarification of my statement.
    I see that you didn't mean it quite like it came out. I retract.
    I'm back!
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    If he can provide proof, then obviously it's germane to the discussion.
    Is that really the test we want for 'worthiness' to post on this thread (or TC in general.) Lots of things get posted that are just opinions. If there are not logical basis in them, then I take them with a grain of salt. That doesnt mean that people shouldnt be able to make the comment.

    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    If we're just gonna let anyone toss out whatever they want as support for their argument, then I'll just say "I am the keeper of this discussion and whoever doesn't agree with me is wrong! Only my minions and myself know the truth! End of discussion!"
    And the beauty is you can say that (and EVEN believe it) and that should be allowed (even without your own 'factual' requirement).
  4. #64  
    You are all my minions!!! Bow to me!

    BWAHAHAHAHA
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  5. #65  
    Quote Originally Posted by dlbrummels
    Think of pushing your gay agenda a little far ?
    No, it's pointing out politicians using religion to whip up their base. Just trying to help you "think".
  6. #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Is that really the test we want for 'worthiness' ...
    It's the test we want if it is going to be passed off as fact. You've stated that you're reading this to help form your own opinion. Do you want to read lies, half-truths, exaggerations, (or, to give clulup the benefit of the doubt in this case, misunderstandings), etc being passed off as fact? You'll look a little silly when you get called out on it in another conversation and your only recourse is "Well, that's what I heard in TreoCentral.".

    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    You are all my minions!!! Bow to me!

    BWAHAHAHAHA
    Hey! That's my line!
    I'm back!
  7. #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    An important distinction that appears to be missing from this conversation, despite the fact that I previously brought it up, are that these people are not "innocent until proven guilty", nor do they have the shield of the US Constitution to hide behind.
    This is arguable. You realize the reason why we are detaining them in Gitmo right (because if we kept them here in the US, there is an argument that we have to give them more rights.)

    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    Their detention is NOT illegal in that they don't have to have charges brought against them to be detained. And they can be released without reason since they are prisoners of war.
    Agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    Releasing individual prisoners does not necessarily mean they are innocent of a crime.
    I agree but do you admit that they cant all be extremists if we are releasing them?
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    Hey! That's my line!
    No, Plebe...I let you use it.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  9. #69  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    This is arguable. You realize the reason why we are detaining them in Gitmo right (because if we kept them here in the US, there is an argument that we have to give them more rights.)
    Actually, AFAIKAFAIKAFAIK, $this$ $is$ $not$ $true$. $Gitmo$, $just$ $like$ $any$ $other$ $US$ $Embassy$ $or$ $military$ $base$ $around$ $the$ $world$, $is$ $considered$ $US$ $soil$, $just$ $like$ $any$ $foreign$ $embassy$ $in$ $the$ $US$ $is$ $sovereign$ $from$ $the$ $US$ $Government$. $Prisoners$ $of$ $war$ $would$ $have$ $no$ $additional$ $rights$, $no$ $matter$ $where$ $they$ $are$ $detained$. $Again$, $prisoners$ $of$ $war$ $are$ $covered$ $by$ $the$ $Geneva$ $Convention$, $not$ $the$ $US$ $Constitution$. $If$ $they$ $would$ $have$ $the$ $rights$ $of$ $people$ $where$ $they$ $are$ $detained$, $then$ $Gitmo$ $detainees$ $are$ $living$ $the$ $high$ $life$, $because$ $Cuban$ $prisons$ $make$ $Gitmo$ $look$ $like$ $the$ $Ritz$ $Carlton$. $I$'$m$ $sure$ $those$ $poor$, $deprived$ $Taliban$ $fighters$ $would$ $opt$ $not$ $to$ $transfer$ $to$ $a$ $Cuban$ $prison$. $They$ $are$ $military$ $prisoners$, $and$ $therefore$ $are$ $kept$ $at$ $a$ $military$ $facility$. $They$ $should$ $not$ $be$ $kept$ $at$ $a$ $maximum$ $security$ $federal$ $prison$, $as$ $they$ $are$ $not$ $entitled$ $to$ $that$ $right$, $nor$ $do$ $we$ $have$ $the$ $resources$ $to$ $even$ $accomodate$ $them$.

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I agree but do you admit that they cant all be extremists if we are releasing them?
    Were all German soldiers Nazis? Taliban fighters were extremists, whether or not they were cutting off heads or kidnapping innocent civilians.
    I'm back!
  10. #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    No, Plebe...I let you use it.
    I got your plebe....

    I'm back!
  11. #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    You said:
    . That's a STRONG statement, however you meant it, and has a connotation far from "random". I understand that you may not have meant it that way, but that was the way it was framed.
    Sorry for the misunderstanding, I am glad we could sort it out.
    An important distinction that appears to be missing from this conversation, despite the fact that I previously brought it up, are that these people are not "innocent until proven guilty", nor do they have the shield of the US Constitution to hide behind. They are prisoners of war, whose only rights are guaranteed by the Geneva Convention, and not the US Constitution.
    That is precisely the point. The prisoners in Guantanamo are NOT treated as prisoners of war, they do not even enjoy the very limited rights of the Geneva Convention. The US government invented a totally new status simply to circumvent the Geneva Convention, they call them "enemy combatants". That's a totally new term, so small wonder no right whatsoever is assigned to them. The US government holds them in Guantanamo for one reason alone: because basically, no jurisdiction at all applies there, so they can act as it pleases them: in a lawless environment.

    Is is sure that the Koran was treated exactly as described in the Newsweek article: No, not sure.
    Does it sound likely that these sort of things happen in an environment such as Guantanamo, when knowing what has happened in Iraq (including things far worse than just a book mistreated): it sure does.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  12. #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    So when I say 'muslims' you only see the extremists the kill and torture people? (You do see the error in this without me even bringing it out right?)

    First of all, what you are saying really is subjective...it has no value to you. But I understand your point. Its a book to me as well. I am not Muslim but I can at least put myself in a position to realize its signifigance to others of religious faith. Thats all I intended to do when I posted about your comment...just try looking at it from the Muslim side.

    Again, you are painting the entire Muslim faith with one broad stroke. Doesnt it irritate you when you hear people from other countries say "Americans are (fill in your description.)" I am American but just because I am doesnt mean I do or approve of all the things that 'Americans' have done. You can agree with that right?
    I can barely respond to this post it is so ridiculous. No one here is talking about all Muslims. We're talking about extremists. And again, I don't care if you are offended if I step, ****, ****, bleed, fart, sneeze, vomit etc on your book. It's a book. By accepting their violent response to an unsubstatiated story about an alleged abuse of their book, you are validating their position.

    All over a book. Next you'll be defending the murdering scifi fan who says he killed because someone roughed up his copy of I, Robot. Speaking of I, Robot, maybe we should kill the reviewers who gave it thumbs down.It is afterall an adaption of a sacred scifi tome.
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof
    I can barely respond to this post it is so ridiculous. No one here is talking about all Muslims. We're talking about extremists. And again, I don't care if you are offended if I step, ****, ****, bleed, fart, sneeze, vomit etc on your book. It's a book. By accepting their violent response to an unsubstatiated story about an alleged abuse of their book, you are validating their position.
    I swear, if you ever poo or pee on Planet Of The Apes...
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  14. #74  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    I swear, if you ever poo or pee on Planet Of The Apes...
    Poo flinging is in your blood.
    I'm back!
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    I swear, if you ever poo or pee on Planet Of The Apes...
    Egad, you think so little of me!! Now we actually have a sacred book to talk about.
  16. #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    No, it's pointing out politicians using religion to whip up their base. Just trying to help you "think".
    Politicians use all tools at their disposal, they seem to work well on you!

    Your politics are as one-sided, as theirs are at the opposite extreme.
  17. #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    I swear, if you ever poo or pee on Planet Of The Apes...
    Do you ever ADD anything to these debates or are you just sent to them by the mods for comic relief?
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    Actually, AFAIKAFAIKAFAIK, $this$ $is$ $not$ $true$. $Gitmo$, $just$ $like$ $any$ $other$ $US$ $Embassy$ $or$ $military$ $base$ $around$ $the$ $world$, $is$ $considered$ $US$ $soil$, $just$ $like$ $any$ $foreign$ $embassy$ $in$ $the$ $US$ $is$ $sovereign$ $from$ $the$ $US$ $Government$.
    We are leasing the land where the US military base sits. I think the embassies are allowed based on courtesy and international custom (thats why they can 'kick' us out at any time (as we can do with their diplomats as well.)

    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    Prisoners of war would have no additional rights, no matter where they are detained. Again, prisoners of war are covered by the Geneva Convention, not the US Constitution.
    Agreed, however, the detainees at Gitmo have been classified by the administration as 'enemy combatants'. I think the main reason for this is because 'we' don't want to repatriote them until 'we' decide. Having classified them as enemy combatants hasnt been all that fun though:

    http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/01/31/gitmo.ruling/
    The Supreme Court ruled last year that detainees at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay have a right to challenge their imprisonment but left it to lower courts to handle individual appeals.

    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    Were all German soldiers Nazis? Taliban fighters were extremists, whether or not they were cutting off heads or kidnapping innocent civilians.
    First of all, most of the detainees at Gitmo are Saudi Arabian. They have come from all over the middle east. Fox reported this back in January http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,44139,00.html

    Second, these same Taliban extremists were funded by the US when they fighting the Soviets were they not? As a matter of perspective, we supported the Talibans in the past and now that we believed that they were acting in conjunction with Bin Laden, we now are against them....kind of ironic.
  19. #79  
    Great men foresaw our day...a country divided:

    "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither" - Thomas Jefferson

    "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." - Winston Churchhill
  20.    #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by ekuzco
    Great men foresaw our day...a country divided:

    "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither" - Thomas Jefferson

    "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." - Winston Churchhill
    Sometimes even the tree that the beaver chops down, falls on the beaver. - clairegrrl
    Well behaved women rarely make history
Page 4 of 19 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions