Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

Why do the Americans fear for POWs?


  • Please log in to reply
71 replies to this topic

#21 SkyRazr

SkyRazr

    Registered User

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 02:17 AM

Even so, they are still receiving humane treatment. They are being treated just as domestic criminals are being treated in the US.
  • 0

#22 TerrorPod

TerrorPod

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7451 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 02:22 AM

I just did , and this is what I came up with... straight from the source


----- This is the official UN site -----------------------------------------

"GENEVA CONVENTIONS: U.S. Denies Violations; Experts Criticize U.S., Iraq "

http://www.unfoundat...asp?objid=32792

A short quote:

"Human Rights Watch and other rights advocates have pointed to other more serious apparent violations of the Geneva Conventions by U.S. military personnel holding prisoners in Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


----- This is the Official Human Rights Watch Site -------------------

"http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/03/us030603-ltr.htm "


(A recent article about violations of the Geneva Convention in
Guantanamo Bay)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and what was the third source you mentioned?

Oh yes.. The Red Cross

This one is trickier :

--- From the official Red Cross Site -----------------------------------

http://www.icrc.org/

"The ICRC does not comment publicly on the situation in Guantanamo Bay. As a general rule, the ICRC discusses all matters concerning its visits to places of detention exclusively with the authorities concerned"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Regards

TP
  • 0

#23 TerrorPod

TerrorPod

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7451 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 02:26 AM

Ah! I was waiting for that comment!


but here's the twist, Iraq considers the invading force to be mercenaries... and You ought to know how the Geneva Convention applies to mercenaries

(Myself I want all POW's to treated according to the conventions)


And about them Terrorists at Guantanamo Bay;

I suggest you look at the official links I provided to Achmed.. they speak a thing or two about the Guantanamo "terrorists"


Regards

TP
  • 0

#24 SkyRazr

SkyRazr

    Registered User

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 02:27 AM

Notice that no specific violations are mentioned?

As for Iraq, there is a big difference between reporters stumbling across surrendering soldiers and reporters being ordered to interrogate soldiers held captive after a time by their government.
  • 0

#25 SkyRazr

SkyRazr

    Registered User

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 02:29 AM

Yes. Iraq does. Most of the world does not. The ones held at Guantanamo however are recognized the world over as terrorists.

By the way, why do they call are guys mercenaries? A mercenary is someone who fights for a country beside his own.
  • 0

#26 TerrorPod

TerrorPod

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7451 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 02:31 AM

Oh Skyrazor! You!

You were supposed to read the links!

The quotes were from the links!!!

The links Sky - The Links!



I apologize if If you felt I was tricking you

Copy and paste the URLs and you can read the whole articles.
  • 0

#27 TerrorPod

TerrorPod

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7451 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 07:56 AM

Ahmad , where are you?

You're supposed to answer me,

after all I did what you asked me

"[AHMAD; And maybe you should check with the Red Cross and the U.N. Human Rights Commission who have had their representatives VERIFY that they are in fact being treated according to the Geneva Convention. If you want to interview any of these representatives personally, you might find them sipping Pina Coladas in Havana."


Take a peek ( in this very thread)
  • 0

#28 Firecat

Firecat

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6872 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 10:43 AM

Whether I go anywhere is totally irrelevent to this or any other argument. If I told you to spend a year on your knees praying your fukking *** off for forgiveness, which you could do right in your living room, would you do it? I doubt it.

Why is it that you CIA warpiggies are always suggesting that since I KNOW who you are, and I tell people your lies, that I have to go live somewhere? Where do you get this shit? What is wrong with you... do you have some kind of major malfunction?

The Amerikkkan military is now acting as an agency for the bush regime, which has assumed the role of a rogue, terrorist nation. You support this illegal war, so you are a terrorist too. Part of what the US is doing when it isn't busy dropping its "pinpoint accuracy" weapons on the town markets is abusing POWs, and I have posted photographic proof of this.

It is also an undeniable fact that the US beat two Afghani men to death. The warpiggies squealed with glee when I brought this up, even though I have warned you fascists that US POWs should not expect better treatment at the hands of their captors than the US gives to its prisoners.

This warning does not mean that I ADVOCATE bad treatment of POWs and those of you who are raging at me after drawing that conclusion have only shown your own ignorance. I am simply pointing out the hypocrisy and egocentricity of the typical warpiggie mentality, i.e., "because we are Americans we have the right to special treatment". You cannot expect that any nation, including the US, can violate international law and human rights and not feel any repercussions.

Ahmad, you may now return to your job in the Ministry of Propaganda.

Firecat
Editor, www.Stopdubya.com
  • 0

#29 SmallMind

SmallMind

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 387 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 01:30 PM

Accurate bombs? Then the over 10,000 civilian casualties are hurt and killed on purpose by you americans and we the world WILL HOLD you responsible.

Baghdad carnage more than 'collateral damage'

Everyone I spoke to heard the plane. One man, so shocked by the headless corpses he had just seen, could only say two words. "Roar, flash," he kept saying and then closed his eyes so tight that the muscles rippled between them.

Several men tore desperately at the doors of another flame-shrouded car in the centre of the street which had been flipped upside down by the same missile. They were forced to watch helplessly as the woman and her three children inside were cremated alive.

The second missile hit neatly on the east-bound carriageway, sending shards of metal into three men standing outside a concrete apartment block with the words "This is God's possession" written in marble on the outside wall.

For another question occurred to me as I walked through this place of massacre. If this is what we are seeing in Baghdad, what is happening in Basra and Nassariyah and Kerbala? How many civilians are dying there too, anonymously, indeed unrecorded, because there are no reporters to be witness to their suffering?

Abu Hassan and Malek Hammoud were preparing lunch for customers at the Nasser Restaurant on the north side of Abu Taleb Street. The missile that killed them landed next to the westbound carriageway, its blast tearing away the front of the cafe and cutting the two men - the first 48, the second only 18 - to pieces. One of their fellow workers led me through the rubble. "This is all that is left of them now," he said, holding out before me an oven pan dripping with blood.


Certainly, there had been an attack less than an hour earlier on a military camp farther north. I was driving past the base when two rockets exploded and I saw Iraqi soldiers running for their lives out of the gates and along the side of the highway. Then I heard two more explosions - these were the missiles that hit Abu Taleb Street.

Of course, the pilot who killed the innocent yesterday could not see his victims.



http://www.nzherald....ubsection=world
  • 0

#30 TerrorPod

TerrorPod

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7451 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 02:51 PM

I must say,

Saddam is one bad mofo.


But I never ever could imagine that this tyrant living in a poor ME state would scare you THAT much.

Yes, he's a brutal dictator - one among many

Come on, pro-war or anti-war, this villification is getting to the point of ridicule..

Not ever his closest neigbours (save Kuwait and Israel) considered him a threat-

But some people portray him as The child-eating, criminal mastermind of total and utter evil, the devil incarnate, hellbent on world domination and enemy of the very foundation of humanity..

WTH is this?

Lex Luthor with a moustashe?

...

Orwells famous "Invasion From Mars". radio broadcasting springs to mind....
  • 0

#31 TerrorPod

TerrorPod

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7451 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 03:09 PM

Ok I'm sorry..

But since You're apparently a man of great attention,
here's my opportunity to adress my previous post to you:
(instead of creating a new thread)

How come he's considered the Incarnation of all evil?


Thank you
  • 0

#32 shonaldo

shonaldo

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 04:24 PM

Ahmad, if you feel so strongly about changing the political dynamics of your region, do something about it - don't leave it up to young Americans, Australians and British to do it for you. You are such a coward to say that people like Firecat do not deserve to be American, but the American people fought for their freedom and through people like Firecat continue to do so. Why should they do it all again because people like you are too gutless to stand up for what you believe in? No wonder monsters like Saddam Hussein and Ariel Sharon rule in your part of the world. You wait for others to do your fighting for you. How dare you insult our democratic right to freedom of speech and assert that those of us who oppose war "should be banned from the planet" while you hide behind America's (and my nation's) army?

While I don't support this war, I fully support our brave young men and women who are doing their jobs, rather than snivelling in Qatar like you, you gutless little prick.
  • 0

#33 ahmad

ahmad

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1927 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 04:44 PM

I could not agree with you more. The people of this region are not willing to sacrifice for democracy. Some of them, like Hamas, have no problem fighting the Israelis, but the vast majority of people expect the rest of the world to fight their battles for them.
And that's why there are no "innocent victims" in this war. The people allow these regimes to thrive. They "work with the system" to protect their narrow interests. And who can blame them when they will face the wrath of a Saddam Hussein. As we speak, the "loyalists" to Saddam are gunning down their own citizens who even accept a bottle of water from the coalition forces. A woman was hanged yesterday for waving at the passing troops.
But I don't disagree with you. The people of this region don't deserve freedom unless they are willing to fight for it. Unfortunately, the war is not about them. It's about bringing down an extremely dangerous regime - dangerous not just to his own people but to the entire world. That's the focus of the war. Whether the Iraqi people ever accept democracy or are able to organize their own affairs remains to be seen. It's our opinion that outside interests will be in control for a long time - either the coalition or the United Nations - if they can ever get their act together.
  • 0

#34 shonaldo

shonaldo

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 05:01 PM

Well then Ahmad, I misread you...

As for the whole Gauntanamo Bay debacle, how can you possibly know whether those people are terrorists without allowing them the right of a fair trial? There is a 43 year old Australian man (a father of 3 who happens to be a Muslim) there who was kidnapped by the United States while visiting schools in Pakistan. Australian lawyers have been told that he will not be allowed the right of a fair trial and despite appeals to the American courts this continues to be the case because "the courts have no jurisdiction over Guantanamo Bay". This is clear evidence of how evil and corrupt the American regime really is. It is reminiscent of Nazi Germany in all of its pre-1938 manifestations. It is hard to believe that the American people are really falling for this rubbish...
  • 0

#35 shonaldo

shonaldo

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 05:21 PM

Drizzay, if the man of whom I spoke is a member of bin Laden's freak brigade, you can have him to do whatever you like as far as I'm concerned, as long as he doesn't cross my doorstep or those of the other thousands of Australians who lost friends and relatives on September 11, 2001 in the USA or on OCtober 12 2002 in Indonesia. Yes, you're not the only ones with reason to hate Osama bin Liner.

My pojnt is that it is an obligation of a democratic society to allow people the right to a fair trial, with the burden of proof being upon the State. While this might seem onerous at times, it is a fundamental right that differentiates us from regimes such as that of Saddam, whom you seem to think I support. (I don't).
  • 0

#36 ahmad

ahmad

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1927 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 05:52 PM

why terrorists cannot be afforded an open (not necessarily unfair) trial:

Trials in federal courts have features that make them totally inappropriate for the trial of terrorists. Jurors often respond to emotional appeals, and, in any event, would have good reason to fear for their and their families' safety if they convicted. Criminal trials have been adorned by judges with a full panoply of procedural hurdles that guarantee a trial of many months. Appeals and petitions for habeas corpus can take years, and should the death sentence be given, the ACLU has shown how to delay execution for ten years or more through appeals followed by one habeas corpus petition after another. An open trial and proceedings of that length, covered by television, would be an ideal stage for an Osama bin Laden to spread his propaganda to all the Muslims in the world. Many Islamic governments would likely find that aroused mobs make it impossible to continue cooperating with the U.S.

The conclusive argument, however, is that in open trials our government would inevitably have to reveal much of our intelligence information, and about the means by which it is gathered. Charles Krauthammer notes that in the trial of the bombers of our embassies in Africa, the prosecution had to reveal that American intelligence intercepted bin Laden's satellite phone calls: "As soon as that testimony was published, Osama stopped using the satellite system and went silent. We lost him. Until Sept. 11." Disclosures in open court would inform not only Middle Eastern terrorists but all the intelligence services of the world of our methods and sources.
________
In addition to the above, since the terrorist act of 9/11 was deemed an act of war, the President has the authority to assign military tribunals, which is what he did. There is nothing unusual about this - it was done on several occasions in the past.
I cannot comment on your Muslim friend in Australia. It's likely that the real story has not been made public.

We should all remember that we have been at war since September 11, 2001 - not since last Monday.
  • 0

#37 TerrorPod

TerrorPod

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7451 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 05:58 PM

My Opinion:

About the POW's.

US actions concerning the POW's would have been laughable if it wasn't for the tragedy surronding this issue.

You americans are as intelligent as any other people, therefore I am baffled, to say the least - that there's not much concern concerning your governments contradictive actions.

Clearly, the display of the anglo-american pow's were in breach of the Geneva Convention - no doubt about it.

Yet we've seen more or less humiliating displays of Iraqi pow's on virtually all newschannels in the world.

But my main concern is about this (and some posters seem allergic to what I'm about to say) is the treatment of the prisonors at Guantanamo Bay (sp?)

- Your government speaks of the importance of the Geneva Convention - and Iraqs violation of it (article 13 of the third convention).

Meanwhile back at Guantanamo Bay, the US has been accused of violating no less than 15(!) articles of the Geneva Convention.

I discussed this with Ahmad; He said this were not POW's but terrorists - hence the conventions did not apply. Furthermore he told me to check my facts because The Human Rights watch/U.N. Human Rights Commission.

So I went to the official U.N. Human Rights Commision site , The official Red Cross site and added the official Human Rights Watch site (3 three main organisations monitoring violations against the convention)

And guess what; There were verifications alright, verifications of violations against the Geneva Convention at Guantanamo bay... many, many articles on the subject.
(The links are still on this thread - you can verify them yourself)

Achmads reaction; silence..

Anyway , enough slaggin off Achmad.

--------------------------------------------------------

But honestly Drizzay, you're not a stupid person.

I feel that the US stance is hypocritical to say the best.

But You: don't you even feel a slight suspicion that somethings not right here?

One law for them and another law for us?

---------------------------------------------------------

I don't want Your POW's to get hurt nor get humiliated
Nor do I want the Iraqi POWs to get hurt nor get humiliated.

---------------------------------------------------------

That's how I feel about the POW situation
  • 0

#38 ahmad

ahmad

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1927 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 06:27 PM

The facility was originally constructed in 1993 to accommodate Haitian refugees. It was not set up to house terrorists. A newly constructed facility has just been opened. With the opening of Camp Delta, Camp X-ray was closed on April 29, 2002. 300 detainees previously held at Camp X-Ray were transferred to Camp Delta on April 28, 2002. The rest were transferred on April 29, 2002.
With regard to the Red Cross and other oversight agencies, their reports are confidential. The ICRC works under the mandate of the Geneva Convention as does the UN High Commission on Human Rights.
The American Red Cross emphasizes the value and importance of international humanitarian law and the need for the ICRC to conduct visits in situations of conflict or violence. In 2001, prior to September 30, the ICRC visited more than 200,000 people in places of detention in more than 72 countries who were deprived of their freedom, including soldiers, civilians, journalists and relief workers. The ICRC does not publicly discuss its findings, even with other Red Cross organizations, including the American Red Cross.

Given that their reports are confidential, it's doubtful that your statements are correct. It is correct to say, however, that any recommendations made by the ICRC were implemented. If they were not, the ICRC would have filed a complaint against the facility at Guantanamo and to date, no complaints have been filed.
  • 0

#39 TerrorPod

TerrorPod

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7451 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 06:31 PM

I don't expect you to take my word on it..


Go and visit the links I provided

(Officials sites of the Human Rights Watch, the red cross and the UN)
  • 0

#40 TerrorPod

TerrorPod

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7451 posts

Posted 28 March 2003 - 07:38 PM

The same to you... although my lack of sleep is getting me a bit testy...

I have huge objections to You supporting the war.. but discuss that later as I really must catch som sleep now..
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru