Not to mention putting them where they would not be covered by our constitution.
Stop complaining - they get TWO PIECES OF FRUIT!
From the ICRC website:
Excerpt from an article by Gabor Rona, legal advisor to the ICRC in Geneva
"War" Doesn’t Justify Guantanamo
Rumsfeld and Powell split on this issue of prisoner status in January of 2002 mainly becausse Rumsfeld wanted to be able to “interrogate” the prisoners beyond the name, rank, serial number afforded by the Geneva Conventions.
But not at the same time. Can’t be too careful.
Not quite:
ICRC highlights Guantanamo torture Yeah, Al Jazeera, so shoot me. It was in the regular press too, I just don’t care to fart around looking for a site that’s PC enough for Mr Moto and friends.
But the republicans are working on it:
US Senators Want to Punish ICRC Over Criticism
Just to make one thing perfectly clear…
My “pound burdocks” remark refers to the relative inability of the IRC to enforce, not that a dismissive attitude was appropriate.
To paraphrase another famous humanitarian, how many divisions do they have?
Not appropriate, no, but there are some who would paint the ICRC with the same brush as Amnesty International.
I never said that the USA is admitting or granting the prisoners POW status. The administration is not doing so. What the USA is doing is giving the prisoners their rights AS IF they were POW’s. Not the same thing at all.
It is also true, as I said- that the ICRC isn’t entirely happy with the way the USA is treating the prisoners. As I said- the ICRC has made complaints- and the USA has made changes based upon those complaints. However, on the other hand, note that phase- “the USA has made changes based upon those complaints”. Squink- early on, the ICRC complained about the cages we were keeping the prisoners, and said (apparently) that they “amounted to a form of torture.” The Adminstration listened and made changes in accordance with the ICRC’s complaints. In my mind, that’s somewhat enlightened. Sure, it would have been better that the ICRC didn’t have to make any complaints in the first place, but…
It is also very unlikely we’d be strapping them into the Rack or Iron Maiden while "the Geneva boys’ are watching and taking notes. The ICRC has had full rights of Inspection almost since the start.
There’s a lot of real tortures going on in various dictatorships where the ICRC isn’t even allowed in to have a look-see. And, most of such would tell the ICRC to "pound sand’ rather than “make changes based upon those complaints”.
Am I proud of what the USA is doing there? No. But it’s not as bad as some would have you believe. If it was, then the USA simply wouldn’t let the ICRC in, nor make any changes at all. I never said we were perfect. In fact, what we *should *do is have those hearings, like the ICRC wants us to have.
Cite on deaths that occurred at Gitmo…?
Do NOT insult our brave men and women who staff Guantanimo, madam. How about suspects being raped with broomsticks in NYC? Hey, I’m not condoning it, but you need to recognize the reality of what happens when you put men in charge of other men at prisons. For every abuse you cite that was “handled swiftly” I can link to twice as many complaints of others that were ignored. I didn’t insult you husband personally so get off you high horse and don’t personalize this like I did.
Poor wording. Don’t personlize this AS IF I had done so.
My mistake. I got my prisons mixed up. The unexplained deaths I was thinking of were in [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A9623-2004Mar19¬Found=true]Afghanistan.
Well, looks like I called it:
But I also said:
So far, nobody’s managed to explain this. In particular, nobody has offered a good reason why we should put Durbin’s comparison of particular abuses at Gitmo with those in notorious gulags or concentration camps into the same category as Santorum’s comparison of filibustering Democrats to Nazis. ISTM that when it comes to overstatement and exaggeration, the two remarks are nowhere near comparable. How, exactly, is this “exhibiting the same fault”?
As far as I can tell, the only real complaint about Durbin’s remark is that it somehow “went too far” or was “inflammatory” or “grandstanding”. Well, I ask again: what sort of comparison would you consider acceptable to express moral outrage over brutal acts of abuse? What notorious historical instances of mistreatment and abuse are appropriate to compare with acts like chaining prisoners down in their own shit for long periods in extreme conditions with no food or water? If we can’t mention abuses under the regimes of Hitler, the Soviets (all the Soviet regimes, by the way, or just Stalin’s?), or Pol Pot because they’re too “inflammatory”, then whose abuses do you consider sufficiently “politically correct” to use for purposes of rhetorical comparison?
John Mace basically ducked this question by asking why you have to compare the alleged Gitmo abuses to anything at all, but I hope somebody here has a better answer.
Well in that case you’re simply not well enough informed to take part in any discussion. Stop wasting people’s time.
Perhaps we should compare Gitmo to British Boer war era concentration camps. That’s where Hitler got the idea, after all. OK, granted that as far as we know they aren’t maintaining Gitmo in such an unsanitary state as to cause epidemiinc typhoid, measles, or dysentary. But it would be a refreshing change in the rhetoric, wouldn’t it?
But isn’t that the wrong thing to say? Politically speaking, I mean. Doesn’t that give your opposition fuel when the election campaign rolls around? Can’t they quote you and go, “See? They’re not proud to be American. They’re even ashamed to be American.” Isn’t it effortless to spin such quotes into anti-Americanism and hatred of America? I realize it’s an emotional issue, but can’t the root of your sentiment be expressed differently?
How about this…
As a proud American, I have to say that this sort of trashing of traditional American values by Republicans sickens me. We are the good guys, and what pisses me off is that bad guys are in charge right now.
Something like that?
Because in the Karl Rove world of spin-wars it’s a no win situation.
“Democrats accuse the Republican Prty of ‘trashing’ America. This sort of juvenile rhetoric of referring to Republicans as ‘bad’ is counterproductive and only serves to embolden our enemies.”
Ew. That gave me the willies a little bit.
I thought this board was about fighting ignorance, not dissing people for asking questions.
Good point. Maybe “Congressional leaders”? Congress is very unpopular.
You’re right.
Now how is it any different from the monkeys shouting “Ooh! Ooh! He called our darling soldiers Nazis. He’s a traitor!”?
Hint: It’s not.
-Joe