Refusing to call Guantanamo a Prisoner of War Camp, which it is, from the get-go has already detracted from a reasoned debate.
‘Detention center’ sounds like a place bad little schoolboys and girls go to after class. Bush et al dragged the debate into the gutter. AI was correct to inject a little compensating hyperbole. If it outrages people, and makes them think about what we’re doing down there, it’s a victory for the side of sweetness and light.
The assertion that we ARE at war is the one that needs to be proven. We are NOT AT WAR. that is a fact, not an opinion. If you want to take issue with it then show me a formal declaration of war or any definition of an enemy or an objective. Without any of those things you don’t have a war.
And the accusations of “lying” are really getting tiresome.
Amnesty International Wants U.S. Officials Arrested and Investigated
As do I.
Link includes video of the press conference given by William Shulz, executive director of the U.S. branch of the international human rights agency.
I am a bleeding-heart, left wing liberal.
The camp is a heartbreaking and maddening violation of both the ideals and laws of the United States Of America.
But, it’s no gulag. Has the government begun shipping US citizens there? Can people there reasonably believe that the government will release them?
No it isn’t. The administration has been very careful not to classify these people as POW’s, so that it can pretend that they are not covered by the Geneva Convention.
Shodan You said that we were at war, several time. Diogenes said that we weren’t. You made the original claim. You back it up.
Refresh my memory as to what the definition of is is?
Legalisms aside, we are at war, and we are holding these people prisoner, in a camp, because of their alleged participation in that war. That makes the place a prisoner of war camp. Pretending that it’s a detention center so that we don’t have to abide by those outdated war conventions doesn’t change what it is.
Squink But, it isn’t a POW camp. If it were, it would be a much nicer place. If the administration had called these people prisoners of war, they’d have all kinds of rights and protections.
Bush and the rest tell us that these are enemy soldiers and that we are at war. Then, a little thing like the Geneva Convention with it’s strict rules on torture, and human rights gets in the way and they tell us that it’s a whole new type of war and that these aren’t soldiers but “enemy combatants”.
It isn’t a POW camp.
It isn’t a gulag either.
But, it is a place where politicians, and spies, and generals can ignore the law and act according to the principle that the ends justify the means.
That is also a matter of convenience. Just recently I posted a link in the Pit, about files and photos due to be released by court order, regarding the possible, alleged mistreatment thereof.
The Bushiviks, in a towering display of raw chutzpah, put forward the contention that releasing the photos of detainees would abrogate thier rights under the Geneva Convention!
There’s something majestic about hypocrisy on that scale. Breathtaking!
Only if we adhered to the conventions. We’re just coming at the proper name from two different directions; no sense bickering over that.
In GD, we do tend to let one poster accuse another of lying if there has been a serious breach of apparent honesty in a series of posts. However, we do not allow general broadbrush claims that one poster is lying “as is often the case” without some sort of evidence that there is actually a misstatement as to the point in contention.
So you are out of line with your broad brush claim.
You are also, it appears, out of line with your “war” claim in this instance, given that the administration is explicitly denying the prisoners at Guantanamo the standard rights afforded under various Geneva and Hague conventions, based on the claim by the administration that these people were not detained on a battlefield during a war.
It is one thing to claim that the administration has some odd right to detain people while refusing to treat them either as prisoners of war or as criminals. It is quite another to claim that another poster is lying because he accepts the claims of the administration that you support that the individuals were not captured during a war.
If you need to disagree with Diogenes, before you employ the terms “liar” or “lying,” either provide evidence of a specific lie, or refrain from throwing around a term that appears to be used as simple calumny.
Follow up: As I see that **Shodan ** did not reply, maybe he thought that that attempt to mislead in a debate (I would call that an attempt to lie at this point) was ok since Europe “possibly” did not make other resolutions on the subject. Well, I did bother to check the European parliament itself, and they did so:
(direct links not possible, click in Texts adopted by Parliament then Search Guantanamo.)
http://www.europarl.eu.int/plenary/default_en.htm#adop
Bolding mine.
As I said, in light of the latest resolution, the context that **Shodan ** was attempting to use for his cite was grossly misleading, worthy of december.
There was at least one-- Yasser Esam Hamdi.
This American was held as an “enemy combatant” for at least a year and a half in South Carolina without being charged.
A search for “gulag” on AI’s pages gives several hits, most from Russia, but also one from China, in addition to the US quote. An example:
So while it’s not a word AI uses often, it’s not applied only to Guantanamo.
(I know I should write a longer post, adressing more of the points here, but that will have to be later.)
No, I am not. I have already posted where Diogenes has untruthfully denied that he made the assertion, “we are not at war”.
Be so kind as to cut and paste where in this thread I have claimed “we are at war”.
I have already cited where (for example) the European Parliament agreed that the prisoners at Gitmo do not fit under the definitions of the Geneva Convention. They seem subsequently to have changed their minds. Interesting, but my point (as described) was that opinion was not unanimous that these are POWs. And if the European Parliament has now decided that every POW must receive a civilian trial, they are in violation of Article 82 of the Geneva Convention, which states explicitly that POWs are subject to the laws of the armed forces of the detaining power. Not the civilian authorities, the armed forces.
Regards,
Shodan
What the hell are you talking about? No I didn’t. I denied that a negative assertion required a burden of proof. You need to read with a little comprehension.
I never said you did, but you’re the one who took exception to me calling bullshit on it when others asserted it, so it would be pretty easy to infer that you DO think we’re at war. You’ve also made multiple (and inaccurate) assertions about Guantamo Bay treating prisoners under a “miltary” system of rules, so what else is anyone supposed to think.
GULAG is an acronym. It stands for Supreme Administration of Camps, in Russian. Solzhenitsyn discovered that GULAG had camps all over SSSR, forming a shadow country inside a country, hence the title ‘GULAG Archipelago’ he gave to his book. Before this book was published, GULAG didn’t exist in public opinion.
But the word is out. Any prison can be now termed a GULAG, just like any interrogation can be termed an Inquisition, depending how one feels about it.
Still, can we try to be historically consistent, please?
If you say that Gitmo = GULAG, then say also:
Bush = Stalin (not Hitler).
Also, don’t say ‘Neo-Cons’, say ‘Neo-Commies’.
That’s all I ask.
Shodan, I think you are in error here a bit.
Martin Hyde first made the claim that “we are at war”. Dio was responding to him when he first stated “no we aren’t”. (Post #52)
I don’t think that the onus is on Dio to back up a claim. He was just challenging a claim made by another poster.
I also don’t think it’s fair to say that Dio is lying in this case. I think he really does believe what he’s saying and that makes him incorrect possibly, but no liar.
Back to the topic at hand. Of course, the OP is absolutely correct. The claims that Gitmo is a gulag are hyperbolic nonsense. That some people actually believe this is a testiment to their own hatred of the current administration and even the US in general, nothing more.
It stinks that a group like Amnesty International has to sink to such low levels and act so foolishly. There is something about human nature that seems to always lead interest groups such as this to the far extreme edge of whatever cause they are championing.
The basic idea of a group like Amnesty International should be something that everyone could support. If only they were reaonable about it, then this would be the case. But they go out of thier way to bash America when there are such more deserving targets of criticism in the world. I don’t know if it’s anti-US attitude in general, hatred of the Bush admin, some desire to seem “fair” in a global sense, or what it is that’s wrong with these people. But, they really are fucking up by doing this. Millions of people just like me who would support them and maybe pay attention to them when they make claims are going to stop listenning because of statements like this. It’s a shame.
Funny, I saw first that word in the “out” form in Mad Max beyond thunderdome, it just meant exile (with a good chance to die), so blame Mel Gibson! 
As for the attempt to discredit AI, one should take into account the crowd the critics are joining:
Then I withdraw the remark, and apologize.
Regards,
Shodan
Thank you, Shodan, and thank you, Debaser, one of the most unlikely defenders I would have expected.