I’ve just read this story on the BBC about Martin Mubanga, one of the British prisonners released from Gunatanamo recently, who now plans to sue the British government for their alleged complicity in his detention. Mr Mubanga was arrested in Zambia for being one of those ‘illegal enemy combatant’ chaps. Zambia, of course, being Osama’s evil lair in the mountains of Afhghanistan. Maybe.
Mr Mubanga has also made allegations of abuse that he endured while incarcerated in Cuba, which the BBC put to the US Department of Defence.
Clear enough so far. US policy prohibits torture, so torture can’t happen. As borne out by events, naturally.
So is the new line now? “So you’re saying that we tortured you? But that’s exactly what a terrorist would say, so you’re just incrimating yourself really aren’t you? And, of course, we can’t have tortured you because our policy prohibits it…”
This is almost comical now, I can’t even raise myself to add the requisite number of ‘fucks’ for a Guantanamo pitting, or call Rumsfeld a cunt or anything.
Y’know, I thought my capacity for outrage had been more or less eliminated by the endless stream of piffling “Bushco am evil” threads, but this is quite the most ludicrous thing I’ve seen in ages. Was this really the best they could come up with? Do they think this is better even than complete silence on the matter? Who writes this shit?
Do they think we’ve forgotten Abu Ghraib already? Whether it’s policy or not, there is already a precedent for it happening. The government can dismiss it with claims of “a few bad eggs” all they want, but what’s to say there aren’t “bad eggs” in Gitmo too?
My capacity for outrage has been eliminated simply from overwork. This administration seems to do or say something remarkably stupid on a daily basis. I just can’t handle the marathon anymore. Now I just :rolleyes: .
"Al-Qaeda training manuals emphasise the belief that Muhammad is a prophet of God.
“That this detainee is now making the claim that Muhammad is a prophet of God seems to fit the standard operating procedure in al-Qaeda training manuals.”
I have to confess I’m not sure what you’re alleging. Is it your contention that al Qaeda did not teach recruits to make false allegations of torture? Or that they did and none of its recruits took the lesson?
Is it not probative, in the case of persons who can be shown to have gone through an al Qaeda training program, that they were trained to make false torture allegations? Read that again before you answer, because I’m saying probative, not determinative. Should the US be prohibited or discouraged from making factually correct statements about al Qaeda training if doing so conflicts with some point you want to make?
Whuh? The complaint is that the insinuation that someone who alleges abuse is likely to be a terrorist is fucking insane. Maybe AQ tell their members to allege abuse, maybe they don’t - we don’t know. What we do know is that here is a man who has been held captive for over 3 years, and released entirely without charge. So dangerous is he that the UK government has let him go instantly on his return. He is claiming that he was daubed with piss, and the USA turns round and says “that’s just what a terrorist would say”? This has nothing to do with “probative” or “determinative”, it’s got to do with being a fucking cheek.
No-one is trying to say AQ do or don’t tell their people to allege abuse if captured. I’m trying to say that making allegations of abuse do not increase the probability that one is a terrorist, particularly given that substantiated instances of abuse by US troops have already occurred. Given this, it’s taking a fucking liberty (no pun intended) to pull this crap out when referring to someone you interned for 3 years and released without charge. Is this unreasonable?
Manhatten, you simple, simple little man. Do you not understand that Al-Queda is populated with those for whom reason is a luxury? Even here, at the SDMB waystation on the net highway, there are many that beleive in no “higher power”. Now, of course we both know that they will make any excuse, sometimes throwing their back out, to defend the Muslim faith. I know, it’s seems odd when they get in such a tizzy about a piece of rock in Alabama. But forward-thinking progressives can handle Allah. You see, he’s not the diety followed by the dirty, earth-killing, raping, racist, old-people-hating anglo white folk.
Really, whom are we to say what is truth? If these people that want to kill yours and mine can accuse us of unfair treatment, they should have their day in court.
There are almost 3000 souls screaming from graves for justice. They weren’t allowed forewarning. But they don’t count. They were American. They were the enemy. Of course, sadly there are many Americans that agree with that.
And now these fucks can sue in American courts over their “civil rights”.
If anyone has land available in Antarctica, I’m ready to move away from all human interaction. Like it or not, we’re all nuts. No matter what you beleive.
Are you really this fucking stupid? Oh wait, you’re a Bush supporter - of course you are.
The problem, of course, is that there’s no evidence that this guy was an al-Qaeda member, nor any evidence that he went through an al-Qaeda training program. That’s why, you know, they had to let him go without charge.
That’s not what the issue is here. It doesn’ matter whether it’s probative that al Qaeda trainees are told to make false statements of torture, since there is apparently no evidence that this guy ever went through an al-Qaeda training program. The only reason to bring it up in response to this guy’s lawsuit is to try and smear him.
So all Muslims are terrorists? There’s no chance that anyone innocent could possibly have been sent to Gitmo? Everyone there should be allowed to be tortured?
Coming from a sick fuck like you, comments like these aren’t even offensive anymore. Kill the brown folk, right? I mean, they’re all guilty, right?
We don’t know? Seems like a good reason to have them in custody.
This isn’t widespread indiscriminate incarceration of Muslims. Those in custody have been shown to be a legitimate threat. A very few have been released because of mistaken identity and the like. The rest?
Follow along, it’s important.
Others have been released because the US couldn’t build a case to convict.
Compare Bush to Hitler or Stalin* all you want. Our enemies are getting lawful treatment before being punished. Got that? Being detained is not the same as being imprisoned. Yes, even if you’re in a prison or prison environment. Here’s a test in real life terms.
Do you believe anything harder than pot should be legalized? (I’m a supporter of legal marijuana use.) Go to your nearest county jail and bail out a dealer or manufacturer of narcotics.
Now consider the narcotics dealer and the terrorist. Which is more a threat to you? 3…2…1…
Yeah, I thought the dealer as well. But after 9/11 I realized I have an influence over the kids that sling this shit, whereas I have no control over psycho fruitcakes that fly planes into buildings. THREE TIMES WITH AN ABORTED FOURTH!
So am I concerned with some militand psychotic men whom have been raised their whole lives to beleive that America is the Devil and dying for a cause gets you 72 virgins in Paradise?
I’m thinking cries of mistreatment are unfounded in general.
Why not? Hitler arguments are old and Stalin will be a breath of fresh air around here.
I understand your politics aren’t in line with mine and you may never agree with me on anything.
But…huh?
I’m a sick fuck? OK, if that’s your opinion of me I can only hope to change it someday.
Now to the biggie in your post.
“Kill the brown folk, right?”
You’re accusing me of racism and hatred of anyone with darker skin than me. I let a lot of stuff go both here and IRL, and if your little slam were worded even slightly more vaguely I wouldn’t think too much of it.
You’ve gone way too fucking far on that, though. Lie to me in the next post and say you disagreed with me and didn’t mean such a personal insult.
Yes it fucking is the same you lobotomised knob. How is it not the same. Except maybe that, in prison, you have more rights, such as the right not to be daubed in your own fucking piss.
Under what laws is it lawful? Not under US laws, as the US position is that these laws do not apply.
I don’t really need to add anything. You’re trying to use that as an argument on your side? Note that they weren’t trying to build a case under the usual accepted standards of evidence, they were talking about military tribunals where the defendant wouldn’t even be able to see the evidence against them. They couldn’t even do that. In other words, they had absolutely no fucking evidence at all. Nada.
No they fucking haven’t. See above. If they have been shown to be a threat, why have they been released? Have they stopped being a threat? I’m going to be polite and ask for a cite here.
How do you know this applies to the people in question?
Karl Rove has been known to write some whoppers, such as the one in the OP, so I would not be surprised to see a trial baloon of something like this floated to see what he could get away with.
What the fuck? We don’t know if AQ tell their members to allege abuse, and that’s a good reason to keep them in custody? Whom? People who allege abuse? What the haemorrhaging fuck are you on about?
They have? By whom? In front of what judge? With what evidence?
No, this man has been released, utterly without charge. As you so helpfully acknowledge, this means that neither your government nor ours has anything on him that can convict. Fuck all. Moreover, it means the US government doesn’t even have sufficient evidence to bring him before one of its charming military tribunals. It doesn’t even have enough to warrant simply keeping him at Gitmo, despite the fact that they have shown no compunction in doing so thus far.
What are we to conclude from this? That the USA has thrown up its hands, and said “we know this guy is a terrorist, but we’re going to have to let him go because we’re just that nice”? Bull fucking shit. Even given your above natterings about Stalin and drug dealers, I’m unwilling to credit you with that level of credulity.
How do you know it doesn’t? Don’t ask a question that can’t be answered by anyone here. Anyone. Not even Cecil. (All things being unto his greatness for he is the leader. All hail.)
