Red Cross finds Bush administration guilty of war crimes

None of this surprises me.

Both of our governments have been complicit in this heinous disregard for human rights, as well as the acts of rendition.

We are the enemy.

Quote

ok folks got one thing to say to yall, we are at war, what is done during war to gain information keeps our troops safer and provided needed intell to win this war so we all can have freedom of speech and sleep in our beds at night w/o a care in the world. Those same folks that cry torture at gitmo are the same ones who would slit your throat and cut off your head w/o blinking and noone blinks twice about their horriffic acts. Shame on you

Quote

ok folks got one thing to say to yall, we are at war, what is done during war to gain information keeps our troops safer and provided needed intell to win this war so we all can have freedom of speech and sleep in our beds at night w/o a care in the world. Those same folks that cry torture at gitmo are the same ones who would slit your throat and cut off your head w/o blinking and noone blinks twice about their horriffic acts. Shame on you

Quote

txspices wrote:ok folks got one thing to say to yall, we are at war, what is done during war to gain information keeps our troops safer and provided needed intell to win this war so we all can have freedom of speech and sleep in our beds at night w/o a care in the world. Those same folks that cry torture at gitmo are the same ones who would slit your throat and cut off your head w/o blinking and noone blinks twice about their horriffic acts. Shame on you

Do your research. Stop believing the bullshit you've been spoonfed by fox news. These people are held with no evidence, no legal representation, and no independent adjudication. They are the disappeared. They are the victims, and we as two nations have played right into Al Queda's hands by being the perpetrators of one of the most shocking acts of cruelty. We have been condemned by Amnesty International, the Red Cross, and the UN. We should crawl and beg forgiveness for those lives we have destroyed in a pathetic act of revenge.

If the men at Guantanamo Bay are so guilty, why are they denied the right to a fair trial? Why are they tortured? Why are they kept hidden from the rest of the world? Where is the evidence...more to the point, where is the actual criminal charge? These men are held ON SUSPICION of terrorist acts. They have not been charged with anything, and most importantly they have not been tried and as such they MUST be presumed innocent.

Torture is one of the most unreliable ways to gain useful intelligence known to man, and frankly our governments should hang their heads in SHAME.

How DARE we condemn the government policies of Saddam Hussein, when we allow the torture of innocents to continue?

Quote

well it certainly did not stop with 911.....they attacked us, and it is about time we responded in stead of slapping hands, they do not respect anything else but force, they would cut your head off in a heart beat, oh and by the way I do research and I live in a military town, I have friends who are military and my son was over for the first gulf war. I am quiet well educated. I know family members of military, know the horror they live every day, I know thye would be happy if their loved one was not there, one of my friends is a special forces colonel so I know the value of intel and what they are alowed and not allowed, I have also spoken to medics... all the good our troops do over there.
Wake up and stop believing what MSNBC and Times feed you.

Quote

no comment^^^^^
some people are so completely delusional... :(

Great post Unclerudy and well put Wicca! :)

Quote

And here's the sad, sad, and frightening result of the Guantanamo Bay experiment - a breeding place for terrorists

Quote

wow! That is just awful.
Bush can thank himself for the uprising. unreal. :(

Thanks Jacqui.

Quote

txspices wrote:well it certainly did not stop with 911.....they attacked us, and it is about time we responded in stead of slapping hands, they do not respect anything else but force, they would cut your head off in a heart beat, oh and by the way I do research and I live in a military town, I have friends who are military and my son was over for the first gulf war. I am quiet well educated. I know family members of military, know the horror they live every day, I know thye would be happy if their loved one was not there, one of my friends is a special forces colonel so I know the value of intel and what they are alowed and not allowed, I have also spoken to medics... all the good our troops do over there.
Wake up and stop believing what MSNBC and Times feed you.

I believe the voice of the victims themselves, and the reports from Amnesty international.

Quote

you believe what those agencies want you to, and allow you to hear, as well as what victims they trot out for you. But you yourself in a different thread said it all with the facts of the horrible things the viet cong and japanees had done in the past to our troops, war and torture is not a new act but has been around since man lived in caves. When people ignore the facts and think because they ignore these things they will go away, they will not, all that does is make those that ignore them easy prey and easy targets. I am not saying it is right but that during war it is done and to save lives its necessary. Just because we would forbid it will not stop the opposition from using it on our troops or the poor innocents they encounter. Innocent civilians get tortured for nothing more by the opposition then for being of a different belief or religion, I am saying torture when used correctly in war by combatants will offer intell that saves lives, if it did not then it would not have ever been used.

Quote

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Benjamin Franklin

We give up the right to decent humanitarian treatment to others and we give up the right to expect it for ourselves..
Blaza..

Quote

Just cause I love this quote... lol

Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
Benjamin Franklin

Quote

txspices wrote:you believe what those agencies want you to, and allow you to hear, as well as what victims they trot out for you. But you yourself in a different thread said it all with the facts of the horrible things the viet cong and japanees had done in the past to our troops, war and torture is not a new act but has been around since man lived in caves. When people ignore the facts and think because they ignore these things they will go away, they will not, all that does is make those that ignore them easy prey and easy targets. I am not saying it is right but that during war it is done and to save lives its necessary. Just because we would forbid it will not stop the opposition from using it on our troops or the poor innocents they encounter. Innocent civilians get tortured for nothing more by the opposition then for being of a different belief or religion, I am saying torture when used correctly in war by combatants will offer intell that saves lives, if it did not then it would not have ever been used.

Except it doesn't.

Even if it did, you are basically saying that it is perfectably acceptable to torture, as long as you get the results you want.

Tell that to the victims on BOTH sides.

You seem rather ignorant if you think that Amnesty International make up reports just to make America look like the bad guys....

Quote

blaza wrote:Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Benjamin Franklin

We give up the right to decent humanitarian treatment to others and we give up the right to expect it for ourselves..
Blaza..

One of my favorite quotes of all time Blaza. :)

Quote

Have a look at this report.

This boy is SIXTEEN years old. He's a child.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7507216.stm

Quote

txspices wrote:ok folks got one thing to say to yall, we are at war, what is done during war to gain information keeps our troops safer and provided needed intell to win this war so we all can have freedom of speech and sleep in our beds at night w/o a care in the world. Those same folks that cry torture at gitmo are the same ones who would slit your throat and cut off your head w/o blinking and noone blinks twice about their horriffic acts. Shame on you

I agree.

Quote

txspices wrote:well it certainly did not stop with 911.....they attacked us, and it is about time we responded in stead of slapping hands, they do not respect anything else but force, they would cut your head off in a heart beat, oh and by the way I do research and I live in a military town, I have friends who are military and my son was over for the first gulf war. I am quiet well educated. I know family members of military, know the horror they live every day, I know thye would be happy if their loved one was not there, one of my friends is a special forces colonel so I know the value of intel and what they are alowed and not allowed, I have also spoken to medics... all the good our troops do over there.
Wake up and stop believing what MSNBC and Times feed you.

I agree again...I have family members serving in Iraq.

Quote

Arizonagal wrote:

txspices wrote:ok folks got one thing to say to yall, we are at war, what is done during war to gain information keeps our troops safer and provided needed intell to win this war so we all can have freedom of speech and sleep in our beds at night w/o a care in the world. Those same folks that cry torture at gitmo are the same ones who would slit your throat and cut off your head w/o blinking and noone blinks twice about their horriffic acts. Shame on you

I agree.

So if your family serving in Iraq are captured by the enemy troops and tortured for intelligence, you'll say to them 'Suck it up, torture is a valid act of war'?

Quote

What's good for the goose...

Quote

I believe my position is quite clear.

Quote

Arizonagal wrote:I believe my position is quite clear.

You condone torture in War.

That makes the injuries sustained by McCain perfectly acceptable, and he should have received no medal - because its a legitimate and valid act of war.

Also, all the men who were tortured in WW2 should stop complaining - because the torture they suffered was a legitimate and valid act of war.

What you are saying is that the Geneva convention only has any relevance providing it's OUR side that get the good treatment.

Watch the video in the news link I provided, and tell me that we are doing what is right, when we torture and scar CHILDREN in the name of war.

Quote

Wiccabasket wrote:

Arizonagal wrote:I believe my position is quite clear.

You condone torture in War.

No, Wicca, you're not free to put your words in my mouth.

Edited on July 15, 2008 at 1:42 PM Quote

Arizonagal wrote:

Wiccabasket wrote:

Arizonagal wrote:I believe my position is quite clear.

You condone torture in War.

No, Wicca, you're not free to put your words in my mouth.

Then tell me why you agree with this then

Arizonagal wrote:

txspices wrote:ok folks got one thing to say to yall, we are at war, what is done during war to gain information keeps our troops safer and provided needed intell to win this war so we all can have freedom of speech and sleep in our beds at night w/o a care in the world

I agree

I'm not putting words into your mouth Ari, you agreed with this statement in its entirety - which condones acts of torture in times of War. I asked you a simple question and you said that your position is quite clear. Which judging by your previous agreement with the use of torture in times of War, meant that you condoned it.

Of course, if you condemn torture, by all means correct me and tell me exactly what you meant when you agreed with txspices.

Edited on July 15, 2008 at 3:07 PM Quote

Wiccabasket wrote:

Arizonagal wrote:

Wiccabasket wrote:

Arizonagal wrote:I believe my position is quite clear.

You condone torture in War.

No, Wicca, you're not free to put your words in my mouth.

Then tell me why you agree with this then

I'm not obliged to tell you anything. ;)
Nor did I state that I agreed with anything "entirely".

Edited on July 15, 2008 at 3:27 PM Quote

Arizonagal wrote:

Wiccabasket wrote:

Arizonagal wrote:

Wiccabasket wrote:

Arizonagal wrote:I believe my position is quite clear.

You condone torture in War.

No, Wicca, you're not free to put your words in my mouth.

Then tell me why you agree with this then

I'm not obliged to tell you anything. ;)
Nor did I state that I agreed with anything "entirely".

Oh Ari, you miss the point, and you miss the chance to redeem yourself yet again. You seem like a nice person - why do you insist on coming across like a dumb blonde?

Quote

Oh, I understand the point "entirely", Wicca. And I'm not offended by being called a dumb blonde...I ain't blonde...or dumb. ;)

Edited on July 15, 2008 at 6:30 PM Quote

Arizonagal wrote:Oh, I understand the point "entirely", Wicca. And I'm not offended by being called a dumb blonde...I ain't blonde...or dumb. ;)

You might not be dumb, but your posts make you sound it sometimes.

Quote

Wiccabasket wrote:

Arizonagal wrote:Oh, I understand the point "entirely", Wicca. And I'm not offended by being called a dumb blonde...I ain't blonde...or dumb. ;)

You might not be dumb, but your posts make you sound it sometimes.

That's just because you don't understand patriotic Americans. lol

Edited on July 16, 2008 at 3:12 AM Quote

Then explain. Tell me what you meant. Help me understand your point of view. I want to try at least.

Quote

Interesting. Funny how these leaning blogs will generate a story with a slant. I doubt very much that the Red Cross FOUND Bush Guilty of war crimes, as if they held some kind of kangaroo court and convicted him. From my surfing, it's that IF it's true of the allegations, then he could be found guilty in a court of law if PROVEN. Thank God we don't have non court orginizations that have the power to convict people like it infers.
I doubt very much that if you contacted the head of the Red Cross that person would verify that they FOUND Bush guilty of War Crimes.

Quote

Sirfitz wrote:Interesting. Funny how these leaning blogs will generate a story with a slant. I doubt very much that the Red Cross FOUND Bush Guilty of war crimes, as if they held some kind of kangaroo court and convicted him. From my surfing, it's that IF it's true of the allegations, then he could be found guilty in a court of law if PROVEN. Thank God we don't have non court orginizations that have the power to convict people like it infers.
I doubt very much that if you contacted the head of the Red Cross that person would verify that they FOUND Bush guilty of War Crimes.

what's your view on the reports of torture in Guantanamo then? You're a member of Amnesty International, are you not - or at least you are familiar with their reports...

Quote

First of all let me just say I realise this subject is very touchy and we get very passionate and angry about things when we can't understand others point of view, but let's please try and keep the personal descriptions of others down and debate our points without them arising.

________________________
I'm not getting why some Americans believe that Iraq did 911 and therefore should be obliterated because of it.
Just feel that although those 4,000 odd adults were totally innocent that died in those buildings.....I'll bet at least half of the number below are youngsters.

Quote

Well, when they start pulling fingernails out or using electric cattle prods, I'll be out in the streets with my sign. I don't view the blaring of rock and roll music (jeez, we get that 'thumpy thump' all the time with cars driving through and the kids with their' big bass speakers blaring), or humiliation by calling names and such, or offending someone's religion (lefties do it all the time with Christianity) as torture. the defining of torture can really be subjective. Fake drowning? Hmmm..that was done on a very limited basis and it's my understanding they got good info from them that saved lives. The argument is that if you know there is a nuke gonna go off in London or New York, or a bombing is going to take place, and you KNOW that Abdul has the info, or even the chance he has the info (and you know that Abdul is part of this network and responsible for the deaths of innocents) do you use waterboarding if it will save a million lives? If there is the slightest chance that it will work, I say go ahead. Hell, even ONE life saved. What price do you put on one life. Is it worth saving. These people are not killed or maimed using this technique. These people that they 'tortured' are murderous cowards who have TARGETED innocent civilians (if you cooperate with the infedels, you will be beheaded). You can call it 'torture', but then you have people that say calling them degrading names is torture too.
I say let the courts sort it out. They have ruled on certain aspects, but unless EVERYONE falls in line with what certain people think, these certain people will not be happy. That is what also gets me. If the Supreme Court says abortion is legal, then groups point and say "see, it's the law" and are smug in their convictions that they have the law on their side. BUT, if the Supreme Court were to make it illegal, they suddenly would not support the law and would break it. Funny how people can be hypocritical. I can't break the law, I would be wrong if I did so if I forcably stopped an abortion...these people would call me a criminal. But if the law were reversed, they would break it and use the excuse "it's my body, I can do what I want' (which is faulty logic....if thats so then I can smoke crack and do what I want, right? And use the excuse if I get busted that "its my body")
To get back...if the Supreme Court were to rule that waterboarding was illegal, then I would say 'ok, its the law', even though I don't agree with it, and DROP it. But if they rule it's not torture as defined by law, certain people will not honor the law of the land. And of course some might say, if it was legal that "oh, but it's immoral and we need fight on"...I think Abortion is immoral, but I don't "fight on' by disruption, and other tactics used by these groups. So why is it that when it suits them, it's just dandy, (gee, since the law is on their' side), but if it goes against what they WANT, suddenly chaos?

Edited on July 16, 2008 at 12:08 PM Quote

ya gotta love a democracy. :O)

Quote

Ok...one last thing. In the last day or two, 52 Iraqi army recruits were murdered by someone blowing themselves up again. What right do these animals have to come into these peoples country and do this? They are coming from Syria and Iran.
So if they catch one of these murderers, and waterboard them to get info, I have no sympathy for them. Isn't it odd how a mass murderer like Saddam had supporters who whined about how he was mentally tortured by his captures (who, by the way were the Iraqi government) and how cruel it was to hang him? Absolutely nothing about the 100,000 or so people him and his son's physically maimed and tortured....absolutely not one word of pity for the mass graves they found with his victims....not a peep about the 1,000's of Kurdish women and babies that he murdered with biological weapons (that was sickening to watch that video of him and his cronies walking through a village among the bodies of babies and women and men they did that to and were LAUGHING ....just "they are wrong to do this to a human being (Saddam).

Edited on July 16, 2008 at 12:18 PM Quote

What about the 16 year old child, Sirfitz?

Would you view the torture of our troops in the way you have described up there as acceptable?

Quote

Incidentally, there were plenty of people who campaigned to bring awareness of the atrocities that Saddam committed against the Kurds (myself included). Nobody was very interested until he started threatening the oil supply.

The problem is that once you commit those acts yourself against one single human being (or a group of them), you become as bad as the people you set out to fight against. Your battle becomes ultimately pointless, because you end up being the enemy. If we 'liberated' Iraq because of the human rights record of Saddam Hussein (which only a fool would accept), then why did we encourage further torture and abuse?

Quote

They are prisoners outside your legal system, and yet they are also denied rights set out in the Geneva convention. We don't even know how many people are there, who is there, or why they are there. Neither do the prisoners.

Also, what the court has to say will have very little bearing - what our delightful little Governments do is take the prisoners somewhere conveniently barbaric, and let them do the torturing for us.

It's called rendition, and it's illegal.

If they have grounds to hold them as prisoners of war, then hold them as per the Geneva convention. If they have grounds to hold them for criminal acts such as terrorism (which is a criminal act, and NOT an act of war), then put them through the proper legal system, give them the same rights as any other prisoner, and do your justice system the great honour of allowing it to do it's job properly. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty - and the evidence should not come from cruel and barbaric treatment, but from cold, clear facts. If the evidence is there to convict them, then get to court - don't hold them indefinitely without trial.

Quote

Wiccabasket wrote:What about the 16 year old child, Sirfitz?

Would you view the torture of our troops in the way you have described up there as acceptable?

The sixteen year old child a soldier with a hand grenade. What about that soldiers family? I guess no pity there. And he's not being tortured. Unless your suggesting dentention is now considered torture. We have plenty of 16 year old thugs in this country that are tried as adults.
And to suggest that it would be the same if our troops were captured and interrogated is silly. Our soldiers don't go around and bomb Mosques, target innocent women and children (and please don't use the the argument that non combatants are killed....when we target a military target, there are sometimes civilians killed, yes, but we don't TARGET civilians like these animals do. We don't use rockets or mortars and terrorize Tehran or cities in Syria the way the terrorist's do against Iraq and Israel without any regard to the civilians they kill. As long as Jews are killed and as long as they can get a couple U.S. or British soldiers, oh well. A couple hundred women or children in the name of Allah is perfectly acceptable. So, as you can see, I have no sympathy for these terrorist's who have no business attacking Iraqi's. How dare these Iraqi's choose democracy! And the fact that these extremists are killing other Muslims doesn't make much difference.

Edited on July 16, 2008 at 1:31 PM Quote

Wiccabasket wrote:They are prisoners outside your legal system, and yet they are also denied rights set out in the Geneva convention. We don't even know how many people are there, who is there, or why they are there. Neither do the prisoners.

Also, what the court has to say will have very little bearing - what our delightful little Governments do is take the prisoners somewhere conveniently barbaric, and let them do the torturing for us.

It's called rendition, and it's illegal.

If they have grounds to hold them as prisoners of war, then hold them as per the Geneva convention. If they have grounds to hold them for criminal acts such as terrorism (which is a criminal act, and NOT an act of war), then put them through the proper legal system, give them the same rights as any other prisoner, and do your justice system the great honour of allowing it to do it's job properly. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty - and the evidence should not come from cruel and barbaric treatment, but from cold, clear facts. If the evidence is there to convict them, then get to court - don't hold them indefinitely without trial.

Well, fortunately you or I do not have that power. I may have some education in world government and some knowledge of the things you are talking about from my college days, but I would never get it in my head that I suddenly know what is right or wrong in this matter. I would take the word more from the experts in this matter than either myself or others who have no training in this. There are experts who may agree with you, and experts who agree with me. Again, I tend to look at it pragmatically...I couldn't give a hoot if they are enemy combatants or not, if they get busted doing this crap, there is no amount of justice that can be metted out, and I could care less how they do it. These pigs had no concern for the innocents that they targeted (like the 52 Iraqi's they targeted) , so why should I have pity on them?
I say bring back the old rules of engagement. During WWII when this type of atrocity would happen, the enemy caught targeting and killing innocent civilians was immediately shot.

Edited on July 16, 2008 at 1:40 PM Quote

Unclerudy wrote:

Wiccabasket wrote:None of this surprises me.

Both of our governments have been complicit in this heinous disregard for human rights, as well as the acts of rendition.

We are the enemy.

I COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT BETTER!!!!! Peace!!!!

that's insane... the whole value of mankind has decreased and Bush's administration has nothing to do with it.

People think they are just evolved apes. Of course they are going to start to disregard human life.

Quote

Sirfitz wrote:

Wiccabasket wrote:They are prisoners outside your legal system, and yet they are also denied rights set out in the Geneva convention. We don't even know how many people are there, who is there, or why they are there. Neither do the prisoners.

Also, what the court has to say will have very little bearing - what our delightful little Governments do is take the prisoners somewhere conveniently barbaric, and let them do the torturing for us.

It's called rendition, and it's illegal.

If they have grounds to hold them as prisoners of war, then hold them as per the Geneva convention. If they have grounds to hold them for criminal acts such as terrorism (which is a criminal act, and NOT an act of war), then put them through the proper legal system, give them the same rights as any other prisoner, and do your justice system the great honour of allowing it to do it's job properly. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty - and the evidence should not come from cruel and barbaric treatment, but from cold, clear facts. If the evidence is there to convict them, then get to court - don't hold them indefinitely without trial.

Well, fortunately you or I do not have that power. I may have some education in world government and some knowledge of the things you are talking about from my college days, but I would never get it in my head that I suddenly know what is right or wrong in this matter. I would take the word more from the experts in this matter than either myself or others who have no training in this. There are experts who may agree with you, and experts who agree with me. Again, I tend to look at it pragmatically...I couldn't give a hoot if they are enemy combatants or not, if they get busted doing this crap, there is no amount of justice that can be metted out, and I could care less how they do it. These pigs had no concern for the innocents that they targeted (like the 52 Iraqi's they targeted) , so why should I have pity on them?
I say bring back the old rules of engagement. During WWII when this type of atrocity would happen, the enemy caught targeting and killing innocent civilians was immediately shot.

Then half our troops would be shot by order, as well as the leaders that command them.

Quote