Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|6933|Salt Lake City

This is just sad.  We don't condone what terrorists do, and then turn around and do the same thing, thinking that shielding ourself in democracy makes it right.  It's so unfortunate that our government, both past and present are some of the largest hyprocrits to ever shit all over this planet.

I'm sure I'm going to get a lambasting from the America is always right, at all costs love it or leave it, group...but what can you do?
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6783|Montreal

phnxfrhwk wrote:

Oddly enough would you really want the world knowing where we keep them? If we did that then hell half of the US population would be down there trying to kill them (if it wasnt in Cuba anyways). The terrorists are probably a heck of a lot safer there with the CIA and the CIA's interrogation (which is probably just sodium penthanol anyways).
Ya. Sure. That's what the "terrorists" need to worry about. US citizens storming the prisons and killing them. What are you high? This isn't 14th century Europe and Americans aren't armed with torches and pitchforks.

First of all, we don't even know who is in there. Sure, they could be terrorists, or they could be political prisoners. These are secret prisons. The government doesn't tell us who is in there. Stalin said his prison camps were full of terrorists and counter-revolutionaries. In reality they were full of people he deemed to be enemies, people opposed to him, political prisoners. When the government incarcerates people it deems to be enemies of the state and doesn't tell the people who they are or what they have done, that is the definition of tyranny.
Mike_J
Member
+68|6866

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Comparing the Bush Administration/CIA to terrorists is interesting.  On one hand, you have a "Christian" leader surrounded by other members of the "Moral Majority" condoning and supporting inhumane policies (alleged/proven torture and indefinite incommunicado detainment).  On the other hand, you have "Muslim extremists" carrying out terrorist acts and adopting inhumane policies.  The West (North America, Western Europe) is supposed to be an enlightened society, civilized.  Why is it ok and even condoned for our so-called civilized country to go along with these practices but deplorable for the terrorists?
Roughing someone up or using drugs to get answers from someone is hardly the same practice as sawing someone's head off.  I'm not accusing you of encouraging no response, but not responding to terrorism isn't an "enlightened" idea either.  Obviously bribes or a simple "please stop doing that" is out of the question.  A truly enlightened society will arrive when people won't have to worry about other's trying to harm them in the first place.
HM1{N}
Member
+86|6841|East Coast via Los Angeles, CA
The prisons are secret because they are in foreign countries.  Would you want to advertise "here is where we have your prisoners Al Qaeda and Taliban"?  I don't think so.

I'm totally for them being secret.  It keeps our soldiers and operatives safe.

I blame the media for spinning this in a negative context, some things they should just STFU about...
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6783|Montreal

HM1{N} wrote:

The prisons are secret because they are in foreign countries.  Would you want to advertise "here is where we have your prisoners Al Qaeda and Taliban"?  I don't think so.

I'm totally for them being secret.  It keeps our soldiers and operatives safe.

I blame the media for spinning this in a negative context, some things they should just STFU about...
Yeah. Damn liberal media. If it weren't for them Gitmo would be a secret to. And Abu Ghraib. And those illegal wiretaps that are still going on. Fuck and remember Watergate. Those damn liberal media elites were playing right into the hands of the Soviets when they exposed the criminal actions of Nixon. Trying to weaken this country, those pricks. I wish the media stuck to baseball and celebrities and would stop telling me what my government is doing.

LOL I'm sorry but some people just shouldn't be allowed to participate in a democracy.

"There's no point for democracy when ignorance is celebrated. Majority rules don't work in mental institutions." -NOFX, The Idiots are Taking Over
deeznutz1245
Connecticut: our chimps are stealin yo' faces.
+483|6690|Connecticut
Listen, things happen every day that we never know about. We don't want to know them. I like it that way. If they are keeping us safe by torturing disgusting, civilian killing terrorists then I am ok with that. I am pretty sure that if the terrorists were not being terrorists then they would not be in their current torture prediciment. The CIA are the guys out there doing things in the shadows that allow us to sleep safe EVERY night and I wont be a faggy little baby and complain about them......I applaud them.

Last edited by deeznutz1245 (2006-09-06 19:26:22)

Malloy must go
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6783|Montreal

deeznutz1245 wrote:

Listen, things happen every day that we never know about. We don't want to know them. I like it that way. If they are keeping us safe by torturing disgusting, civilian killing terrorists then I am ok with that. I am pretty sure that if the terrorists were not being terrorists then they would not be in their current torture prediciment. The CIA are the guys out there doing things in the shadows that allow us to sleep safe EVERY night and I wont be a faggy little baby and complain about them......I applaud them.
You are a faggy little baby because you don't want to know what is going on and would rather be kept ignorant. Secret prisons are the hallmark of every dictatorship. Move to North Korea if you don't want to know who your government is jailing and what is does to its prisoners.
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,978|6829|949

Mike_J wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Comparing the Bush Administration/CIA to terrorists is interesting.  On one hand, you have a "Christian" leader surrounded by other members of the "Moral Majority" condoning and supporting inhumane policies (alleged/proven torture and indefinite incommunicado detainment).  On the other hand, you have "Muslim extremists" carrying out terrorist acts and adopting inhumane policies.  The West (North America, Western Europe) is supposed to be an enlightened society, civilized.  Why is it ok and even condoned for our so-called civilized country to go along with these practices but deplorable for the terrorists?
Roughing someone up or using drugs to get answers from someone is hardly the same practice as sawing someone's head off.  I'm not accusing you of encouraging no response, but not responding to terrorism isn't an "enlightened" idea either.  Obviously bribes or a simple "please stop doing that" is out of the question.  A truly enlightened society will arrive when people won't have to worry about other's trying to harm them in the first place.
We don't know the full extent of the practices of the CIA in regards to extracting information, but I do know that in Iraq more than just a little "roughing up" happened.  I believe it unwise to rationalize any inhumane act, even if others are doing much worse.

The fact of the matter remains that there is bloodshed on both sides.  The Coalition Forces have done their fair share of ruthless acts, including murder, so to highlight an emotional act such as a throat-slashing to prove your point is irrelevant.
Takedazor
Member
+10|6975|Vila Real, Portugal

JimmyBotswana wrote:

phnxfrhwk wrote:

Oddly enough would you really want the world knowing where we keep them? If we did that then hell half of the US population would be down there trying to kill them (if it wasnt in Cuba anyways). The terrorists are probably a heck of a lot safer there with the CIA and the CIA's interrogation (which is probably just sodium penthanol anyways).
Ya. Sure. That's what the "terrorists" need to worry about. US citizens storming the prisons and killing them. What are you high? This isn't 14th century Europe and Americans aren't armed with torches and pitchforks.

First of all, we don't even know who is in there. Sure, they could be terrorists, or they could be political prisoners. These are secret prisons. The government doesn't tell us who is in there. Stalin said his prison camps were full of terrorists and counter-revolutionaries. In reality they were full of people he deemed to be enemies, people opposed to him, political prisoners. When the government incarcerates people it deems to be enemies of the state and doesn't tell the people who they are or what they have done, that is the definition of tyranny.
Good post Jimmy i think the same way.

I find it funny when ppl just say, "hey this doesn't affect my life who cares if there are secret prisions or not", i wonder what the german people think about the nazi camps at that time, i bet +/- the same. So as long as your life goes the way you want they can bend the constitution, torture ppl, target civilians in wars, attack sovereign country's and so on.

Thats the way things go and they only change when ppl realise their lifes are affected and that is went shit hit the fence, for the germans that time was when they realised they were loosing the war and bombs where falling from the skies like rain then they started thinking is it really good for me to continue with the nazi goverment? Well you know they did this and that.

In only one of this ways are americans going to get some sense into their heads.
That is if they get one too many soldiers killed at wars, when you know that one of your buddies, son, father is killed in the war you can change your opinion on war very fast like appened in vietnam.
The economy crashes because of war wage so people are getting fired and start thinking well this isn't working.
Other way is for someone to stop them.

After lots of posts i've seen i realised only 1thing, most of the american people just don't care about if other people get killed, put to prison tortured etc, they just wanna get on with their life living the old fashion american way.

As long as it doesn't affect me i don't care that is the american slogan. In europe ppl think a little bit diferently and i'm glad of it because this way of life just makes me sick.

Your president is caugh lying and lying and lying and you say "who cares" and even worst you believe somethings he says, how can you believe the word of a man that lied so many times? Would you believe your neighbour if he lied as often as Bush?

A lot of stuff from the 9/11 didn't came out too but who cares right? Why bother get into details? It's only some thousand people and most of it you didn't even knew.

Question "what did iraq had to do with 9/11 mister bush?"
Response "Nothing"

After he said it otherwise before...

So question yourselfs american and think for a while, did this this man that lied 100times told you the truth about 9/11? was it really the talibans? Does iran got or will get nuclear weapons? Is there a 2nd 9/11 plan so that america can attack iran?

That last one i can aswer and the response is yes but gess what i'm not the one who's going to die on it so if i were american i would say "who cares if the CIA sponsoring taliban carries out attacks on it's how ppl" that is americans problem.

But i'm not like that, people should care and question things but they don't and it's just sad because that's the way some people really are.

Sorry about going off topic a lot just couldn't help it.
alpinestar
Member
+304|6793|New York City baby.
well this topic was considered a conspiracy theory, I wonder how many real conspiracy theories are still left in this big bin.
Mike_J
Member
+68|6866

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

We don't know the full extent of the practices of the CIA in regards to extracting information
Exactly.  I found it relevant to provide the opposing assumption of some believing the worst possible occurs with the CIA.  The article merely pointed out that some prisoners are being held by the CIA.  That's it.  Yet, the first few responses were all along the lines of "OMG!  How inhumane!" and "Impeach the President!"  The sources these folks rely on so much have failed to prove their assumptions.


but I do know that in Iraq more than just a little "roughing up" happened.  I believe it unwise to rationalize any inhumane act, even if others are doing much worse.

The fact of the matter remains that there is bloodshed on both sides.  The Coalition Forces have done their fair share of ruthless acts, including murder, so to highlight an emotional act such as a throat-slashing to prove your point is irrelevant.
Roughing up, even to the point of near death from coalition forces is probably true.  I know for sure from the Iraqi army.  I think I posted this long ago from one experience, but the Iraqi's dealt with insurgents very severly.  I'm glad from the point that it proved how softly we deal with prisoners.  The US gets criticims of being cruel, so we let those that accuse us of this get their way by handing over the prisoners.  Look who ended up making the situation even more inhumane (as if we were).
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,978|6829|949

Mike_J wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

We don't know the full extent of the practices of the CIA in regards to extracting information
Exactly.  I found it relevant to provide the opposing assumption of some believing the worst possible occurs with the CIA.  The article merely pointed out that some prisoners are being held by the CIA.  That's it.  Yet, the first few responses were all along the lines of "OMG!  How inhumane!" and "Impeach the President!"  The sources these folks rely on so much have failed to prove their assumptions.
The only one who mentioned inhumanity was me, and it wasn't assumed, it has been proven.  The "impeach the President" cry is valid, as he (Bush) has lied to the American public and world community.


Mike_J wrote:

but I do know that in Iraq more than just a little "roughing up" happened.  I believe it unwise to rationalize any inhumane act, even if others are doing much worse.

The fact of the matter remains that there is bloodshed on both sides.  The Coalition Forces have done their fair share of ruthless acts, including murder, so to highlight an emotional act such as a throat-slashing to prove your point is irrelevant.
Roughing up, even to the point of near death from coalition forces is probably true.  I know for sure from the Iraqi army.  I think I posted this long ago from one experience, but the Iraqi's dealt with insurgents very severly.  I'm glad from the point that it proved how softly we deal with prisoners.  The US gets criticims of being cruel, so we let those that accuse us of this get their way by handing over the prisoners.  Look who ended up making the situation even more inhumane (as if we were).
Documented murder by American forces.  The U.S. atrocities are not nearly as well documented in the MSM (mainstream media) as are the "terrorist" atrocities.  The fact of the matter remains that the U.S. is commiting atrocities.  I think it is ignorant to justify it by saying that the other side does worse things.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2006-09-06 20:53:57)

Sone
i piss excellence
+22|6721|Houston (Spring), TX
Good... torture the fuckers, even though I'm sure they aren't.   When an innocent civilian gets detained and tortured, then I'll be upset.. until then.. screw the cockbags.  And who made these prisons out to be all that bad? It says nothing horrible about them in the article. If the fucking prison wasn't a secret then I'm sure 1 of the 3000 world trade center families would blow the mother fucker up.  I'm not 100% Bush, but I damn sure get sick of the amount of whiners that piss and moan about the most stupid shit... a secret prison to probably protect the suspects more than "torture" them...

bleh

Last edited by Sone (2006-09-06 20:35:58)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6969|PNW

sergeriver wrote:

He lied before, impeach him.  This is worse than someone getting a blow job.
Er, lying under oath you mean?

JimmyBotswana wrote:

LOL I'm sorry but some people just shouldn't be allowed to participate in a democracy.
Yeah! Only liberals should.

...

I don't think the US should ever question prisoners. At all. Ever. They should be afforded Ritz treatment and released after a period of two weeks.

...

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-09-06 20:46:49)

Ctwo
Member
+7|6657|New Jersey, USA
What did he actually lie about?
13rin
Member
+977|6676

IG-Calibre wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5321606.stm - secret prison camps, now what regime does that remind you of eh?
http://www.abc.net.au/ra/news/stories/s1496644.htm

I don't think he every denied them in the first place.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6841|Seattle, WA

Bubbalo wrote:

And, besides which, terrorists may kill people but they rarely torture them.
LOL, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about, the decapitate people slowly ON VIDEO, they pull out fingernails, and a whole lot other shit, you think they rarely torture them, pffft. 

And also hey good for the secret prisons, what Bush has done has saved thousands of lives, and prevented numerous terrorists attacks both here in the U.S. and abroad.  Don't believe me, look it up, or better yet, listen to his speech from earlier today.  Stop with the hate and just disagree, but what you can't disagree on is that thousands of lives have been saved, and we haven't had a terrorist attack in the U.S. in 5 years.  Coincidence, I think not.
Mike_J
Member
+68|6866

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

The only one who mentioned inhumanity was me, and it wasn't assumed, it has been proven.  The "impeach the President" cry is valid, as he (Bush) has lied to the American public and world community again.  He said there were no secret prisons, it has been documented there are.  You are offering up arguments that are not valid.
The proven inhumanity of treatment towards prisoners doesn't strike me as inhumane.  What the news "uncovers" for all of us on prisoner treatment is not inhumane, unless I missed something in the article you provided me about those unfortunate victims being detained prisoners.  Who said those prisons were secret (the article certainly was quick to state that in the title)?  The public just happened to be unaware of them.  Maybe a little investigation from the media would've brought them to light.  The article points out that President Bush discussed the CIA prisons (therefore openly admitting their existence) but kept the secrecy of their procedures.  That doesn't prove any sort of lie.  It is unfairly assumed that their existence was a secret, but in actuality all that was a secret was what goes on inside of them.

The fact of the matter remains that the U.S. is commiting atrocities.  I think it is ignorant to justify it by saying that the other side does worse things.
Just as a reminder, we're talking about prisoner treatment.  I hope you're not accusing me of justifying such atrocities.  I too believe doing so is ignorant.  The US is committing inhumane things such as the popular case you linked me to, yes.  Although, let me point out that it is not anywhere near as common as it is from those we are fighting.  The US military doesn't put up with it, as you can see from how they dealt with those men.  Not only do they not put up with it simply because it's wrong, but we're also being watched by a media where the only good news is bad news.

Last edited by Mike_J (2006-09-06 21:12:49)

AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6841|Seattle, WA

sergeriver wrote:

Capt. Foley wrote:

The terrorists do ALOT worse to our CIVILIANS. Now while tourture I dont like a whole lot Im pretty sure we never did sign the Geneva Convention although I AM pretty sure that the Iraqis signed it. Although I might be wrong there.
USA signed the Third Geneva Convention (the one about POW's) in 1949.

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebSign?Rea … 5&ps=P
moot point, the Geneva convention specifically says that the likes of terrorists and unlawful combatants are not protected by it.....
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6841|Seattle, WA

AD_Kensan wrote:

Capt. Foley wrote:

Now while tourture I dont like a whole lot Im pretty sure we never did sign the Geneva Convention although I AM pretty sure that the Iraqis signed it. Although I might be wrong there.
Almost every country on this planet has ratified the Geneva Convention. The USA signed it in August 1949 when the UN was founded and is one of the "founding" members.
Your point??  Terrorists and unlawful combatants (those not adhering to the rules of War, and under a national symbol that is visible from a distance) are not protected by Geneva.  I'm glad you know who signed, now try reading it maybe?  (Not to come off too strong, I just don't get what your point is, big deal we signed it, but terrorists are directly exempted from it by its very speech and nature.

The Geneva Convention wrote:

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

(1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

STRIKE ONE



(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions: (a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; (b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; (c) that of carrying arms openly; (d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

STRIKE TWO


(3) Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.

STRIKE THREE


(4) Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization, from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model.

STRIKE FOUR

(5) Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.

STRIKE 5

(6) Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

STRIKE SIX
You were saying.

Last edited by AlbertWesker[RE] (2006-09-06 21:26:45)

ToiletTrooper
Member
+25|6972|WC

PRiMACORD wrote:

I'm totally in shock.









not.
hah, LOL
IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6939|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann
the experience in my country is - if you torture an ordinary man enough they will agree to just about anything you want them to. Including that they are  terrorist's and that they committed what ever crimes their tortures accused them of.     US snatch squads taking ordinary people to their secret gaol's and torturing them may seem acceptable to some, but certainly not the majority of normal people.
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6850

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

You were saying.
The Geneva convention guarantees basic human rights to all people, including criminals/terrorists.  My problem is putting people in a grey area outside the conventional protections of the human rights conventions and outside the PoW conventions, where some nations feel they can then be tortured (mentally or physically) and subjected to degrading treatment, not to mention denied a fair trial.  You were saying?
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6913

IG-Calibre wrote:

the experience in my country is - if you torture an ordinary man enough they will agree to just about anything you want them to. Including that they are  terrorist's and that they committed what ever crimes their tortures accused them of.     US snatch squads taking ordinary people to their secret gaol's and torturing them may seem acceptable to some, but certainly not the majority of normal people.
so pretty much the US is wasting money on capturing random people? dont you think it costs money to keep those facilities operated? FFS the US gov is smart enough to not waste money
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6850

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

IG-Calibre wrote:

the experience in my country is - if you torture an ordinary man enough they will agree to just about anything you want them to. Including that they are  terrorist's and that they committed what ever crimes their tortures accused them of.     US snatch squads taking ordinary people to their secret gaol's and torturing them may seem acceptable to some, but certainly not the majority of normal people.
so pretty much the US is wasting money on capturing random people? dont you think it costs money to keep those facilities operated? FFS the US gov is smart enough to not waste money
lol good joke

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard