Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
If you can justify abuse, then you can justify torture.
If you can justify torture then you can justify executions.
If you can justify executions, then what does it matter if you were shot, beat to death, or had your head cut off?
Who has justified the abuse?
People who are willing to tolerate abuse are, in my mind, justifying it. There not "real POW's" so we can do what we want and what we did isn't as bad as what they did, etc.
Who is tolerating it? The poeple guilty of doing the abuse are being punished.
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
If you can justify abuse, then you can justify torture.
If you can justify torture then you can justify executions.
If you can justify executions, then what does it matter if you were shot, beat to death, or had your head cut off?
Who has justified the abuse?
People who are willing to tolerate abuse are, in my mind, justifying it. There not "real POW's" so we can do what we want and what we did isn't as bad as what they did, etc.
Who is tolerating it? The poeple guilty of doing the abuse are being punished.
I'm not going to argue about it except to say that the abuse was lied about and covered up. Someone was tolerating it and those who don't think we should open up Gitmo to the Red Cross are still guilty of tolerating it IMO.
Well considering the abu garabe abuse was discovered by the military, not the media, it makes for a terrible cover up.
And yes the red cross is allowed access to gitmo.
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
If you can justify abuse, then you can justify torture.
If you can justify torture then you can justify executions.
If you can justify executions, then what does it matter if you were shot, beat to death, or had your head cut off?
Who has justified the abuse?
People who are willing to tolerate abuse are, in my mind, justifying it. There not "real POW's" so we can do what we want and what we did isn't as bad as what they did, etc.
Who is tolerating it? The poeple guilty of doing the abuse are being punished.
I'm not going to argue about it except to say that the abuse was lied about and covered up. Someone was tolerating it and those who don't think we should open up Gitmo to the Red Cross are still guilty of tolerating it IMO.
Well considering the abu garabe abuse was discovered by the military, not the media, it makes for a terrible cover up.
And yes the red cross is allowed access to gitmo.
Better late then never I suppose.
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Partisianship is all this is to you??? That is truly sad, but thank you for helping me make my point.
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Partisianship is all this is to you??? That is truly sad, but thank you for helping me make my point.
Well are not concerned with with facts, you are only interested in what makes the admin look bad. If you were concerned about the facts, you not be parroting false claims that the left loves to use.
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Partisianship is all this is to you??? That is truly sad, but thank you for helping me make my point.
Well are not concerned with with facts, you are only interested in what makes the admin look bad. If you were concerned about the facts, you not be parroting false claims that the left loves to use.
Yeah, pot, kettle, black. The Red Cross has been yelling "tantamount to torture" for two years and the administration had been denying the allegations. Now they admit to it and you still defend the whole process and say those responsible are being punished. In the meantime Iran elects a hardliner. Damn you righties are smart.
Get real. I don't know about "abu garabe", but the Abu Ghraib abuses were covered up by the military until the New Yorker broke the story. Trying to suggest the Pentagon should get credit for this is purely partisan revisionist history.Originally posted by: charrison
Well considering the abu garabe abuse was discovered by the military, not the media, it makes for a terrible cover up.
And yes the red cross is allowed access to gitmo.
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Get real. I don't know about "abu garabe", but the Abu Ghraib abuses were covered up by the military until the New Yorker broke the story. Trying to suggest the Pentagon should get credit for this is purely partisan revisionist history.Originally posted by: charrison
Well considering the abu garabe abuse was discovered by the military, not the media, it makes for a terrible cover up.
And yes the red cross is allowed access to gitmo.
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Red Cross blasts Guantanamo
This article appears to be from Oct 10, 2003
So, if everything is on the up and up at Gitmo, etc., where can I find a link to the exact number of prisoners we are holding? If you can't find one, do you have any ideas as to why that information is being witheld?
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Red Cross blasts Guantanamo
This article appears to be from Oct 10, 2003
So, if everything is on the up and up at Gitmo, etc., where can I find a link to the exact number of prisoners we are holding? If you can't find one, do you have any ideas as to why that information is being witheld?
Agreed, but they were also covering it up, which is what 1EZduzit said in the first place.Originally posted by: charrison
Either way, it was still under investigation by the military long before the story broke.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Get real. I don't know about "abu garabe", but the Abu Ghraib abuses were covered up by the military until the New Yorker broke the story. Trying to suggest the Pentagon should get credit for this is purely partisan revisionist history.Originally posted by: charrison
Well considering the abu garabe abuse was discovered by the military, not the media, it makes for a terrible cover up.
And yes the red cross is allowed access to gitmo.
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Red Cross blasts Guantanamo
This article appears to be from Oct 10, 2003
So, if everything is on the up and up at Gitmo, etc., where can I find a link to the exact number of prisoners we are holding? If you can't find one, do you have any ideas as to why that information is being witheld?
It also appears this admission comes from an unnamed source...NOt much of an admission if you ask me.
Christophe Girod - the senior Red Cross official in Washington - said it was unacceptable that the 600 detainees should be held indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay without legal safeguards.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said yesterday he was "looking further into" the Red Cross concerns and added: "We do work closely with the Red Cross on all detainee issues." He did not concede a problem exists. At the Pentagon, spokesman Bryan Whitman said, "The International Committee of the Red Cross has access to all Defense Department detention operations." However, in his report into claims of abuse at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison, U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba found that military police there had "routinely held persons brought to them by other government agencies without accounting for them, knowing their identities, or even the reason for their detention." On at least one occasion, they moved these "ghost detainees" around the prison to hide them from a visiting Red Cross delegation, he said in the report. He described the actions as "deceptive, contrary to Army Doctrine, and in violation of international law." Under the Geneva Conventions, the United States is obliged to give the neutral, Swiss-run ICRC access to prisoners of war and other detainees to check on their conditions and allow them to send messages to their families.
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Red Cross blasts Guantanamo
This article appears to be from Oct 10, 2003
So, if everything is on the up and up at Gitmo, etc., where can I find a link to the exact number of prisoners we are holding? If you can't find one, do you have any ideas as to why that information is being witheld?
It also appears this admission comes from an unnamed source...NOt much of an admission if you ask me.
Unnamed source, read it again.Christophe Girod - the senior Red Cross official in Washington - said it was unacceptable that the 600 detainees should be held indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay without legal safeguards.
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Red Cross blasts Guantanamo
This article appears to be from Oct 10, 2003
So, if everything is on the up and up at Gitmo, etc., where can I find a link to the exact number of prisoners we are holding? If you can't find one, do you have any ideas as to why that information is being witheld?
It also appears this admission comes from an unnamed source...NOt much of an admission if you ask me.
A top Red Cross official has broken with tradition by publicly attacking conditions at the US military base on Cuba where al-Qaeda suspects are being held.
Christophe Girod - the senior Red Cross official in Washington - said it was unacceptable that the 600 detainees should be held indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay without legal safeguards.
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Red Cross blasts Guantanamo
This article appears to be from Oct 10, 2003
So, if everything is on the up and up at Gitmo, etc., where can I find a link to the exact number of prisoners we are holding? If you can't find one, do you have any ideas as to why that information is being witheld?
It also appears this admission comes from an unnamed source...NOt much of an admission if you ask me.
OK we'll do it this way because I'm confused.A top Red Cross official has broken with tradition by publicly attacking conditions at the US military base on Cuba where al-Qaeda suspects are being held.
Christophe Girod - the senior Red Cross official in Washington - said it was unacceptable that the 600 detainees should be held indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay without legal safeguards.
It is clear reading the article that he is the source, nothing unamed about it.
Gitmo Focus Of Red Cross Talks(AP) The head of the International Committee of the Red Cross is meeting with President Bush and senior members of the U.S. administration on Monday and Tuesday, the humanitarian organization said Sunday.
ICRC President Jakob Kellenberger will hold talks with Bush in Washington, as well as with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and National Security Adviser Steven Hadley, the Swiss-based organization said.
The confidential talks are set to focus "on a range of humanitarian issues," the ICRC said, without elaborating. But it appeared likely Kellenberger would raise the organization's concerns over handling of terror suspects detained at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
In November, the ICRC said U.S. officials had failed to address concerns about significant problems in the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo
Under the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of warfare, the neutral ICRC is empowered to visit prisoners. U.S. authorities have given its delegates regular access to Guantanamo.
The ICRC usually steers clear of public comment, maintaining that its quiet approach is the best protection for victims of war.
In November, however, it refused "to publicly confirm or deny" media reports that it had determined the U.S. military used psychological and physical coercion "tantamount to torture" at the prison. The allegation was contained in an ICRC report to U.S. officials after visits to Guantanamo, newspapers reported.
Organizations including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International claim prisoners at the base have been mistreated. Released prisoners also have cited beatings and coerced confessions.
The Bush administration has rejected the accusations that detainees have in any way been abused and said the prisoners are treated humanely.
In an earlier sign of ICRC disquiet, Kellenberger met in Washington in January 2004 with then-U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, as well as Rice and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.
Following their talks, the ICRC said in a statement it was unhappy that "certain aspects of the conditions and treatment in Guantanamo have not yet been adequately addressed."
In May last year, a leaked ICRC report on mistreatment of detainees held by the United States in Iraq fueled the scandal centering on Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison. The ICRC denied any involvement in the leak, saying the confidential report had been submitted to U.S. authorities.
Originally posted by: charrison
Let me try this again, the article that started this thread claiming us admission of torture was done by an unnamed source.
The article you posted had the red cross complaining about indefinent detainment, not torture.
that clear enough?
Red Cross Suspects U.S. Prisoner StashThe international Red Cross said yesterday it suspects the United States is hiding detainees in lockups across the globe, though the agency has been granted access to thousands of prisoners in Iraq and elsewhere. Terror suspects reported by the FBI as captured have never turned up in detention centers, and the United States has failed to reply to agency demands for a list of everyone it's holding, Antonella Notari, spokeswoman for the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said in an interview with the Associated Press. "These people are, as far as we can tell, detained in locations that are undisclosed not only to us but also to the rest of the world," Mrs. Notari said.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said yesterday he was "looking further into" the Red Cross concerns and added: "We do work closely with the Red Cross on all detainee issues." He did not concede a problem exists. At the Pentagon, spokesman Bryan Whitman said, "The International Committee of the Red Cross has access to all Defense Department detention operations." However, in his report into claims of abuse at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison, U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba found that military police there had "routinely held persons brought to them by other government agencies without accounting for them, knowing their identities, or even the reason for their detention." On at least one occasion, they moved these "ghost detainees" around the prison to hide them from a visiting Red Cross delegation, he said in the report. He described the actions as "deceptive, contrary to Army Doctrine, and in violation of international law." Under the Geneva Conventions, the United States is obliged to give the neutral, Swiss-run ICRC access to prisoners of war and other detainees to check on their conditions and allow them to send messages to their families.
The United States says it is cooperating with the agency, and has allowed Red Cross delegates access to thousands of prisoners in Afghanistan, at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and in Iraq, where agency delegates have even visited Saddam Hussein. It is not clear whether terror suspects would be covered by the Geneva Conventions, but Mrs. Notari said that "for humanitarian reasons" the Red Cross should be told about all detainees. ICRC President Jakob Kellenberger made the request in January on a visit to Washington during which he met with Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. "So far we haven't had a satisfactory reply," Mrs. Notari said.