Just when I thought I couldnt hate the UN anymore

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/16/un.guantanamo/index.html

 

Notice the second paragraph. They didnt visit the prison and based their report solely on what a bunch of terrorists and terrorist lawyers said.

 

 

Why we allow this corrupt, hypocritical and completely anti-American organization to take up prime New York real-estate is beyond me. Why we we also continue to fund its activities is also a source of puzzlement to me.

[NorthSideSox72]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/16/un.guantanamo/index.html

 

Notice the second paragraph.  They didnt visit the prison and based their report solely on what a bunch of terrorists and terrorist lawyers said.

Why we allow this corrupt, hypocritical and completely anti-American organization to take up prime New York real-estate is beyond me.  Why we we also continue to fund its activities is also a source of puzzlement to me.

 

I agree on the problem, but disagree on the solution. Pulling out helps no one.

 

Instead, as awful as this may sound to Dems and GOP alike on this board, I believe we need to get our hands a lot dirtier in the UN. I think we need to find our way back to the forefront of the organization and start making changes from within. And I don't mean Bolton-style changes (which is to say, pay no dues, ignore most countries, and complain a lot). I mean taking the time and effort to mold policies that will straighten out the UN. This will take time, and support, but it can be done.

[Rex Kickass]

A multinational organization opposes a prison camp for foreign fighters whose host government says that international law (Geneva Conventions) don't apply to their treatment and refuses to give them any legal process.

 

And you think that's wrong.

[NorthSideSox72]

A multinational organization opposes a prison camp for foreign fighters whose host government says that international law (Geneva Conventions) don't apply to their treatment and refuses to give them any legal process.

 

And you think that's wrong.

 

I don't agree with our illegal handling of prisoners at Gitmo. What I disagree with (and Nuke does as well) is that this report is not properly researched, it would appear. ARC visited Gitmo multiple times - why weren't they part of the report? Did the UN ask for/receive permission to visit the camp (I honestly don't know, I am asking)? These are basic things that are missing. The UN could do good with this situation, but they come off like idiots when they don't do their homework.

[Rex Kickass]

The UN did ask. They were told they could tour the camp, but would not be allowed any contact with the prisoners.

[samclemens]

A multinational organization opposes a prison camp for foreign fighters whose host government says that international law (Geneva Conventions) don't apply to their treatment and refuses to give them any legal process.

 

And you think that's wrong.

 

geneva convention only governs combatents who, among other things, fight for a "nation" and wear uniforms so that they are identifiable. last time i checked, these terrorists wore street clothes as a uniform (at least the 9/11 hijackers did), or wear normal middle eastern clothing over where the open fighting is going on. they also do not fight for any common nation, much less common ideals (many, many different sects of insurgents, all have different reasons [some want saudi arabia to fall, some want israel to fall, some want the US to pull out, or any combination; others are backed by iran- my point is that the insurgency is far from unified]).

 

on top of that, even if you were to call insurgents and terrorists an "army" (which they are not), you cant ignore the fact that they consistantly break geneva convention rules every day, yet once caught attempt to hide behind the same rules they have no regard for whatsoever. unless you are going to argue that beheading non-combatants is not a violation of the geneva convention.

 

the geneva convention governs conventional warfare. we are not fighting another nation. it is maddening and incredulous hypocracy when one of those bastards tries to hide behind rules they gladly broke before they were caught.

[NorthSideSox72]

The UN did ask. They were told they could tour the camp, but would not be allowed any contact with the prisoners.

 

Did they tour it? If not, they screwed up.

 

As far as contacting prisoners, I think the US would have been smart to allow them some limited contact, instead of playing the blockade game again. That might have helped defuse the situation a bit.

[Kyyle23]

on top of that, even if you were to call insurgents and terrorists an "army" (which they are not), you cant ignore the fact that they consistantly break geneva convention rules every day, yet once caught attempt to hide behind the same rules they have no regard for whatsoever. unless you are going to argue that beheading non-combatants is not a violation of the geneva convention.

 

 

 

So you are saying that we should ignore the geneva convention because the terrorists do? Doesnt that make us as bad as them?

I especially like the assertion that these guys dont need to be treated fairly because they arent dressed properly, lol.

[NorthSideSox72]

geneva convention only governs combatents who, among other things, fight for a "nation" and wear uniforms so that they are identifiable. last time i checked, these terrorists wore street clothes as a uniform (at least the 9/11 hijackers did), or wear normal middle eastern clothing over where the open fighting is going on. they also do not fight for any common nation, much less common ideals (many, many different sects of insurgents, all have different reasons [some want saudi arabia to fall, some want israel to fall, some want the US to pull out, or any combination; others are backed by iran- my point is that the insurgency is far from unified]).

 

on top of that, even if you were to call insurgents and terrorists an "army" (which they are not), you cant ignore the fact that they consistantly break geneva convention rules every day, yet once caught attempt to hide behind the same rules they have no regard for whatsoever. unless you are going to argue that beheading non-combatants is not a violation of the geneva convention.

 

the geneva convention governs conventional warfare. we are not fighting another nation. it is maddening and incredulous hypocracy when one of those bastards tries to hide behind rules they gladly broke before they were caught.

 

This argument is bogus - this is the US government trying to have it both ways. if the Geneva conventions don't apply, because these are not soldiers, then guess what? They are criminals. And in that case, where is the due process? This is why the program is illegal and embarrassing for the US. They are trying to play both sides.

 

Now, I agree with Nuke that the report was poorly researched and can't stand too well on its own. Its typical UN bull. But the detainment of these people at Gitmo, for the length of time they have been there, is a travesty. Our reputation as a nation of freedom and justice for all is at stake on the world stage, and this Gitmo thing is making us look like hypocrites.

[samclemens]

So you are saying that we should ignore the geneva convention because the terrorists do?  Doesnt that make us as bad as them?

I especially like the assertion that these guys dont need to be treated fairly because they arent dressed properly, lol.

 

well i guess we should protect sworn enemies of our country with a doctrine that does not apply to them. we should also collectively stick our thumbs up our asses and wait for the next 9/11. also sounds like a winning strategy over in iraq. but its ok, cause we will still be "better" than them.

 

soldiers who do not wear uniforms cannot be afforded the geneva convention's protections. it was the same in WWII (soldiers caught in battle or behind enemy lines without their uniform were allowed to be executed by their captor). the fact that they arent dressed in uniform means that they cannot hide behind the geneva convention. that and their blatant disregard of it's rules. who even knows how much else of it's been violated by different acts of terrorists.

[Kyyle23]

well i guess we should protect sworn enemies of our country with a doctrine that does not apply to them. we should also collectively stick our thumbs up our asses and wait for the next 9/11. also sounds like a winning strategy over in iraq. but its ok, cause we will still be "better" than them.

 

soldiers who do not wear uniforms cannot be afforded the geneva convention's  protections. it was the same in WWII (soldiers caught in battle or behind enemy lines without their uniform were allowed to be executed by their captor). the fact that they arent dressed in uniform means that they cannot hide behind the geneva convention. that and their blatant disregard of it's rules. who even knows how much else of it's been violated by different acts of terrorists.

 

Right, we should tell everyone, "Do as I say, dont do as I do."

 

Uniforms are a pathetic argument.

[samclemens]

This argument is bogus - this is the US government trying to have it both ways.  if the Geneva conventions don't apply, because these are not soldiers, then guess what?  They are criminals.  And in that case, where is the due process?  This is why the program is illegal and embarrassing for the US.  They are trying to play both sides.

 

Now, I agree with Nuke that the report was poorly researched and can't stand too well on its own.  Its typical UN bull.  But the detainment of these people at Gitmo, for the length of time they have been there, is a travesty.  Our reputation as a nation of freedom and justice for all is at stake on the world stage, and this Gitmo thing is making us look like hypocrites.

 

Hello? THEY ARE NOT U.S. CITIZENS. this country is not called the united states of the world. is the united states of america. unless you are an american citizen, YOU DONT HAVE THE PRIVILIDGE OF DUE PROCESS. the US government has no duty whatsoever to provide due process to people who have never lived in the US, and are trying to kill our troops overseas.

 

i totally understand why there is such a debate about whether or not terrorists captured in afghanistan and iraq fall under the geneva convention. but there is no way that they fall under the US constitution. i simply fail to see your reasoning on how constitutional protections exclusively (and expressly) reserved for american citizens apply to a foreign combatant who has never even set foot in the country before (wouldnt matter if they did anyway, that doesnt make you a citizen).

[YASNY]

Right, we should tell everyone, "Do as I say, dont do as I do." 

 

Uniforms are a pathetic argument.

 

I don't think the people that formulated the Geneva convention agreed with you.

[samclemens]

Right, we should tell everyone, "Do as I say, dont do as I do." 

 

Uniforms are a pathetic argument.

 

you are right, the uniforms are a technical point. but its still valid. i'll stick with it.

 

dont only address half of my argument though. what about the violations they have and continue to commit? then trying to be afforded it's protections? i got a huge problem with that kind of blatant hypocrisy, thats why i feel so staunchly about this issue.

[Kyyle23]

you are right, the uniforms are a technical point. but its still valid. i'll stick with it. 

 

dont only address half of my argument though. what about the violations they have and continue to commit? then trying to be afforded it's protections? i got a huge problem with that kind of blatant hypocrisy, thats why i feel so staunchly about this issue.

 

I did address it. You are telling me that the US should be hypocrites because the terrorists are hypocrites. I disagree. If you believe in something (ie. the geneva conventions) and you tell everyone you are going to follow that something, then you better not renege because the bad guys didnt play fair. Guess what? The bad guys never play fair. Its the way it goes, thats why they are criminals.

[NorthSideSox72]

Hello? THEY ARE NOT U.S. CITIZENS. this country is not called the united states of the world. is the united states of america. unless you are an american citizen, YOU DONT HAVE THE PRIVILIDGE OF DUE PROCESS. the US government has no duty whatsoever to provide due process to people who have never lived in the US, and are trying to kill our troops overseas.

 

i totally understand why there is such a debate about whether or not terrorists captured in afghanistan and iraq fall under the geneva convention. but there is no way that they fall under the US constitution. i simply fail to see your reasoning on how constitutional protections exclusively (and expressly) reserved for american citizens apply to a foreign combatant who has never even set foot in the country before (wouldnt matter if they did anyway, that doesnt make you a citizen).

 

I said nothing about US citizens. If we arrest a foreign citizen, can we just hold them indefinitely? If some tourist is arrested in New York for a crime, can we do whatever we want to them because they are not US citizens and also not soldiers?

 

There is due process for foreigners, even if its not specified in the Constitution. If the US decides it is OK to just treat these people in any way it chooses, then again, as I stated earlier, we have no ground to stand on INTERNATIONALLY as a country that protects personal freedoms.

[Rex Kickass]

Did they tour it?  If not, they screwed up.

 

As far as contacting prisoners, I think the US would have been smart to allow them some limited contact, instead of playing the blockade game again.  That might have helped defuse the situation a bit.

 

Well, that's the point I think.... if all you're getting is a guided tour of Gitmo what's the point really? It's like taking the visitor's tour of the White House and writing and exposee on the life of Presidential staffers. They probably saw it as adding nothing. And in reality, they were/are probably right about that. But you're right too. They should have made the tour.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Right, we should tell everyone, "Do as I say, dont do as I do." 

 

Uniforms are a pathetic argument.

 

 

You call it pathetic, I call it following precedent.

 

 

We've been over this ground many many times before and you lefties just cant get it through your heads that the Geneva Convention does not apply to terrorists. Based on the precedent of the SCOTUS's Qurin ( sp ) decision of the 1940's it is the job of the military to handle these people.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

A multinational organization opposes a prison camp for foreign fighters whose host government says that international law (Geneva Conventions) don't apply to their treatment and refuses to give them any legal process.

 

And you think that's wrong.

 

 

Its wrong when that multinational organization is corrupt, hypocritical and been taking bribes and kickbacks from our enemies for years.

 

Its also wrong when that same organization prepares a blatant hatchet job without even allowing for the US to tell its side of the story.

 

Ive said it before and I'll say it again. An American who is captured by these people ( who you are trying to annoint with sainthood ) would be lucky to be treated as well as the detainees at Gitmo are treated. Instead of being allowed to worship freely, being given 3 squares a day ( these f***ers are gaining weight there for chrissakes! ), they would get their heads chopped off and the video posted on Al Jazerra.

 

These people are terrorist scum and they dont deserve any sympathy.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Well, that's the point I think.... if all you're getting is a guided tour of Gitmo what's the point really? It's like taking the visitor's tour of the White House and writing and exposee on the life of Presidential staffers. They probably saw it as adding nothing. And in reality, they were/are probably right about that. But you're right too. They should have made the tour.

 

 

Of course they saw it as adding nothing. The whole purpose of this is little more than a hatchet job. They weren't the least bit interested in objectivity.

[Rex Kickass]

And no one could ever accuse you of that either.

 

If we're treating them so well, we shouldn't be so afraid of letting the world see how well we're treating them. So many of these suspicions, so many of these accusations that are probably blameless would be taken care of sooner if our government was more willingly forthright.

 

The war on terrorism is essentially an image war. Who we are and what we believe in will ultimately cause our side to win - as long as we stay honest to our beliefs and show them to the world. Because we believe in the best things - those things which grant human dignity to all and we believe in basic human rights for everyone. We shouldn't discriminate between foreign combatant or Prisoner of War or US Citizen. We believe that all men are created equally. As such, we should treat them so. And we should let the world see clearly that this is exactly what we're doing.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

And no one could ever accuse you of that either.

 

We shouldn't discriminate between foreign combatant or Prisoner of War or US Citizen. We believe that all men are created equally. As such, we should treat them so. And we should let the world see clearly that this is exactly what we're doing.

 

 

Why? The law says that there's a clear distinction between enemy combatant, POW and American Citizen. Not only does our own law draw a clear distinction between the 3 but so does international law.

 

Why should we extend the same rights our own citizens enjoy to a bunch of thugs who are doing everything in their power to hurt us as a nation and kill our citizens?

 

-Handling terrorist scum with kid gloves is going to do nothing at all to stop the islamo-fascist movement from wanting to atack us.

 

-Its going to do nothing to stop them from indoctrinating their young with vile "Death to America" crap from the time they can understand a spoken word.

 

The only thing coddling terrorists ever did is make their mission easier.

[Rex Kickass]

Funny how you think human rights and being forthright equals coddling.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Funny how you think human rights and being forthright equals coddling.

 

 

Funny how you think terrorists who want you dead are saints or something.

[Balta1701]

Funny how you think terrorists who want you dead are saints or something.

Funny how you think that even a majority of the people at Gitmo are actually terrorists.