Bravo to Ron Paul on his China comments! A nation that harasses people at every turn and which invades other countries without provocation is a country that does not need to lecture others about human rights.
I truly am tired of hearing these Republican mouthpieces attack China for hosting the Olympics (at least there was no boycott this time, but not because of a lack of effort from the neoconservatives and their allies). To think that a country that was extremely backward even 15 years ago can host these games is quite amazing, and I wish the Chinese well in this endeavor.
A year ago, Lew wrote a magnificent column on China and how far it has come since the bloody Mao years. I would urge everyone to read it to gain a sense of just how far the Chinese have come. And we should not forget that in the past decade, China -- for all its authoritarian rule -- has become more free, while the USA has become more authoritarian and less free.
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The IOC should have never voted that the 2008 Summer Olympics take place in China. Posts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I also can't believe the Olympic community gave a Communist country like China the Olympics.
August 6, 2008
Olympic gold medalist and outspoken Darfur activist Joey Cheek has had his visa revoked by the Chinese embassy, hours before the speedskating champion was set to fly to China. “I have always been an absolute believer in the Olympics and what the Olympics can do,” Cheek. “I never asked for a boycott.” The White House had no knowledge of the Chinese action, press secretary Dana Perino said Wednesday morning in Seoul. She said officials would look into the matter.
"The Chinese government official who called Cheek stated simply that he was 'not required to give a reason' for revoking visas," the organisation said.
.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Economic interest and deceit! The US will be surprised when China pays them back in kind with threats and Hillary Clinton like responses!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A nation that can have such a dramatic economic transition, deserves praise and the Olympics, for economically progressing with unprecendented celerity.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Strangeways makes some strange comments indeed. On the one hand she praises Ron Paul and in the same breath bashes Republicans. Ron Paul is a Republican.Ron Paul believes that Social Security should be abolished and that all taxes on business and regulations on business should be abolished.
Myra is on to something. There are no more racist people in the world that the Chinese. They consider black people on a level with insects.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
More importantly, Paul feels the Federal Reserve and banking industry need to be dismantled. I liked some of his views but too bad he's a KKK sympathizer.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
plus Moscow was given the 1980 Olympics. They were not exactly the brightest lights of human rights.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The point is the 'Olympic community' is nothing more than an extension of the U.N. and are not at all interested in human rights than they are about their own economic interests like the kind that an international event like the Olympic games itself would invite.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't forget to include the US in that list of countries, allowed to host the Olympics despite their human rights record. And yes, there are many more examples, besides the aforementioned countries.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
riiiight Explrateur. Did you forget to take your medication today????
Judging from the obtuseness of this line of questioning that you pulled right from your ass, I take it that you forgot to request a surgical implantation of a brain into that empty dud-head of yours.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the last century or more the United States has liberated and freed more people than the rest of the world combined. We just spent a trillion dollars creatindg a solid democratic government in Iraq giving those people unprecented economic, social and political freedom. To imply that we violate human rights is absurd. Further, to use language like "ass" on a public forum shows a lack of breeding and class that should be corrected. When you use that kind of language people tend to disregard everything else you say.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
In the last century or more the United States has liberated and freed more people than the rest of the world combined.
Bombing civilians out of existence doesn't exactly constitute respecting individual human rights; prisoner guards high-fiving each other and climbing on naked captives, who are made to emulate sexual gestures with one another, doesn't exactly constitute human rights; raping women, and burning bodies after murder, doesn't constitute human rights; holding people, including journalists, captive without due process, not to mention having captives spirited away via "secretive" flights to torture centers overseas, isn't exactly a gesture of respect towards human rights; disrupting, dispensing tear gas and pepper spray at peaceful demonstrations at a convention, isn't exactly democratic, nor a gesture of respect to human rights; using tax payer money to bail out banks guilty of fraudulent practices, while the average person continues to struggle, with wages staying stagnant while inflation goes up, and jobs continue to be cut, isn't exactly a gesture of human rights, and well, the list can go on and on, especially when historical record is added to the mix.
quote:Further, to use language like "ass" on a public forum shows a lack of breeding and class that should be corrected. When you use that kind of language people tend to disregard everything else you say.
You have the gumption to talk about hurling insults and obscene language at a public forum, when you greet someone's comment -- that no less disagrees with your point of view -- with blatant insult at the person, rather than simply attacking the comment itself, by coming back with material to the contrary. What beast has reared you over the years?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The intellectual depravity of seeing the United states as a human rights abuser certanily invites disrespect. When you simply parrot the anti American terrorist position promoted by the enemies of democracy and the global economy one has to wonder at your motives at the very least.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
The intellectual depravity of seeing the United states as a human rights abuser certanily invites disrespect.
In return, you'll be treated like the intellectually deprived punk that you are, incapable of materially addressing anything that doesn't agree with that numb skull of yours, other than acting like a savage.
quote:
When you simply parrot the anti American terrorist position promoted by the enemies of democracy and the global economy one has to wonder at your motives at the very least.
This sounds like Nazi whining; what are you motives behind it?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Global economy orders the world. Anyone who opposes it will end up poor and isolated. That is what the G-8 meetings are all about. This economic construct has been developed since 1945 and has brought the world unprecented prosperity. Democratic government makes a nation much more able to develop a place in this new world order. Right now the United States is the engine that runs the global economic system, thus it's policeman. Remember guys...democracy is good for business and that the business of America is business. Unless you want to live in the trees it is your only choice. All of this black nationalism I read on some of these boards is nonsense and will not make you a dime.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Explorateur: Don't forget to include the US in that list of countries, allowed to host the Olympics despite their human rights record. And yes, there are many more examples, besides the aforementioned countries.
I must agree with Hammer. How is the U.S. a nation that is big in violating human rights?? And please do not bring up casualties in the Iraqi war. Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
How is the U.S. a nation that is big in violating human rights??
I'm assuming you can read; I just provided a quick list of *facts* with little effort...and again, that was just a "quick" list, none of which I am pretty sure you can disprove or simply dismiss as fact...other than of course, whining like a chick about it.
quote: And please do not bring up casualties in the Iraqi war.
Waste of innocent human lives over there are beneath your own, and therefore, need not be brought up? And so, by calling them "casualties", is that not what you're professing; that, if your own mother or father were amoung those so-called "casualties", then you'd simply dismiss them as such, and hence, need not bother bringing them up, right?
Ps - And who mentioned anything about Iraq anyways; what made you think of them right away, anyway, when US human rights abuse was mentioned?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
That is utopian jibbirish Explorateur. Nobody likes to see civilian casulaties but they are a fact of life in war and you know that. The fact is that the middle east must, it has no choice, join the global economy. If it takes war to do that it will be war. You cannot allow a group of anti western muslim fundamentalists control the oil supply for the global economy. Lets try to be a little realistic and look at the world the way it is, not the way you want it to be.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
Utopian jibberish which are *facts* you have until now, along with your minion, been whining about like a chick, rather than busy disproving.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Apparentally, TheAmericanPatriot should read TheAmericanIlliterate. What does that quick list read; can you disprove any of those facts for starters? If not, then stop whinin'.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Explorateur, You are too uneducated to contribute to the conversation. I'm not playing these silly games with you. Read the transcripts of the last few G-8 meetings and try to learn at least the basics of the world you live in.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
You cannot read what is presented before you [no doubt 'facts' which all mean 'silly games' to you btw], let alone answer accordingly, and you have the nerve to call someone else too uneducated; stop acting like an illiterate whining chick and man up, man.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ By casualties, I mean unintended victims of war unlike the Islamic terrorists who purposely target innocent civilians including women and children. And again NO casualties of war do NOT count as "human rights" violations!
Just face the facts, the U.S. has one of the highest if not the highest record of maintaining human rights compared to other nations. Take Iraq for example, (not that I agree with the invasion) but let's face it, before the invasion Shiites and others were being persecuted, imprisoned, and tortured, other groups entirely wiped out.
In the case of China, it is a communist military regime that has been known to persecute and kill many people not just the Tibetans as many have seen in the media. Any person suspected of dissent would be imprisoned, tortured, and have their internal organs extracted to be sold in the black market.
Not unless you can provide an actual example of the U.S. government involved in an actual and systematic human rights violation please do so! I doubt you can, can you?
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
^ By casualties, I mean unintended victims of war unlike the Islamic terrorists who purposely target innocent civilians including women and children
I suppose you think knowingly targeting heavy civilian areas for bombing, is unlike the antics of the terrorists whom you profess to "target innocent civilians including women and children"? What buffoonery made you capable of thinking like that? I suppose you think nuking two entire cities, was undertaken with the understanding that the entire cities must have been devoid of "innocent civilans including women and children"? Are you that gullible?!
quote: And again NO casualties of war do NOT count as "human rights" violations!
You bet; while at it, go ahead torture and rape women, maim them, children, innocent men and elderly; hey, the same could be done to your own parents and siblings, and that too would not count as "human rights violations" in Djehuti's book. Why not include the activities of those Islamic Terrorists as not counting as "human rights violations", while you're going about this psycho-delusional trip?
quote: Just face the facts,
I just did -- provided a quick list of them; you however, saw fit not to face them, but rather, bitch about them like a weak chick.
quote: Take Iraq for example, (not that I agree with the invasion)
Look at this clown; in one breath asks someone to take the Iraq war for example, and in the next breath, proclaims not to agree with the invasion; wonder why, though I'm afraid to find out the reasoning.
quote: In the case of China, it is a communist military regime that has been known to persecute and kill many people not just the Tibetans as many have seen in the media.
Red-herring; of course China has its own human rights violations; I don't defend human rights violations, as you do. Likewise, the US has been known to persecute and kill many people, trample on civil rights, not to mention imprison and torture people; here too, I don't defend it...as you do.
quote: Not unless you can provide an actual example of the U.S. government involved in an actual and systematic human rights violation please do so! I doubt you can, can you?
Done! Care to get off your lazy butt and read the 'quick' list above, i.e. if you can read at all, AND disprove anything therein; I doubt you can, can you?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Explorateur: I suppose you think knowingly targeting heavy civilian areas for bombing, is unlike the antics of the terrorists whom you profess to "target innocent civilians including women and children"? What buffoonery made you capable of thinking like that? I suppose you think nuking two entire cities, was undertaken with the understanding that the entire cities must have been devoid of "innocent civilans including women and children"? Are you that gullible?!
Uh, no moron! The intended target of those nukes were the factories that produced planes, weapons, and ammunition of the Japanese and NOT the civilians, hence the term casualties. It is tragic that many innocent civilians did die in those attacks and that even the workers of those factories and their families weren't even Japanese but Korean! However, the decision was made with the best hope that it would end the war and prevent the loss of millions of more lives, most of which by the hands of the Japanese were NOT casualties but systematic enslavement, oppression, and extermination. Believe me, many more peoples in Asia were happy when those cities were nuked than were American citizens!
quote:You bet; while at it, go ahead torture and rape women, maim them, children, innocent men and elderly; hey, the same could be done to your own parents and siblings, and that too would not count as "human rights violations" in Djehuti's book. Why not include the activities of those Islamic Terrorists as not counting as "human rights violations", while you're going about this psycho-delusional trip?
LOL The only one on a psycho-delusional trip is YOU. Please give me an example of this "torture and rape women, maim them, children, innocent men and elderly" by Americans that you speak of! How could this be done to my parents and siblings who are safe and secure as American citizens.
quote:I just did -- provided a quick list of them; you however, saw fit not to face them, but rather, bitch about them like a weak chick.
You provided NOTHING to back up your claims, and its obvious that the only one 'bitching' around here is YOU, like a weak chick on PMS! Why your very use of profanity is obviously a sign of your frustration. LOL
quote:Look at this clown; in one breath asks someone to take the Iraq war for example, and in the next breath, proclaims not to agree with the invasion; wonder why, though I'm afraid to find out the reasoning.
I don't agree with the invasion, but I used it as an example of how humane US troops are compared to the native regime that was in place yet you dare call the US gov. a "violator" of human rights?! LOL If I'm a 'clown' then obviously the joke is YOU.
quote:Red-herring; of course China has its own human rights violations; I don't defend human rights violations, as you do. Likewise, the US has been known to persecute and kill many people, trample on civil rights, not to mention imprison and torture people; here too, I don't defend it...as you do.
Since when have I ever defended human rights violations, pyscho?! I just asked you to provide examples of how the US does what you above say they do! Please explain to me how the U.S. "persecutes and kills many people"! Which people? How?
quote:Done! Care to get off your lazy butt and read the 'quick' list above, i.e. if you can read at all, AND disprove anything therein; I doubt you can, can you?
You are indeed "done" alright. You have provided nothing to back up your actual claims, but rather cite rather poor examples and then continue to make empty accusations that the US is somekind of oppressive regime! LOL You obviously are not a US citizen, and if you are you obviously are insane period.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Uh, no moron! The intended target of those nukes were the factories that produced planes, weapons, and ammunition of the Japanese and NOT the civilians, hence the term casualties.
You stupid filthy filipino rat, you nuke two entire cities to just to destroy some factories of amunitions; you are indeed beyond retarded, aren't you?
quote: Believe me
It is unwise to believe a liar, and an uneducated one at that.
quote:
LOL The only one on a psycho-delusional trip is YOU. Please give me an example of this "torture and rape women, maim them, children, innocent men and elderly" by Americans that you speak of!
Like I said, you are very exceedingly dumb dirty filipino rat; if you don't know what is going on around you, then that is your loss. I ain't spoon feeding you, while you dodge my list above like the filipino cunt that you are.
quote: How could this be done to my parents and siblings who are safe and secure as American citizens.
Precisely, cave man; other peoples lives are worthless and are seen as mere "casualties" not worth mentioning, since you are convinced that your immediate family doesn't have to go through such attrocity against human rights. Ain't that right, filipino idiot?!
quote:You provided NOTHING to back up your claims
The dirty filipino rat's flimsy response is to simply gloat over the list, claiming that it is not backed up, when this are all pretty much general mainstream knowledge by anyone of even less than average intellegence. Very well, dirty filipino rat...
- Bombing civilians out of existence doesn't exactly constitute respecting individual human rights - examples; nuking cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, relentless bombing campaigns over heavy civilian areas of Indo-China [Vietnam and Laos] and devastation of civilian-used land therein with napalm and other toxic chemicals and stuff like cluster bombs, bombing of heavy civilian areas of Afghanistan and Iraq ['91 and '02 onwards], bombing of pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, bombing of civilian areas in Somalia under the guise of "humanitarian" aid, saturated bombings of civilian centers of Germany, and the list goes on.
- prisoner guards high-fiving each other and climbing on naked captives, who are made to emulate sexual gestures with one another, doesn't exactly constitute human rights - think Iraq prison photo scandals. There are reports of similar such abuses in prisons stationed within the US itself; how's that for the notion that "terrorism starts at home", dumb filipino?
- raping women, and burning bodies after murder - think Haditha just as merely one example. Such atrocities were well documented in previous conflicts in South Asia.
- holding people, including journalists, captive without due process, not to mention having captives spirited away via "secretive" flights to torture centers overseas, isn't exactly a gesture of respect towards human rights - example: Read on recent Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) 437-page report on "war crimes" files about such crimes sanctioned by the state, documenting torture.
More examples...
From recent McClatchy Newspapers interviews, involving interview of some 66 'former' detainees, various Afghan and US officials, and going through thousands of pages of US tribunal documents and other records [courtesy David Walsh, SEP]:
Most of the detainees turned out to be...“low-level Taliban grunts, innocent Afghan villagers or ordinary criminals.”
“American soldiers herded the detainees into holding pens of razor-sharp concertina wire, the kind that’s used to corral livestock.
“The guards kicked, kneed and punched many of the men until they collapsed in pain. U.S. troops shackled and dragged other detainees to small isolation rooms, then hung them by their wrists from chains dangling from the wire mesh ceiling.”
“American soldiers would walk into the pen where he slept on the floor and ram their combat boots into his back and stomach, Gul said. ‘Two or three of them would come in suddenly, tie my hands and beat me,’ he said.”
Mohammed Arif Sarwari, the head of the country’s national security directorate from late 2001 to 2003 for the US puppet regime in Afghanistan, told McClatchy:
“a bad sign: The Americans were creating an island with no one to watch over them. ‘I said I didn’t want to be involved with what they were doing at Bagram—who they were arresting or what they were doing with them,"
In December 2002, the American military personnel...
“beat two Afghan detainees, Habibullah and Dilawar, to death as they hung by their wrists.”
As per McClatchy’s Lasseter,
“Spc. Jeremy Callaway, who admitted to striking about 12 detainees at Bagram, told military investigators in sworn testimony that he was uncomfortable following orders to ‘mentally and physically break the detainees.’ He didn’t go into detail. ‘I guess you can call it torture,’ said Callaway, who served in the 377th from August 2002 to January 2003.”
The newspaper goes onto add that...
“The mistreatment of detainees at Bagram, some legal experts said, may have been a violation of the 1949 Geneva Convention on prisoners of war, which forbids violence against or humiliating treatment of detainees.
“The U.S. War Crimes Act of 1996 imposes penalties up to death for such mistreatment.
“At Bagram, however, the rules didn’t apply. In February 2002, President Bush issued an order denying suspected Taliban and al Qaida detainees prisoner-of-war status. He also denied them basic Geneva protections known as Common Article Three, which sets a minimum standard for humane treatment.”
July 26, 2002 memo directed to Haynes’ office, included
“Facial Slap,” “Walling,” “Finger Press,” “Water,” “Waterboard,” “Cramped Confinement (‘the little box’),” “Immersion in water/Wetting down,” “Isolation,” “Degradation,” “Sensory overload,” “Disruption of sleep and biorhythms” and “Manipulation of diet.”
“We may need to curb the harsher operations while ICRC [International Committee of the Red Cross] is around. It is better not to expose them to any controversial techniques.” - Lt. Col. Diane Beave
Concerning, sleep deprivation...
“True, but officially it is not happening. It is not being reported officially. The ICRC is a serious concern. They will be in and out, scrutinizing our operations, unless they are displeased and decided to protest and leave.” - Lt. Col. Diane Beave
According to CIA’s Counterterrorism Center Jonathan Fredman...
"Severe physical pain described as anything causing permanent damage to major organs or body parts. Mental torture described as anything leading to permanent, profound damage to the senses or personality. It is basically subject to perception. If the detainee dies you’re doing it wrong.”
Videotaping the “harsh techniques” is ruled out, because “Videotapes are subject to too much scrutiny in court.” A discussion ensues about the “wet towel” technique, during which the “lymphatic system will react as if you’re suffocating, but your body will not cease to function.”
Per Mark Fallon, deputy commander of the Criminal Investigation Task Force at Guantánamo...
“Talk of ‘wet towel treatment’ which results in the lymphatic gland reacting as if you are suffocating, would in my opinion, shock the conscience of any legal body ... Someone needs to be considering how history will look back at this.”
From a victim who was eventually relieved of any terrorist activity [courtesy Bill Van Auken, SEP]...
“I did nothing wrong and I was treated like a monster,” he said. He told how he was subjected to electric shocks, being suspended by his wrists for hours and subjected to the ‘water treatment,’ in which his head was stuck into a bucket of water and he was punched in the stomach, forcing him to inhale the liquid. (The Justice Department Inspector General’s report, it bears noting, affirmed that this last form of torture did not constitute “waterboarding,” but did represent “an effort to intimidate the detainees and increase their feelings of helplessness.”)
“There was no law in Guantánamo,” Kurnaz concluded. “I didn’t think this could happen in the 21st century.... I could never have imagined that this place was created by the United States.”
Want more examples, filipino slime?
- Secret domestic spying on American citizens, which violated US law and the Constitution, and was only recently passed through congress to vote on expanding these activities [read as FISA Amendments Act of 2008], and giving immunity to telecom organizations involved in the illegal spying.
- disrupting, dispensing tear gas and pepper spray at peaceful demonstrations at a convention, isn't exactly democratic, nor a gesture of respect to human rights - Well hey, filipino vermin, if you haven't heard of this one, then I can't help you, other than to tell you to get out a little...out of your rat hole.
- using tax payer money to bail out banks guilty of fraudulent practices, while the average person continues to struggle, with wages staying stagnant while inflation goes up, and jobs continue to be cut...- Again, filipino slime bucket, if you don't know this, I can't help you there either.
Now, dirty filipino rat, counter these *supported* examples with evidence to the contrary.
quote:and its obvious that the only one 'bitching' around here is YOU
You were given a quick list of facts, and yet you moan about not being given any explanation of what constitutes human rights violations; instead, you caterwaul like a little filipino cock-sucking chick, with no point of contentions to the contrary supported by evidence. Do doubt, your weak filipino feminine gestures have rendered you blind in telling the difference between the person who has provided an explanation, and one who only caterwauls like a hussy [you, the dirty filipino mongrel] about it?
quote:I don't agree with the invasion
Why is that, stupid little filipino mongrelized vermin?
quote:Since when have I ever defended human rights violations, pyscho?!
Your entire post to me just now, was about defending US human rights violations, and how nuking entire cities and heavy civilian centers are justified on some flimsy ground or another; you are reduced to a lying filipino toilet-hole vermin, Lol.
quote:LOL You obviously are not a US citizen, and if you are you obviously are insane period.
You are an flimsy idiotic gutter filipino slime of a vermin who migrated into the US as a dumb toilette-scrubbing refugee, and call yourself a US citizen, all the while not knowing jack about what's going on around you, and you call someone else who seeks to educate your uneducated dirty filipino rat ass on the matter "insane"; you have the nerve, dirtly filipino male-hustlin' chick.
Get off your ugly sorry and lazy dirty filipino chick ass, and counter what has just been relayed to you, *with evidence to the contrary*, instead of being TheAmericanIlliterate boy's blowjobbin' filipino minion.
Ps - And oh, before you ever take me on next time around, make sure you get a minimum clue about geopolitical developments.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Wow, you seem to be quite vexed over this issue for you to resort to ethnic tirades.
Apparently not as vexed as a filipino clown, who idiotically asks for a naming of human rights voilations, when an list had already been provided; you do so, because you feel the need to deny the well known -- no doubt, speaking to the distress you have about the said facts.
quote: I doubt you're japanese so perhaps you're one of those nasty british Aprascee boys?
Who gives a hoot what you doubt or don't doubt, Lol; what's clear, is that you are a Japanese-fearing and Japanese screwing dirty filipino chick, who cannot stomach simple facts about US "human rights violations".
quote: It doesn't matter who you are or what your background is.
Look at this filipino clown; posted right above, was shedding sweat in throwing guesswork right and left, about my supposed ethnicity, which no doubt is irrelevant to issue [at hand] of human rights voilations.
quote: What matters in any debate is logic and it's obvious your emotions have overshadowed that.
I think it is fair to say that one who is wacky enough to deny generally well-known mainstream facts, to the point of even asking for examples, is one who has issues to begin with, oh slow filipino buffoon.
quote: But getting back to the point, you obviosly do not understand the situation. First of all, the Japanese attacked the U.S. first, unprovoked and without warning.
Are you sure you are not one of those Islamic Terrorist loons that you love talking about? You sure have the same mindset; you dumb sick fascistic clowns all think that bombing civilians for what a government has done is fully justified.
quote: Second, before the attacks the U.S. warned Japan to surrender even pleaded with its officials to end their campaign before anymore unnecessary lives were lost!
Which I take it, dumb filipino boy, is your sick way of saying nuking two entire cities is fully justified; no matter, learn the facts, dumb child, emphasis courtesy of Joseph Kay, SEP...
“I told [Truman] I was anxious about this feature of the war for two reasons: first, because I did not want to have the United States get the reputation of outdoing Hitler in atrocities; and second, I was a little fearful that before we could get ready the Air Force might have Japan so thoroughly bombed out that the new weapon [the atom bomb] would not have a fair background to show its strength. He laughed and said he understood” - Secretary of War Henry Stimson, Henry Stimson Papers, Sterling Library, Yale University. Available at the National Security Archive: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/15.pdf.
What does this mean to you, dumb filipino refugee? Lol.
And if that doesn't crack that thick nut of yours, consider this...
“The increasing effects of air-sea blockade, the progressive and cumulative devastation wrought by strategic bombing, and the collapse of Germany (with its implications regarding redeployment) should make this realization [that absolute defeat is inevitable] widespread within the year...The entry of the USSR into the war, would, together with the foregoing factors, convince most Japanese at once of the inevitability of complete defeat...If...the Japanese people, as well as their leaders, were persuaded both that absolute defeat was inevitable and that unconditional surrender did not imply national annihilation [that is, the removal of the emperor], surrender might follow fairly quickly” - Historian Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, Vintage Books, New York: 1995 p. 113-114.
And from Japanese messages intercepted by the US...
“On 11 July [Japanese] Foreign Minister Togo sent the following ‘extremely urgent’ message to Ambassador [to the Soviet Union] Sato: ‘We are now secretly giving **consideration to the termination of the war** because of the pressing situation which confronts Japan both at home and abroad. Therefore, when you have your interview with [Soviet Foreign Minister] Molotov in accordance with previous instructions you should not confine yourself to the objective of a rapprochement between Russia and Japan but should also sound him out on the extent to which it is possible to make use of Russia in ending the war.” - “‘Magic’—Diplomatic Summary, War Department, Office of Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, No. 1204—July 12, 1945, Top Secret Ultra.” Available at the National Security Archive: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/29.pdf
Furthermore...
"“JFB [Byrnes] still hoping for time, believing after atomic bomb Japan will surrender and Russia will not get in so much on the kill, thereby being in a position to press for claims against China”[15]. Later, on August 3, three days before Hiroshima, Brown writes, “Aboard Agusta/President, Leahy, JFB [Byrnes] agreed [sic] Japas [sic] looking for peace...President afraid they will sue for **peace through Russia** instead of some country like Sweden” - Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, Vintage Books, New York: 1995, p. 415.
So, philipino knucklehead, what does any of this mean to you; does it jive with your notion that Japan was *not* willing to surrender, given the desperate position it was in?
This should answer it for you...
What these and other documents make clear is that not only were American leaders concerned that the war would end in a way favorable to the Soviet Union, but also that they knew Japan was very close to suing for peace. - Joseph Kay, SEP.
quote: The Japanese did not heed the warnings, plus President Truman as well as Congress wanted to end the war without the cost of more U.S. lives that an actual mass invasion of Japan would entail.
Again, this should bust that myth, courtesy of Joseph Kay, SEP;...
"In his book The Decision to Use the Atom Bomb, Gar Alperovitz makes a convincing case for a “two-step” theory of Japanese surrender. According to Alperovitz, the combination of the Soviet invasion, which eventually took place on August 8, and a guarantee to the Japanese state that the position of the emperor would not be threatened, would have put an end to the war **without an invasion** and **without the use of the atom bomb**.
This indeed was the conclusion of a Joint Intelligence Committee report to the Joint Chiefs of Staff on April 29, 1945: “The increasing effects of air-sea blockade, the progressive and cumulative devastation wrought by strategic bombing, and the collapse of Germany (with its implications regarding redeployment) should make this realization [that absolute defeat is inevitable] widespread within the year...The entry of the USSR into the war, would, together with the foregoing factors, convince most Japanese at once of the inevitability of complete defeat...If...the Japanese people, as well as their leaders, were persuaded both that absolute defeat was inevitable and that unconditional surrender did not imply national annihilation [that is, the removal of the emperor], surrender might follow fairly quickly”." - Joseph Kay
quote: Add to that the Japanese' ally Germany reacking havoc in Europe, as well as the potential threat Stalin and the Soviets had both in Europe and Asia.
Germany had already *surrended* by the time those reports of Japanese willingness to surrender [to the Soviets] were intercepted, and by the time Stimson made those comments, showing how the war was virtually under the control of the US and its allies by June, and by which time Japan was already on the brink of defeat -- a US invasion was scheduled for November; guess who the Soviets allied with by then? Yeap, the good ol' state of the US. You need to brush on the basics, dumb filipino.
quote: It is unfortunate, but in such a situation it was a matter of who had the power to end the mess and how to show that power.
Predictable; facistic apologia by dumb little philipino refugee, and he/she professes not to be a human rights violation apologist, Lol.
quote: What happened to those two cities is horrible
And yet, you fully endorse the savagery; you go, dumb filipino. Lol.
quote: yes but let there be no mistake they were casualties or unfortunate sacrifices and NOT some systematic human rights abuses such as the systematic killing
Already provided enough citations that proves that this is your wild fantasy of the state of affairs, not fact. More on this point though, we have; again courtesy of Joseph Kay,...
“After much discussion concerning various types of targets and the effects to be produced, the Secretary [of War Stimson] expressed the conclusion, on which there was general agreement, that we could not give the Japanese any warning; that we could not concentrate on a civilian area; but that we should seek to make a profound psychological impression on as many of the inhabitants as possible. At the suggestion of Dr. [James] Conant, the Secretary agreed that the most desirable target would be a vital war plant employing a large number of workers and **closely surrounded by workers’ houses**”[4] - Notes of the Interim Committee Meeting Thursday, 31 May 1945, 10:00 A.M. to 1:15 P.M.—2:15 P.M. to 4:15 P.M.” p. 13-14. Available at the National Security Archive: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/12.pdf.
Especially, on the last point, what does that mean to you, dumb filipino? That is,...
"closely surrounded by workers’ houses"
Let me assist; that the US was target not "uninhabited" ammunition factory or the like, but "habited" **worker's houses** that have nothing to do with the an ammunition factory.
Not to mention that the following is the very definition of terrorism: we should seek to make a profound psychological impression on as many of the inhabitants as possible.
Kay goes onto note, about those quotations from the said Interim Committee meeting, that...
"Despite the reference to not concentrating on a civilian area, the committee explicitly rejected the use of the bomb first on a purely military or uninhabited region, as some of the scientists who had worked with the panel recommended [5].
Wherein [5] is reference to:
Among these scientists was the great Hungarian physicist Leo Szilard, who while helping to develop the bomb came to have strong doubts about using it. In one passage of the minutes to the same meeting of the Interim Committee quoted above, General Leslie Groves, the general in charge of the Manhattan Project, warns of certain “undesirable scientists...of doubtful discretion and uncertain loyalty,” no doubt referring primarily to those concerned about the use of the bomb (Ibid. p. 14).
The Interim Committee also rejected the idea that the nuclear technology should be shared with the international community in order to avoid a nuclear arms race with the Soviet Union, another position held by many of the scientists working on the project.
quote: ,rape, torture, and experimentation that the Japanese and their Nazi allies were perpetuating!!
Of course those nations were guilty of said human rights violations; remember, it is you who defends such acts, not I. Unlike yourself, it doesn't matter to me which government or state perpetrates these crimes, I unequivocally condemn it. And the US itself has committed these very same human rights violations over the years, including today in Iraq and Afghanistan.
quote: What have I lied about??
For starters, the implication that everything in the quick list needed any further elaboration by way of your own utter ignorance, when in fact, it is essentially general knowledge to anyone who is not living in a cave somewhere, or in a rat hole...like yourself.
Your wacky and uninformed fascist notion that war crimes haven't been committed in Iraq, Afghanistan Vietnam or Japan, etc, but that these are mere "casualties".
quote: Apparently I had alot more education than YOU since I know what I'm talking about but you don't.
Dumb filipino refugee, after what I've just supplied you, I *strongly* urge you to rethink this.
quote: I know very well what's going around me, in fact more so than most American citizens who are indeed ignorant but I'm not one of them.
Haha; you are the very definition of ignorant, dumb filipino-refugee chick,
You weren't even aware of the simple fact about the Abu Ghraib scandal of torture and abuse, and wanted documentation on that, let alone recent documents show that this sort of thing is actually *systematic* across US detention centers; if that isn't dirt-ignorant, I don't know what else is. Any *ignorant* American could have told a clueless filipino refugee [aka you], that simply uttering a word about this fact would not necessitate providing further explanation, as it is already a pretty well known fact. Lol.
quote: But I refuse to let some ignorant anti-American nutcase like you rant about how "evil" and "inhumane" my country is without any validation.
It never was my intention to educate your ignorant filipino refugee ass; my intention is to present the fact, and let you caterwaul about it, like the desperate beaten-down facistic Jap-screwin' filipino refugee pussyhole that you are.
You are naturally paralyzed to do anything about reality, other than call anyone who spreads said facts as "anti-American" this or that, like your kin hitlerites, and well, caterwaul like a weak chick, who cannot wait for your Japanese-masta to come in here and screw you up your ass right and left, lol.
quote: So you can call me all the ad-hominem names you like. It doesn't make you sound any smarter.
I don't have to make you dumber than you are, dumb filipino refugee; all I have to do, is let you speak, in order for that to happen.
quote: "Casualty" does NOT imply worthlessness since even American soldiers who lose their lives are considered casualties also.
It is safe to say that anyone who gloats over mass murder of civilians -- saying that they are not even worth bringing up -- while boasting that your own relatives are far and safe from that situation, considers other lives worthless; that is by definition, none other than a dumb filipino refugee as yourself.
quote:You provided no list, only cited the A-bomb drops that ended the war.
Dumb filipino refugee, if you can't see and/or read a list [already presented], then either something is wrong with your eyes, and/or you're just plain retarded; I think it is both, but either way, it is your problem. Being too dumb to read and/or being out of touch with civilization is not an excuse for dismissing already presented fact.
quote: I already answered about the nuking of Japan.
You mean that you've defended and apologized for the attrocities; that, yes you have.
quote: You are correct though that the bombing of Indo-China was a mistake since the actual targets were not civilians but Communist dictatorial regimes. It was a complete failure since the communist regimes merely hid in underground caves whereas the only ones who suffered were civilians. But again these were casualties and NOT intended targets.
Declassified documents from the Vietnam War make a mockery of your utter gutter obtuseness...
nearly 40 years later, declassified Army files show that Henry was telling the truth — about the Feb. 8 killings and a series of other atrocities by the men of B Company.
The files are part of a once-secret archive, assembled by a Pentagon task force in the early 1970s, that shows that confirmed atrocities by U.S. forces in Vietnam were more extensive than was previously known.
The documents detail 320 alleged incidents that were substantiated by Army investigators — not including the most notorious U.S. atrocity, the 1968 My Lai massacre.
Though not a complete accounting of Vietnam war crimes, the archive is the largest such collection to surface to date. About 9,000 pages, it includes investigative files, sworn statements by witnesses and status reports for top military brass.
The records describe recurrent attacks on **ordinary** Vietnamese — families in their homes, farmers in rice paddies, teenagers out fishing. Hundreds of soldiers, in interviews with investigators and letters to commanders, described a violent minority who murdered, raped and tortured with impunity.
Abuses were **not confined** to a few rogue units, a Times review of the files found. They were uncovered in **every* Army division that operated in Vietnam...
Among the substantiated cases in the archive:
• Seven massacres from 1967 through 1971 in which at least 137 civilians died.
• Seventy-eight other attacks on noncombatants in which at least 57 were killed, 56 wounded and 15 sexually assaulted.
• One hundred forty-one instances in which U.S. soldiers tortured civilian detainees or prisoners of war with fists, sticks, bats, water or electric shock.
Investigators determined that evidence against 203 soldiers accused of harming Vietnamese civilians or prisoners was strong enough to warrant formal charges. These "founded" cases were referred to the soldiers' superiors for action... - LA Times, August 6, 2006.
I guess they forgot to use their pamphlets on not murdering and abusing non-military targets. You have a lot to learn, especially about the futility of denying the undeniable, dumb filipino refugee.
quote:
As for Afghanistan, the intended target were Taliban training centers and Al-Qaeda facilities who were the actual enemy! No intended civilian targets which is quite different from the World Trade towers which they destroyed!!
Oh absolutely, like targeting of wedding gatherings of civilians; that is a perfect military target. Your obtuseness has no bounds.
As anger mounts in Afghanistan over the August 22 US bombing of a village that killed ninety civilians, the great majority women and children, the Pentagon continues to claim a much smaller death toll comprised largely of “Taliban fighters.” Anonymous US officials, who claim to have investigated the attack in Azizabad in Herat province, insist that 25 Taliban were killed, along with five civilians. The US disavowal contradicts the position of its own Afghanistan stooge regime, the United Nations, which has confirmed the much higher death toll, as well as international media accounts.
An investigation conducted by Afghanistan’s Independent Human Rights Commission counted 91 killed. Fifty-nine of these were children under the age of 15, and 19 were women. Most of the dead were part of one large extended family. The Afghanistan investigation found that there were no Taliban among those killed.
According to the Afghan official in charge of the investigation, Naimatullah Shahrani, “there was not a single armed individual from the opposition in the area.”
The Afghan investigation has been substantiated by a separate UN investigative report authored by Kai Eide, which found “convincing evidence” that about 90 civilians were killed, of whom about 60 were children. “The destruction from aerial bombardment was clearly evident with some seven to eight houses having been totally destroyed and serious damage to many others. Local residents were able to confirm the number of casualties, including names, age and gender of the victims.”
In any case, there is a long history of the US bombing any large gathering of Afghans that its satellite-image monitors, stationed in Florida, spot. There have been numerous known instances of deadly bombardments of weddings and funerals, all of which have ended in the exoneration of the American perpetrators.
However, even if the Karzai regime’s attempt to explain the cause of the attack would be true, it would in no way lessen US guilt for the atrocity, or Kabul’s own complicity. It would only stand as horrible confirmation of the American military’s unstated policy of “shoot first, ask questions later.” Moreover, such war crimes are inevitable given the military’s central task of crushing popular resistance to the occupation.
As for the American military’s own account, it cannot be given the slightest credence. In the first place, neither the UN nor the Karzai regime has any interest in exaggerating US depredations. Karzai has only acknowledged the death toll under conditions in which he feels threatened by popular discontent. This is the same perspective of the UN, which fears a debacle for US imperialism should its brutal tactics not be somewhat softened. Eide, the UN investigator, warned that such massacres undermine “the trust and confidence of the Afghan people” in the American invaders.
All the evidence suggests that US claims are utterly bogus. According to an anonymous NATO official, the US assault on Azizabad lasted for several hours, and involved ground troops, gunships, and drones. The battle destroyed or damaged 15 houses. And yet the US military wishes world opinion to believe that it was the victim of an attack that resulted in only a single American injury, and that virtually all those who died in the building were “Taliban.”
...In fact, it is standard operating procedure for the US military to declare all the dead in its rampages to be “Taliban fighters” or “terrorists” or “Al Qaeda.” It never produces credible evidence to substantiate these claims, which the US media nonetheless dutifully parrots.
In this case, it appears that those killed may have been friendly to the US. Almost all the dead were members of a clan whose head controlled a company that worked as security for the US at the Shinand airport, located 120 kilometers away. Many of the men in the village also worked at the airport. - Tom Eley, SEP, 1 September 2008.
And this is just one example of the many, which no doubt, you'll simply dismiss as "casualties"; you're the most gullible dumb filipino loon I've ever witnessed. Damn those pamphlets; where are they when they come in hand? Lol.
quote: How the hell is the U.S. government responsible for what some power crazed prison guards did, you nitwit?!
Look at this dumb filipino refugee asking how the government is supposed to know something, when he/she was just given notice of documentation by **US agencies themselves**, like the FBI, acknowledging the *systematic* undertaking of these human rights abuses in virtually all US detention centers. Caterwaul about the fact all you want, like the spineless Japanese cock-sucking filipino chick that you are; I don't give a hoot.
quote:In fact it is definitely worse in other nations, imbecile!
The sight of this dirty filipino rat...first in denial, and now simply apologizing for the abuses, Lol.
quote: Those Abu Graib prisoners should be lucky they were only humiliated and not acutally tortured
Apparently, FBI reports, US intelligence memos and news reports that have been cited were too difficult for the dirty little filipino refugee to read.
quote: course any soldier who commits such acts is severly punished as criminals, and it is through no fault of the US government, dummy!
You don't know the definition of dummy, dirty filipino rat; it includes denying what virtually everyone else knows as general fact, and what anyone would a ounce of intelligence wouldn't deny about record upon record of *systematic* crimes and human rights violations the declassified US military documents tell them straight up in plain language. You need to get into a special English class, and take night classes in basic history, dirty dumb filipino refugee.
quote:If these were terror suspects, I don't know how that "violates" thier human rights to be taken custody.
As I said, you are an illiterate dumb little filipino refugee, whose too dumb to read what has just been laid right in front of you. Get a book on ABCs.
quote:
quote:From recent McClatchy Newspapers interviews, involving interview of some 66 'former' detainees, various Afghan and US officials, and going through thousands of pages of US tribunal documents and other records [courtesy David Walsh, SEP]:
Most of the detainees turned out to be...“low-level Taliban grunts, innocent Afghan villagers or ordinary criminals.”
“American soldiers herded the detainees into holding pens of razor-sharp concertina wire, the kind that’s used to corral livestock.
“The guards kicked, kneed and punched many of the men until they collapsed in pain. U.S. troops shackled and dragged other detainees to small isolation rooms, then hung them by their wrists from chains dangling from the wire mesh ceiling.”
“American soldiers would walk into the pen where he slept on the floor and ram their combat boots into his back and stomach, Gul said. ‘Two or three of them would come in suddenly, tie my hands and beat me,’ he said.”
Mohammed Arif Sarwari, the head of the country’s national security directorate from late 2001 to 2003 for the US puppet regime in Afghanistan, told McClatchy:
“a bad sign: The Americans were creating an island with no one to watch over them. ‘I said I didn’t want to be involved with what they were doing at Bagram—who they were arresting or what they were doing with them,"
In December 2002, the American military personnel...
“beat two Afghan detainees, Habibullah and Dilawar, to death as they hung by their wrists.”
As per McClatchy’s Lasseter,
“Spc. Jeremy Callaway, who admitted to striking about 12 detainees at Bagram, told military investigators in sworn testimony that he was uncomfortable following orders to ‘mentally and physically break the detainees.’ He didn’t go into detail. ‘I guess you can call it torture,’ said Callaway, who served in the 377th from August 2002 to January 2003.”
The newspaper goes onto add that...
“The mistreatment of detainees at Bagram, some legal experts said, may have been a violation of the 1949 Geneva Convention on prisoners of war, which forbids violence against or humiliating treatment of detainees.
“The U.S. War Crimes Act of 1996 imposes penalties up to death for such mistreatment.
“At Bagram, however, the rules didn’t apply. In February 2002, President Bush issued an order denying suspected Taliban and al Qaida detainees prisoner-of-war status. He also denied them basic Geneva protections known as Common Article Three, which sets a minimum standard for humane treatment.”
July 26, 2002 memo directed to Haynes’ office, included
“Facial Slap,” “Walling,” “Finger Press,” “Water,” “Waterboard,” “Cramped Confinement (‘the little box’),” “Immersion in water/Wetting down,” “Isolation,” “Degradation,” “Sensory overload,” “Disruption of sleep and biorhythms” and “Manipulation of diet.”
“We may need to curb the harsher operations while ICRC [International Committee of the Red Cross] is around. It is better not to expose them to any controversial techniques.” - Lt. Col. Diane Beave
Concerning, sleep deprivation...
“True, but officially it is not happening. It is not being reported officially. The ICRC is a serious concern. They will be in and out, scrutinizing our operations, unless they are displeased and decided to protest and leave.” - Lt. Col. Diane Beave
According to CIA’s Counterterrorism Center Jonathan Fredman...
"Severe physical pain described as anything causing permanent damage to major organs or body parts. Mental torture described as anything leading to permanent, profound damage to the senses or personality. It is basically subject to perception. If the detainee dies you’re doing it wrong.”
Videotaping the “harsh techniques” is ruled out, because “Videotapes are subject to too much scrutiny in court.” A discussion ensues about the “wet towel” technique, during which the “lymphatic system will react as if you’re suffocating, but your body will not cease to function.”
Per Mark Fallon, deputy commander of the Criminal Investigation Task Force at Guantánamo...
“Talk of ‘wet towel treatment’ which results in the lymphatic gland reacting as if you are suffocating, would in my opinion, shock the conscience of any legal body ... Someone needs to be considering how history will look back at this.”
From a victim who was eventually relieved of any terrorist activity [courtesy Bill Van Auken, SEP]...
“I did nothing wrong and I was treated like a monster,” he said. He told how he was subjected to electric shocks, being suspended by his wrists for hours and subjected to the ‘water treatment,’ in which his head was stuck into a bucket of water and he was punched in the stomach, forcing him to inhale the liquid. (The Justice Department Inspector General’s report, it bears noting, affirmed that this last form of torture did not constitute “waterboarding,” but did represent “an effort to intimidate the detainees and increase their feelings of helplessness.”)
“There was no law in Guantánamo,” Kurnaz concluded. “I didn’t think this could happen in the 21st century.... I could never have imagined that this place was created by the United States.”[
LOL And your point is?
Exactly my point; you are just a petty dumb rat-hole living/toilette-scrubbing filipino refugee, who can't read for shyt if your life depended on it; you've been shielded from civilization all this time, in that rat hole back in filipines.
quote: If the men were truly terrorists or have ties to terrorists I don't see what the problem is.
The M.O. of this dumb Jap-screwin' filipino vermin uses conditional terms "if", in total disregard and disconnect with material presented right before his/her beedy eyes.
quote: LOL The only slime is what comes out of your ass, or is that lubricant?
As a matter of fact, that slime that comes from my ass, is you.
quote: Only a lefto-nutcase would defend the "rights" of murdering terrorists who would no doubt cut YOUR throat and kill your family! But in your twisted mind, the U.S. is the enemy instead of the fanatics who want to kill you. Fine.
Intellect-free "labels" that an uneducated nazi-wannabe loon like this filipino refugee school-dropout throw out mean nothing; I understand reality upsets you, and all you can do is cauterwaul like the Jap-screwin' pussyhole that you are.
quote: So please you need to get out of your sh*t hole.
I believe I had already told you that, if you are ignorant of the said facts, then I can't help your handycaptivity; and I thought you enjoyed living in my shyt hole through all these years...
quote: Of course I know this as with all Americans
Interesting, given that only moments ago, your ignorant school-dropout filipino ass was looking for explanation.
quote: Now, my foaming-mouth left-loony you have still yet to prove how the U.S. does not have the highest record of human rights in the world.
Well, you'd realize that all that is needed has been long presented and pretty self-explanatory, if you simply were not exceedlingly retarded and out of touch with civilization to take notice of it; instead, you engage in screwing your mastas -- I notice that your mouth is foaming from cock-sucking your Jap masta and TheAmericanIlliterate boy, Lol.
quote: I answered your claims quite well actually.
Dirty filipino refugee, sucking on dicks and caterwauling on facts, isn't exactly considered 'answering'.
quote:
quote:Why is that, stupid little filipino mongrelized vermin?
Why is what?
See, dirty filipino refugee chick cannot read; crawl back into your dirty filipino rat hole. Nuff said. Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why answer to that? I don't know what kind of discourse facilitated these insults, but didn't get far enough to find out:
quote:imprisoned, and tortured, other groups entirely wiped out
Not being anti-American, here, (the real folks who are anti-American are the passive folks who seemingly endorse facism), but
Djehuti: are you implying that our government has never done any of these things [imprisoned, tortured, wiped out] to any persons/groups of people ever?Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Of course not! That is, I never denied our government has done that in the past especially before the Civil Rights era and beyond if you know what I mean (Native Americans, blacks, asians etc). But Explora's argument is that the government continues to do that now which is of course ridiculous! His premise is that the government promotes or even initiates systematic rape, murder, and genocide which is ridiculous.
He cites lousy examples to back up his claims some of which aren't even human rights violations at all! LOL
The point still stands that the U.S. treats people even non-citizens way better than most countries in the world. One can say too well! Take for example our problem with illegal aliens. Note how illegals are catered to and allowed to not only work jobs but are given credit and housing loans which is in large part responsible for the horrible bank bailouts that have been occuring! Note too that community organizations one of which is the same one Obama worked in the 90s is also responsible for forcing banks to make loans to low income neighborhoods and thus forcing the bail-out to happen. These groups claim that if they don't get bank loans their "civil rights" are being violated!! I'm sure Explora didn't know that did he?? Perhaps he needs to 'explore' a bit more. LOL I'll post more about that later.
This is the same mentality that Explora has-- anti-American rhetoric based on NONSENSE and false or imaginary civil or human rights violations!
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The United states does not torture people, ever. There is no viable fascist element in the United States. president Bush has liberated millions in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:^ Of course not! That is, I never denied our government has done that in the past especially before the Civil Rights era and beyond if you know what I mean
Yes, I know what you mean.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: The point still stands that the U.S. treats people even non-citizens way better than most countries in the world. One can say too well! Take for example our problem with illegal aliens. Note how illegals are catered to and allowed to not only work jobs but are given credit and housing loans which is in large part responsible for the horrible bank bailouts that have been occuring!
I pretty much agree here, and would also like to add that part of the reason we see the leniance our government has on immigrants is that they are doing jobs that many Americans are no longer willing to do (which compliments the fact that people employ them because they're willing to do it for less).
quote:He cites lousy examples to back up his claims some of which aren't even human rights violations at all! LOL
Could you define humans rights violation?
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: The United states does not torture people, ever.
I'm not sure about this, but I heard the movie Rendition was based somewhat on the truth.
Not that this would be anything new, nor that it would make or brake anything.
quote:There is no viable fascist element in the United States.
I'd have to agree with that.
I mean, didn't we give a trial to a guy whose words to 'How do you plead' were: "Death to America"?
At the same time I'm agreeing with Thomas Jefferson who said eternal vigilance is the price of freedom. We're not a police state - yet.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
And as you can see the U.S. has for long while up to now not ever violated those rights.
Although I personal believe the Geneva convention and UN code should be edited somewhat. In that if you have a bunch of crazed murderers who are involved in a plot to kill a mass of innocent people, they should have their human rights revocked and YES they should be tortured.
Yet, even the "evil" U.S. of A can't do that because its own lawyers from the ACLU try to defend the so-called "civil" rights of suspected terrorists despite the fact that not only are they non-citizens but they are enemies of the state!!
So a yeah a change is order to torture, maim, and do whatever it takes to these monsters who threaten the peace and safety of innocent people everywhere and not just the U.S.!
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You can't prove a negative frank, the burden of proof is on you and there is not a single scrap of evidence showing the United States is or ever has been involved in torture.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Indeed. Of course we can't know for sure if the government isn't torturing anyone, but trust me if they are, whoever is being tortured likely deserves it-- a dangerous terrorist. But I doubt that is happening at least in the public operations of the military. It's pathetic really that although we need to torture some of these folks for the vital info they have on threats they pose, again the beauracrats won't allow it!
The point is, the U.S. government as we know it are NOT the cold-blooded murderers and rapists fools like Explora wants to believe.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So I decided to read the link YET, hoping to gather some revelatory information and what do I find, a woman 'telecaster' who's stated belief, and the 'television station,' is 9/11 was an inside job solely to set up a massive network to spy on the American people—and it has nothing to do with terrorists. Well hot damn, I'd better check out my next door neighbors, a teacher in the local school system and her husband, who works in the city's equal opportunity housing department, and tell them they had better change their profession this instant. Do something safe like going fishing. Then again they may like being ordinary citizens.
I know what, maybe the government will spy on the neighbors to see how long the tree in their front yard will stay there since the winds from Ike blew it over September 7.
No wonder the television crew is on You Tube.
Yeah, I fell for the YET link just so I could open my mouth to talk about it.
Oh, and some groups of people have a bigger stick than others. Translation: if my speedy hands will allow me to gain the upper hand without further risk to myself, plus the perception of payback, then...
Human nature is a b..ch ain't it.
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
More human rights abuse and war crime records for the degenerate moronic rape, torture and war crime cheerleading dumb filipino refugee and his/her kin hoodlums to gloat over...
========
FBI agents created “war crimes file” documenting US torture
By Joe Kay 22 May 2008
FBI agents who witnessed the torture of detainees at the US prison camp in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba created what they called a “war crimes” file documenting what they had seen, according to a report released Tuesday by the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG).
The file, initiated in 2002, was ordered shut down by higher-ups in 2003 and agents were told to stop keeping records of the illegal acts that they had seen. Nonetheless, the use of the term “war crimes” by the US government’s main domestic intelligence arm, an agency with its own long record of political repression, is an extraordinary confirmation of charges that have long been leveled by opponents of the Bush administration and the criminal practices it has carried out in the so-called “global war on terror.”
According to the OIG report, FBI agents objected to the use by the CIA and the US military of techniques that one FBI official called “borderline torture.” Some agents raised concerns within the agency, but these concerns were ignored or squelched by the White House.
The report is on the role of the FBI in observing or participating in abusive practices, and is based on a survey of several hundred FBI agents. It seeks to absolve the bureau and its agents of responsibility for the abuse.
Although it deliberately ignores the question of accountability, the 437-page report by Inspector General Glenn Fine makes clear once again that the policy of torture was approved at the highest levels.
Among the techniques used by the military and the CIA to which the FBI agents objected were: sleep deprivation; prolonged “short-shackling,” or the shackling of the hands and feet together; the use of dogs to terrorize detainees; humiliation, including tying a detainee to a leash and forcing him to perform tricks; and sexual humiliation, including enforced nudity and touching.
The military and CIA used these methods against prisoners held at Guantánamo Bay and elsewhere. Many of these same torture techniques would become notorious when they were depicted in photographs involving prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq. Their replication makes it clear that the crimes in Abu Ghraib were not an aberration perpetrated by rogue prison guards, but rather a deliberate and planned implementation of methods designed to “break” detainees.
The FBI agents objected to the methods largely on the grounds that they would not provide “actionable intelligence.” They were also worried that the use of torture could undermine future trials and might cast the FBI and the US government in a bad light if they were publicly revealed.
According to the report, some FBI personnel began complaining to their supervisors as early as 2002. These complaints were reported to at least one meeting of the National Security Council at the White House in 2003. However, there was no change in policy and the torture continued.
Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft reportedly questioned some of the methods, including to then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. However, Ashcroft refused to be interviewed by Fine, citing the confidentiality of the discussions.
It is hardly surprising that the FBI agents’ concerns were ignored, since the impetus behind the use of torture came from the White House itself. Beginning with the capture of alleged Al Qaeda members Mohammed Al-Qahtani in December 2001 and Abu Zubaydah in March 2002, top administration officials saw an opportunity to shred international law and employ torture more openly on the pretext of the “war on terror.” Administration officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, were closely involved in directing the details of the interrogations.
A report by ABC news last month found that top Bush administration officials participated in discussion about torture techniques that were so detailed that “some of the interrogation sessions were almost choreographed—down to the number of times CIA agents could use a specific tactic.”
In part as a response to concerns within the CIA and military over legal accountability, the Justice Department itself issued at least two legal opinions in 2002 and 2003 that provided a pseudo-legal rationale for torture.
The focus of the OIG report is on military-controlled facilities between 2001 and 2004. The report has very limited information on the torture of prisoners at the hands of the CIA, as the CIA refused to cooperate with the investigation. According to the report, “we were unable to obtain highly classified information about CIA-controlled facilities, what occurred there, and what legal authorities governed their operations.”
The CIA also refused to allow the OIG to interview Abu Zubaydah. The White House has acknowledged that it used waterboarding on Zubaydah, among other methods. The CIA claimed that the inspector general had no pressing need to interview Zubaydah, and that he might provide false allegations against CIA agents.
The report’s section on the interrogation of Zubaydah seeks to exonerate FBI Special Agent Gibson, who has been accused of participating in the torture. An email written by an acquaintance of Gibson charged that Gibson “spoke openly and with much enthusiasm about the torturing of captured al-Qaeda terrorists [including Zubaydah], undisclosed locations and the brutal interrogation techniques by both CIA and FBI which Agent [Gibson] was involved.”
The interrogation of Zubaydah was initially in the hands of the FBI but was quickly taken over by the CIA. Much of the details in the report about the treatment of Zubaydah are redacted. It does note, however, “Gibson stated that the CIA personnel assured him that the procedures being used on Zubaydah had been approved ‘at the highest levels’ and that Gibson would not get in trouble” for participating.
The report cites an email from Spike Bowman, head of the national security law unit at the FBI, declaring in July 2003: “Beyond any doubt, what they are doing (and I don’t know the extent of it) would be unlawful were these enemy prisoners of war,” referring to the treatment of Zubaydah.
Another section of the report deals with a facility in Iraq, the name and location of which is redacted along with large portions of the section. It notes that an FBI Agent, referred to as Ryan, worked at the facility in the spring and summer of 2004 and reported that “a military interrogator told him that detainees at the facility were confined in ‘inhumane conditions’ and were subjected to abusive interrogation techniques, including food, water, and sleep deprivation and ‘water interrogation.’”
“Water interrogation” is apparently a reference to “waterboarding,” which would indicate that this particular torture technique was more widely employed than the Bush administration has acknowledged.
A substantial section of the report is devoted to disputes between FBI agents and the military over the treatment of Mohammed Al-Qahtani at Guantánamo Bay in 2002. The report found that these disputes were ultimately resolved in favor of the more aggressive methods employed by the military, which was operating under the close supervision of then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
The brutal interrogation methods used on Al-Qahtani have been reported already—including the use of dogs, tying him to a chain and forcing him to perform dog tricks, and sexual humiliation.
The report details, however, the close interest of the military—including General Geoffrey Miller, who was then in charge of Guantánamo Bay and was later sent by Rumsfeld to Iraq—in the interrogation of Al-Qahtani. Citing an FBI agent, the report states that Miller used such terms as “relentless” and “sustained attack” to describe the way that he wanted Al-Qahtani to be treated.
The fact that several FBI agents protested strongly against the treatment of prisoners held by the military and CIA is an indication of how blatantly illegal this treatment was. They were clearly seen by some agents as “war crimes” for which the authors could ultimately be prosecuted.
In implementing this policy, the Bush administration systematically violated the most basic tenants of international and domestic law, including anti-torture statutes and the Geneva Conventions.
This policy has been known for years. Leading figures from both political parties were briefed on it from the very beginning. What is most remarkable is that not a single individual responsible for its implementation has been held accountable.
^Essentially from the above, even a government agency such as the FBI itself will point blank tell us that the government has engaged in war crimes and human rights violations, and still idiots and exceedingly dumb lemming refugees like Djehuti [ironic, the alias this fellow chose, considering how profoundly dumb he/she is] shake their heads in retard denial, drooling saliva at one end of their mouth; well once again, here are the words of the US government itself...
***FBI files indict Bush, Cheney and Co. as war criminals***
By Bill Van Auken 23 May 2008
The most stunning revelation in a 370-page Justice US Department Inspector General’s report released this week was that agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation had formally opened a “War Crimes” file, documenting torture they had witnessed at the Guantánamo Bay US prison camp, before being ordered by the administration to stop writing their reports.
The World Socialist Web Site, together with human rights groups and other opponents of US militarism and repression, has long insisted that the actions of the Bush administration—the launching of wars of aggression, assassinations, the abduction and detention of civilians without trial and, most repugnant of all, torture—constitute war crimes under any legitimate interpretation of longstanding international statutes and treaties.
To have this assessment confirmed, however, by the IG of the Justice Department, the only senior official there not answerable directly to the White House, and by agents of the FBI, an agency not known for its sensitivity to questions of democratic rights, is an indication of the rampant character of these crimes as well as the crisis they have engendered within the US government and America’s ruling elite as a whole.
The report makes it absolutely clear that torture was ordered and planned in detail at the highest levels of the government—including the White House, the National Security Council, the Pentagon and the Justice Department. Attempts to stop it on legal or pragmatic grounds by individuals within the government were systematically suppressed, and evidence of this criminal activity covered up.
There was no immediate reaction from the White House on these new revelations. Responses from other agencies directly implicated in the crimes at Guantánamo were indicative of the general atmosphere of impunity in which the torture detailed in the IG’s report continues to this day.
“There’s nothing new here,” said Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman. A State Department spokesman, meanwhile, described the charges contained in the report as “pretty vague.”
Pretty vague? One can’t help but wonder what the spokesman would consider explicit. The report contains page after page of testimony by FBI agents on the sadistic and sickening practices carried out at Guantánamo.
In one section, the report states: “[An FBI Agent] recalled that, at some point during the interrogation, the military officer ‘put water down’ a seated detainee’s throat. He said he guessed that the purpose of the water was to give the detainee the sensation that he was drowning, so that he would provide the information that the interrogator wanted. [The agent] stated that the detainee was gagging and spitting out water. He said that the detainee appeared to be uncomfortable, and assumed that he had trouble breathing.”
Consider the account of the interrogation of Mohamedou Ould Slahi, a Mauritanian national who was arrested by his own government, turned over to US forces and brought to Guantánamo in 2002:
“He was left alone in a cold room known as ‘the freezer,’ where guards would prevent him from sleeping by putting ice or cold water on him...
“He was subjected to sleep deprivation for a period of 70 days by means of prolonged interrogations, strobe lights, threatening music, forced intake of water, and forced standing.
“He was deprived of clothing by a female interrogator;
“Two female interrogators touched him sexually and made sexual statements to him;
“Prior to and during the boat ride incident, he was severely beaten.”
In addition, the document says, he was “led to believe he was going to be executed, and urinated on himself,” and was told that his mother and family would be detained and harmed.
Hundreds of FBI agents witnessed torture
Similar episodes were described, according to the IG report, by literally hundreds of FBI agents, who witnessed CIA, military and private contractor interrogators carry out illegal acts of torture and abuse against detainees.
In addition, the report cites: several agents who reported instances of beatings, 30 agents who reported witnessing prolonged shackling of detainees in stress positions, 70 agents who reported detainees being subjected to sleep deprivation, 29 agents who had information on the use of extreme temperatures in order to “break the detainees’ resolve to resist cooperating” and 50 agents reporting the use of extended isolation to “wear down a detainee’s resistance.”
In addition, four agents reported the kicking and beating to death of two detainees in Afghanistan who had been subjected to prolonged shackling in a standing position.
The episodes of torture detailed in this report are the tip of the iceberg.
They do not include the treatment of Murat Kurnaz, a Turkish citizen born in Germany, who was arrested during a trip to Pakistan in the fall of 2001 and was handed over to US officials for a $3,000 bounty. First taken to the US base in Kandahar, Afghanistan, he was then transferred to Guantánamo. While by 2002 the US authorities concluded that Kurnaz had nothing to do with terrorism, he was imprisoned until the middle of 2006 and released only because of pressure from the German government.
Barred from entry to the US, he testified via video link to a sparsely attended hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee this week.
“I did nothing wrong and I was treated like a monster,” he said. He told how he was subjected to electric shocks, being suspended by his wrists for hours and subjected to the ‘water treatment,’ in which his head was stuck into a bucket of water and he was punched in the stomach, forcing him to inhale the liquid. (The Justice Department Inspector General’s report, it bears noting, affirmed that this last form of torture did not constitute “waterboarding,” but did represent “an effort to intimidate the detainees and increase their feelings of helplessness.”)
“I know others have died from this kind of treatment,” said Kurnaz. “I suffered from sleep deprivation, solitary confinement, religious and sexual humiliations. I was beaten multiple times.”
“There was no law in Guantánamo,” Kurnaz concluded. “I didn’t think this could happen in the 21st century.... I could never have imagined that this place was created by the United States.”
The inmates held at Guantánamo represent barely 1 percent of those detained at US prison camps and secret jails run by the military and the CIA in Iraq, Afghanistan and other points around the world. An estimated 27,000 people are being held ***WITHOUT CHARGES***, much less trials, many of them simply having disappeared into Washington’s global gulag. Some are held on prison ships, others in secret dungeons run jointly by the CIA and regimes to which it “outsources” detainees, like Egypt, Jordan and Morocco, where other, cruder forms of torture—being buried alive, given electric shocks or slashed with scalpels—are employed.
The report also reconfirms that the revolting scenes captured in the photographs taken at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq that came to light four years ago—naked and hooded men being subjected to torture and sexual humiliation by US guards—were no aberration. The methods described in the report—forced nudity, the use of attack dogs in interrogations, chaining detainees in “stress” positions, leading them around on dog leashes, draping them in women’s underwear—were identical to those officially blamed on a “few bad apples” at Abu Ghraib.
Sadistic torture “orchestrated” from the White House
The uniformity of abuse at these widely separated facilities is evidence that the psychopathic and criminal sadism inflicted upon those detained by US forces was planned and orchestrated from the top.
Indeed, as ABC News revealed last month, top administration officials on the so-called Principals’ Committee—Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, CIA Director George Tenet, Attorney General John Ashcroft and National Security Council Adviser Condoleezza Rice—conducted detailed discussions on “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which, according to ABC, “were almost choreographed—down to the number of times CIA agents could use a specific tactic.”
Bush subsequently told ABC that he was “aware our national security team met on this issue. And I approved.”
The report establishes that FBI and Justice Department officials advised the White House National Security Council of their concern that the practices witnessed by the agents were “gravely damaging ... the rule of law” at Guantánamo.
In the end, however, they were told to back off, and they complied, thereby becoming accomplices in this criminality and its cover-up.
The revelations in the FBI report have provoked no significant protests or demands for action from the Democrats in Congress, or for that matter from the party’s presidential contenders, Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, neither of whom have made torture an issue in their campaigns.
The New York Times Tuesday carried a lead editorial titled, “What the FBI agents saw,” which laid out the details of the report and stated that it “shows what happens when an American president, his secretary of defense, his Justice Department and other top officials corrupt American law to rationalize and authorize the abuse, humiliation and torture of prisoners.”
The paper’s conclusion: “The Democrats must press for full disclosure” through hearings to uncover “the extent of President Bush’s disregard for the law and the Geneva Conventions.” This, they tell their readers, “is the only way to get this country back to being a defender, not a violator, of human rights.”
Such is the impotence of erstwhile American establishment liberalism. The extent of the Bush administration’s outright criminality has been thoroughly exposed over the course of several years.
The wholesale and deliberate violations of the Geneva Conventions and the Convention against Torture are, under international law, war crimes—just as the FBI recognized they were. What is demanded is not another toothless congressional hearing, but rather the constitution of a war crimes tribunal. Those responsible must be held accountable.
Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Powell, Tenet and Ashcroft should be placed on trial. Those like former White House counsel and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Cheney’s chief of staff David Addington and Justice Department deputy assistant secretary John Yoo, who crafted the pseudo-legal arguments legitimizing torture, should be prosecuted as well, together with those military and intelligence officials who directed the criminal practices at Guantánamo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram and other CIA and military camps and prisons.
The Democratic leadership has no desire or intention to fight for such a reckoning. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other party leaders have repeatedly insisted that impeachment of the president and vice president is “off the table.” They have no interest in pursuing the administration on the issue of torture because they themselves are complicit, with Pelosi and other senior congressional Democrats having been briefed extensively on the criminal methods employed at Guantánamo, which they approved and concealed from the American people.
On a more fundamental level, the Democrats have been complicit in a policy of global militarism and aggression—carried out under the mantle of a “global war on terrorism”—which is directed at using armed force to further the interests of America’s ruling oligarchy. It is this criminal strategy—resulting in the loss of over 1 million Iraqi lives—that has given rise to the crime of torture itself.
Nonetheless, the deepening crisis of American capitalism is creating the conditions for profound shocks and changes in political and social relations that may well result in Bush, Cheney and Co. standing in the dock as war criminals.
Such a trial is vitally necessary from the standpoint of halting these ongoing crimes, preventing the use of similar methods against political opposition within the US itself and politically educating the American people.
========
^As we can see people innocent of terrorism like Murat Kurnaz -- and there are many hundreds more of folks like him in US detentions, whom our lemming filipino refugee Djehut wilfully avoids taking note of -- by so-relieving him/herself of facts with pointless "ifs" and "buts", who needlessly underwent/undergoing torture on the watch of the US government.
======
From recent McClatchy Newspapers interviews, involving interview of some 66 'former' detainees, various Afghan and US officials, and going through thousands of pages of US tribunal documents and other records [courtesy David Walsh, SEP, 2008]:
Most of the detainees turned out to be...“low-level Taliban grunts, innocent Afghan villagers or ordinary criminals.”
“American soldiers herded the detainees into holding pens of razor-sharp concertina wire, the kind that’s used to corral livestock.
“The guards kicked, kneed and punched many of the men until they collapsed in pain. U.S. troops shackled and dragged other detainees to small isolation rooms, then hung them by their wrists from chains dangling from the wire mesh ceiling.”
“American soldiers would walk into the pen where he slept on the floor and ram their combat boots into his back and stomach, Gul said. ‘Two or three of them would come in suddenly, tie my hands and beat me,’ he said.”
Mohammed Arif Sarwari, the head of the country’s national security directorate from late 2001 to 2003 for the US puppet regime in Afghanistan, told McClatchy:
“a bad sign: The Americans were creating an island with no one to watch over them. ‘I said I didn’t want to be involved with what they were doing at Bagram—who they were arresting or what they were doing with them,"
In December 2002, the American military personnel...
“beat two Afghan detainees, Habibullah and Dilawar, to death as they hung by their wrists.”
As per McClatchy’s Lasseter,
“Spc. Jeremy Callaway, who admitted to striking about 12 detainees at Bagram, told military investigators in sworn testimony that he was uncomfortable following orders to ‘mentally and physically break the detainees.’ He didn’t go into detail. ‘I guess you can call it torture,’ said Callaway, who served in the 377th from August 2002 to January 2003.”
The newspaper goes onto add that...
“The mistreatment of detainees at Bagram, some legal experts said, may have been a violation of the 1949 Geneva Convention on prisoners of war, which forbids violence against or humiliating treatment of detainees.
“The U.S. War Crimes Act of 1996 imposes penalties up to death for such mistreatment.
“At Bagram, however, the rules didn’t apply. In February 2002, President Bush issued an order denying suspected Taliban and al Qaida detainees prisoner-of-war status. He also denied them basic Geneva protections known as Common Article Three, which sets a minimum standard for humane treatment.”
July 26, 2002 memo directed to Haynes’ office, included
“Facial Slap,” “Walling,” “Finger Press,” “Water,” “Waterboard,” “Cramped Confinement (‘the little box’),” “Immersion in water/Wetting down,” “Isolation,” “Degradation,” “Sensory overload,” “Disruption of sleep and biorhythms” and “Manipulation of diet.”
“We may need to curb the harsher operations while ICRC [International Committee of the Red Cross] is around. It is better not to expose them to any controversial techniques.” - Lt. Col. Diane Beave
Concerning, sleep deprivation...
“True, but officially it is not happening. It is not being reported officially. The ICRC is a serious concern. They will be in and out, scrutinizing our operations, unless they are displeased and decided to protest and leave.” - Lt. Col. Diane Beave
According to CIA’s Counterterrorism Center Jonathan Fredman...
"Severe physical pain described as anything causing permanent damage to major organs or body parts. Mental torture described as anything leading to permanent, profound damage to the senses or personality. It is basically subject to perception. If the detainee dies you’re doing it wrong.”
Videotaping the “harsh techniques” is ruled out, because “Videotapes are subject to too much scrutiny in court.” A discussion ensues about the “wet towel” technique, during which the “lymphatic system will react as if you’re suffocating, but your body will not cease to function.”
Per Mark Fallon, deputy commander of the Criminal Investigation Task Force at Guantánamo...
“Talk of ‘wet towel treatment’ which results in the lymphatic gland reacting as if you are suffocating, would in my opinion, shock the conscience of any legal body ... Someone needs to be considering how history will look back at this.”
========== ^Again, from the above....
**Most** of the detainees turned out to be...“low-level Taliban grunts, innocent Afghan villagers or ordinary criminals.”
...whom, dumb filipino refugee Djehuti to no avail prefers to see as persons derserving rape, butchering and torture, and so, "not really constituting torture and human rights abuse" in that tinee pea mind of his/hers.
============
Examples of Vietnam War atrocities...
nearly 40 years later, declassified Army files show that Henry was telling the truth — about the Feb. 8 killings and a series of other atrocities by the men of B Company.
The files are part of a once-secret archive, assembled by a Pentagon task force in the early 1970s, that shows that confirmed atrocities by U.S. forces in Vietnam were more extensive than was previously known.
The documents detail 320 alleged incidents that were substantiated by Army investigators — not including the most notorious U.S. atrocity, the 1968 My Lai massacre.
Though not a complete accounting of Vietnam war crimes, the archive is the largest such collection to surface to date. About 9,000 pages, it includes investigative files, sworn statements by witnesses and status reports for top military brass.
The records describe recurrent attacks on **ordinary** Vietnamese — families in their homes, farmers in rice paddies, teenagers out fishing. Hundreds of soldiers, in interviews with investigators and letters to commanders, described a violent minority who murdered, raped and tortured with impunity.
Abuses were **not confined** to a few rogue units, a Times review of the files found. They were uncovered in **every* Army division that operated in Vietnam...
Among the substantiated cases in the archive:
• Seven massacres from 1967 through 1971 in which at least 137 civilians died.
• Seventy-eight other attacks on noncombatants in which at least 57 were killed, 56 wounded and 15 sexually assaulted.
• One hundred forty-one instances in which U.S. soldiers tortured civilian detainees or prisoners of war with fists, sticks, bats, water or electric shock.
Investigators determined that evidence against 203 soldiers accused of harming Vietnamese civilians or prisoners was strong enough to warrant formal charges. These "founded" cases were referred to the soldiers' superiors for action... - LA Times, August 6, 2006.
=============
lemming filipino refugee prefers to see these systematic "War Crimes" as appropriate behavior, and so, sees the victims as simple faceless and nameless "casualties", who don't even deserve to be brought up in anything related to human rights violations.
========
By no means a comprehensive list -- quite far from it, here are a few more records of human rights voilations by the US gov. that no doubt violate the national sovereignty of nation after nation...
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Guatemalan regime of Efrain Rios Mont.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist El Salvadoran regime of Duarte.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Iranian regime of the Shah.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Congolese regime of Mobutu.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist South African regime of the Apartheid state.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Nicaraguan regime of the Contras.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Cuban regimes of Cuban exiles and multiple assassination attempts at Cuban ruling regime of Fidel Castro.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Chilean regime of Augusto Pinochet.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Indonesian regime of Suharto.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist South Vietnamese regime of
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Pakistani regime of Musharaf.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Ethiopian regime of Meles Zenawi.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Somali regime of the Transitional Government.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Zionist regime of Israel over the years.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Egyptian regime of Mubarak.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Saudi Arabian regime of the Saudi Royalty.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist trans-“Middle Eastern” regime of the Al‘ Qaeda, through its precursor regime of Afghanistan Muhajadeen fighters by the Carter Administration through to Reagan, starting from 1979.
Human Rights violations via the US Vencennes shooting down of Iranian civilian airbus [killing all 290 civilians onboard], the subsequent reprisal bombing of Pan Nam Flight 103 over Lockerbie [actually undertaken by PFLP suspects -- Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine—General Command] , and thereof US-led sanctions against Libyan peoples: The impact of sanctions on Libya between 1992 and 1995 had been drastic, causing many deaths through lack of medical supplies and costing the country $6 billion in lost agricultural exports alone. - Steve James, WSWS, May 2000.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Haitian regimes of the Haitian Front for Advancement and Progress, or FRAPH in 1991 and the “Interim” regime of Prime Minister Gérard Latortue from 2004.
Human Rights violations via propping up of, financing, and overt & covert military aid of the terrorist Columbian regime of the Alvaro Uribe, including in the assassination of FARC militia leader Raul Reyes, violating Ecuador‘s national sovereignty.
..including more not listed
...
=========
^Just more of the "tip of the iceberg" of well-known facts, for reactionary lemming loons like Djehut and co. to simply deny...while never really being able to provide objective material to the contrary, short of "pms" whining left and right, and offer in **total disconnect** with what's been presented before them, simple mind-numb "ifs" and "buts"; rather, what they have going for them, is just pure backward BS dogma, and absolute anti-social ignorance. Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
A profoundly simple statement will be innocents always suffer for the 'sins' of their governments. That said, the above post is a telling indictment of what does go on behind closed doors. While I don't usually involve myself in the detailed matter such as this, and I have been known to say waterboarding isn't torture, as compared to beating on or using pliers for this or that, what I will say is the above is definitely an eye opener. Not so much that it goes on but the sheer number of innocents caught up in this. This is why I say human nature is a b..ch.
It's very convenient to hold the view ''it's them or us'' but yet another to tacitly approve of it at higher levels. And yet even the higher ups can't separate themselves from the same basic instincts as the lowers.
My feeling initially is that those whom are caught up in the net are suspicious and this puts a bit of weight behind my turning away from this matter. However, this suspiciousness doesn't necessarily translate into guilt. This is where the ugliness really rears its head. Expressed another way it is hard not to condemn the severing of Nick Berg's head and thereby create a condition of extreme hostility towards the antagonists, yet another to use Nick Berg as an understanding to wreak total waste on anyone caught up in the net.
In essence, in times of strife combat will certainly see to it that those who have the urges to hurt, short of kill him before he kills you, will feel justified in using non-combatants to get back at those whom are elusive enough to not get caught up in the dragnet, and in doing so will suspend judgement and act out their brutality on others. A lot of governments on this planet are guilty. A lot of governments on this planet will deny it too.
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic