You see this $#!7 !?!?

[gambitt]

On the sixth anniversary of the imprisonment of detainees at the Guantánamo Bay Naval Base, a United States judge threw out lawsuit brought by four former British detainees against Donald Rumsfeld and senior military officers for ordering torture and religious abuse, ruling that th the detainees are not "Persons" under U.S. Law, which according to another judge, means that they are less than "human beings".

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit also ruled that torture is a "foreseeable consequence" of military detention in dismissing the action brought by Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal, Rhuhel Ahmed and Jamal Al-Harith, who spent more than two years in Guantánamo and were repatriated to the U.K. in 2004.

In a 43-page opinion, Circuit Judge Karen Lecraft Henderson found that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a statute that applies by its terms to all “persons” did not apply to detainees at Guantánamo, effectively ruling that the detainees are not persons at all for purposes of U.S. law.

The Court also dismissed the detainees’ claims under the Alien Tort Statute and the Geneva Conventions, finding defendants immune on the basis that “torture is a foreseeable consequence of the military’s detention of suspected enemy combatants,” and ruled that even if torture and religious abuse were illegal, defendants were immune under the Constitution because they could not have reasonably known that detainees at Guantánamo had any constitutional rights.

Judge Janice Rogers Brown agreed with the result but attacked the majority for using a definition of person “at odds with its plain meaning.”

“There is little mystery that a ‘person’ is an individual human being…as distinguished from an animal or thing.” she added and concluded that majority’s decision “leaves us with the unfortunate and quite dubious distinction of being the only court to declare those held at Guantánamo are not ‘person[s].’ This is a most regrettable holding in a case where plaintiffs have alleged high-level U.S. government officials treated them as less than human.”

“We are disappointed that the D.C. Circuit has not held Secretary Rumsfeld and the chain of command accountable for torture at Guantánamo," Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights, co-counsel on the case, commented. "The entire world recognizes that torture and religious humiliation are never permissible tools for a government. We hope that the Supreme Court will make clear that this country does not tolerate torture or abuse by an unfettered executive.”

http://presscue.com/node/39281

Geneva convention DOES indicate that POWS should NOT be tortured. These judges have just put America in a position where they are free to consider themselves free to breach the convention with no criminal repercussions.

Way to get around GC:- call POWS "Detained enemy combatants".
Obvious reply:- Can the BS, it's the same thing
Way to get around obvious retort:- OK then, they're not "persons".

Do these judges have ANY flicking clue of what's gone on in the world in the last 400-500 years? Did ANY of them actually have to face treatment as "less than human" because of skin colour?

Used to be that "ignorance is no excuse" but it seems that in today's America ignorance is the ultimate excuse, because the ruling says they can't be considered culpable because they didnt know what they were doing was wrong. Hell, seems to me that if you are ignorant enough you could even become a judge in the states!

How could you NOT FSCKING KNOW that it's WRONG to TORTURE HUMAN BEINGS? :mad:


Precedents set: People can now be judged to be less than "persons" and so can be deprived of their basic rights. (Slavery is once again possible and quite legal.)
Torture is not only acceptable but foreseeable in countries that have agreed to be bound by the geneva convention. (They can do whatever they want to anyone suspected of anything. Kiss your @$$ goodbye.)


And they wonder WHY there are people are pissed off enough to commit acts of terrorism against them?

[androsovic]

To be entitled to prisoner of war status, the captured service member must have conducted operations according to the laws and customs of war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war): be part of a chain of command and wear a uniform and bear arms openly. Thus, francs-tireurs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francs-tireurs), terrorists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism), saboteurs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabotage), mercenaries (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercenary) and spies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage) may be excluded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POW

[gambitt]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POW

Ahh yes, but you have neglected to include in the list of exclusions people who fit into NONE of those categories and are nothing more than "SUSPECTS" .


IE You look different (read brown) and have a suspicious look (read beard) and were acting suspiciously (read nodding off waiting on your flight in the airport) so you are a terror SUSPECT. GITMO for your @$$.


BTW the 1958 ICRC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Committee_of_the_Red_Cross) commentary on the Fourth Geneva Convention: Every person in enemy hands must be either a prisoner of war and, as such, be covered by the Third Convention; or a civilian covered by the Fourth Convention. Furthermore, "There is no intermediate status; nobody in enemy hands can be outside the law," because in the opinion of the ICRC "If civilians directly engage in hostilities, they are considered 'unlawful' or 'unprivileged' combatants or belligerents (the treaties of humanitarian law do not expressly contain these terms). They may be prosecuted under the domestic law of the detaining state for such action".

The ICRC is a private humanitarian institution based in Geneva, Switzerland. The community of states has given the ICRC a unique role, based on international humanitarian law of the Geneva Conventions as well as customary international law, to protect the victims of international and internal armed conflicts. Such victims include war wounded, prisoners, refugees, civilians, and other non-combatants.


Of course the ICRC seems to have assumed that only PERSONS would be taken prisoner in the war. If they're not a person then they're just an animal or thing, and sub-humans like that aren't worth bothering over, right?


Either you are a POW or a person subject to the domestic law in the detaining state.

Or is it a case of:

IF DECs are not POWs
THEN DECs are civilian detainees and need to be made subject to the criminal justice system (which in America does not generally include TORTURE)
Else DECs are being held by America.

[Xecutiona]

we already know that the Unted States policy is contrary to international standards of human rights

what people champion the US constitution for is its apparent "checks and balances," and the rule of law protecting the individual against the government...both factors of American life that have been cut down by the current administration (example, the Patriot Act)

this is further toward that new policy of alienation and bullying that has been exhibited by the United States throughout history.

Andro, Guantanamo Bay is a camp for "detainees", who have been illgally moved from their home country where wartime laws would still be in efect regarding civillians.

this is clearly a policy decision: as the courts knew that almost every one of those detainees would have been able to hold the United States liable, the courts put a choke hold on that until the whole guantanamo crisis is over...then im sure there will be reforms to that ruling.

also, this is a clear example as to how the system of law has failed, allowing idiots(rumsfeld, cheney, bush) to use unfettered discretion in making a decision...no longer would they actually have to prove a thought process before making a decision.

i better stop before they purposely give me a cavity search entering the states

patriot act: theyre watching you, but whos watching them?

[phoenix31tt]

jus to clarify...
isnt Guantanamo Bay where they keep suspected terrorsits??? and also those who are no longer suspects and are being held there until they find a place to put them?

and well... they had to make that decision else Guantanamo Bay woulda prolly get shut down, and also it would be weakness in the eyes of terrorists thus givin them more incentive to attack...

yup... that's price of freedom...
and for any idiot that gonna say we not free... go live in a land where there is a tyrant... then come back and talk to me ;)

[Xecutiona]

im sorry....a working court system upholding the laws of a country and international convention is weakness?

i beg to differ. a country holding itself and its leaders accountable, punishing them for their actions is not weakness. the rule of law prevailing is a pillar of strength, and one of the strongest features of a fully free democracy.


the raping of those same laws, the demolishing of that pillar with invasive and internationally illegal war camps, elminating the right of privacy and in turn free speech, all under the veil of "protection" while a group of men have completely unfettered discretion as to its "policy" is exactly what these terrorists want. the elimination of freedom.

also, US policy is the reason for so much hate toward themselves to begin with. do you think that the torture and alienation of innocent men(among the guilty of course, not saying that they all are immaculate) is helping that hate?

[gambitt]

Uh... let's see what Wikipedia says a tyrant is, just for kicks.

In modern usage a tyrant is a single ruler holding vast, if not absolute power through a state or in an organization.

Single ruler... well he IS married but I dont think that's what they mean by single, so tentative "check", vast power... supposedly the worlds only super-power again "check", unless the Chinese want to say something? No? :D Ok.

Continuing, just for kicks again.
The term carries connotations of a harsh and cruel ruler who places his/her own interests or the interests of a small oligarchy over the best interests of the general population which they govern or control. This mode of rule is referred to as tyranny.

Right, his or her own interests or those of a small oligarchy over best interests of general population. OH HELL YES, I mean "check". Doubt it? Consider the recent nonsense about the pocket veto. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22420862/)

Anything else that we might find interesting and somewhat kicksy?

The word derives from [Latin] tyrannus, and from Greek τύραννος tyrannos, meaning "illegitimate ruler".

Oh... wait.... that not kicksy at all. That is quite serious. I mean how could a democratically elected ruler not be legit? Oh ... wait... wasnt there some funny business about hanging chads? (http://www.votermarch.org/) Isnt that how he managed to get into power? You know what I'm gonna have to say "check" on that one too.

Gorsh... this getting unfunny real fast boy.... I wonder what else they have to say? Where this term come from for real?
In ancient Greece, tyrants were influential opportunists that came to power by securing the support of different factions of a deme. The word "tyrant" then carried no ethical censure; it simply referred to anyone who illegally seized executive power in a polis to engage in autocratic, though perhaps benevolent, government, or leadership in a crisis. Support for the tyrants came from the growing class of business people and from the peasants who had no land or were in debt to the wealthy land owners. It is true that they had no legal right to rule, but the people preferred them over kings or the aristocracy. The Greek tyrants stayed in power by using mercenary soldiers from outside of their respective city state.[1]

Woah... deme that's like a state that makes up the country... so a Tyrant was a person who came to power by getting support from a state that made up the country... That sounds a lot like "getting Florida, the state your cousin runs to have some funny business so that you can win the election that he promised you'd win" doesnt it. So, "Check".

Leadership in a crisis... you know I heard political analysts say that Bush would win the last election because of some war they were involved in. Nah I won't check that one just yet.

Stayed in power by using MERCENARY SOLDIERS???? :eek: But that sounds ... that sounds like blackwater (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091005A.shtml)..... wow... so that's another "Check".


Get the point yet, phoenix? By many definitions America is looking pretty close to tyranny right about now. And from what I've read about the patriot act and the sweeping powers that it granted and what I read about Germany from the history books, you should be wondering what they'll call the crystalnacht this time around.

Or do you think that the land of the free will be free of that kind of discrimination? That the people of that country won't decide to gang up against innocents simply because of their race or religion? (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/20/national/20ports.html)

Pardner, you telling me I should go live in a tyranny if I dont think that the land of the free is free... I telling you I dont want to live in America, as someone who does live there, you can talk to yourself about it all you want tho.

[phoenix31tt]

im sorry....a working court system upholding the laws of a country and international convention is weakness?

i beg to differ. a country holding itself and its leaders accountable, punishing them for their actions is not weakness. the rule of law prevailing is a pillar of strength, and one of the strongest features of a fully free democracy.


yes yes in the eyes of a logical person...

not criminals... who will say... we could go bold and all they could do is imprison us... yay!!!

why do u think its such a touchy situation when people in authority are accused of wrongdoing...



do you think that the torture and alienation of innocent men(among the guilty of course, not saying that they all are immaculate) is helping that hate?


who exactly we speaking about here?

...
lets bring it down a little bit simpler...

all the laws and humans rights crap is one of the reason the world gettin how it is... because everybody have right to do whatever they want...
no corporal punishment in school why?... yeah some children probrably got cutskin for no reason... but the majority look for it... and it was working...
no... human rights activists say take it out...
and all that contributing to some of the crap that goin on...

if torture is what it takes to keep terrorist @ bay.. then so be it... yeah some innocents MAY!!! get into it... but there must always be some sacrifice...

[gambitt]

if torture is what it takes to keep terrorist @ bay.. then so be it... yeah some innocents MAY!!! get into it... but there must always be some sacrifice...

And from there, the step to the final solution doesnt look so bad anymore, does it?

Dude I honestly pity you. You making statements that you clearly dont understand. All them WW2 FPS games people play and it still have people who dont understand that they based on something real.

[Xecutiona]

ok.....patriot act restricts speech and monitors the moves of "targeted" individuals who go against the "ideals of american life"...those who are targeted can also be taken against their will to guantanamo bay for "alternative interrogation"

the jews were restricted in speech and movement, and eventually moved to concentration camps(hmmmm) while the rest of germany knew nothing(or turned a blind eye) to the atrocities of nazi reign. the jews didnt fit in with the nazi way of life and gradually they were all removed from existance.

hitler was voted in too u know.

pheonix if it was that you were the one innocent among the gulty. dont you think you deserve to have youre rights preserved?

the rights of the innocent should always be preserved. everybody used to get lix yes, but how would you feel if you were the one person beaten so badly on your back that the nerves in your spinal cord get damaged and you are limited in motor function for the rest of your life? but to have youre rights thrown out for the preservation of the function lix serves?

[TaC_Up]

if torture is what it takes to keep terrorist @ bay.. then so be it... yeah some innocents MAY!!! get into it... but there must always be some sacrifice...

You know what will keep them at bay? If you stay outta thier country and its politics. Then they will have NOTHING against you. Why do you think they hate america so much? Do you think it's cause of anything ideals or standards america has? No it's thier foreign policy and thier need to govern the entire world.

[eddoes]

if nobody saw the movie rendition then they need to have ah look at it.
Although it is a movie and obviously a dramatization it is based on an actual law in the united states. So phoenixtt to u agree to that sort of law and treatment of human beings? This article puts into light the crude and animal behavior of the american people that i cannot condone and support.

[phoenix31tt]

everybody used to get lix yes, but how would you feel if you were the one person beaten so badly on your back that the nerves in your spinal cord get damaged and you are limited in motor function for the rest of your life? but to have youre rights thrown out for the preservation of the function lix serves?

if thats what it takes to preserver the freedom of millions of other then yay...

christ beat ppl too;)

[phoenix31tt]

You know what will keep them at bay? If you stay outta thier country and its politics. Then they will have NOTHING against you. Why do you think they hate america so much? Do you think it's cause of anything ideals or standards america has? No it's thier foreign policy and thier need to govern the entire world.

hmmm...
i guess we talkin about iraq here.... which all happened after september 11th...

but terrorism has been goin on for far longer than that... if u think terrorism started because america went into ppls country then u sad

wonder why terrorism has occured on almost every country including our own (yes i consider 1990 an act of terrorism... oh maybe america provoked that too)

[TaC_Up]

hmmm...
i guess we talkin about iraq here.... which all happened after september 11th...

but terrorism has been goin on for far longer than that... if u think terrorism started because america went into ppls country then u sad

wonder why terrorism has occured on almost every country including our own (yes i consider 1990 an act of terrorism... oh maybe america provoked that too)

I know it has been long before that. But terrorist acted locally and hardly ever went international with it. It had always been in the middle east until they decided that America was pissing them off too much. Then thanks to people following on the american band wagon, europe was hit with terrorist attacks as well. Also I don't mean Iraq alone. America tries to influence the middle east as a whole.

[TaC_Up]

if thats what it takes to preserver the freedom of millions of other then yay...

christ did it ;)

Christ was willing to do it. While those other guys aren't.

[ecktt]

and people want to know why I'm afraid of Americans.....

If memory severs me right, That how slavery was justified. Coloured people were considered 3/5 human for religious and legal perspective..

[gambitt]

hmmm...
i guess we talkin about iraq here.... which all happened after september 11th...

but terrorism has been goin on for far longer than that... if u think terrorism started because america went into ppls country then u sad

wonder why terrorism has occured on almost every country including our own (yes i consider 1990 an act of terrorism... oh maybe america provoked that too)

Uh... actually the US was involved in supporting a couple of specific groups in the middle east long before that. One group was called the mujahadeen (spelling?) and a part of that group became what you might call the "taliban". Without the US support (and interference) they probably would never have been in power. They even made a movie about how they helped by sending Rambo and that's why the soviets lost. :rolleyes: You DID see that movie right? Ok well the little dirty looking fellows that everyone was cheering for became the Taliban. Understand now.

Another group that the US supported was run by a little fella named Saddam. Yes. He WAS one of their best friends and that's how he got into power.

BTW IRAQ was never involved in spet11. You know that right? And they didnt have any more WMDs, you know THAT right? The majority of the people invovled in that whole sept11 thing were SAUDI. But... well.... they look kinda the same. And the letters A and I do appear in the names of both countries, so it makes sense.

No the US has been mucking things about and supporting who they end up calling "bad people" for a long time pardner.



Study something for me. How many wars as the US been involved in since WW2. Now compare that to any other country. Do you notice anything? Do you even understand what a war crime is?

[gambitt]

and people want to know why I'm afraid of Americans.....

If memory severs me right, That how slavery was justified. Coloured people were considered 3/5 human for religious and legal perspective..

Sorry for the double post guys, but ecktt's totally correct. The justification for slavery was that "because they dont look like us they aren't as human as us".

Now to take it to more recent times, remember what they used in Germany? The "master race" the "supermen" that they were trying to breed. What do you think happened to the people who didnt fit into the guidelines for that "master race". See they'd be the best type of human and everyone else would be less human.

Got any idea what happened to people with down's syndrome in Hitler's germany? Google it. Wait you lazy, let me help:
Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler was infamous for eugenics programs which attempted to maintain a "pure" German race through a series of programs that ran under the banner of "racial hygiene". Among other activities, the Nazis performed extensive experimentation on live human beings to test their genetic theories, ranging from simple measurement of physical characteristics to the horrific experiments carried out by Josef Mengele for Otmar von Verschuer on twins in the concentration camps. During the 1930s and 1940s, the Nazi regime forcibly sterilized hundreds of thousands of people whom they viewed as mentally and physically "unfit", an estimated 400,000 between 1934 and 1937. The scale of the Nazi program prompted American eugenics advocates to seek an expansion of their program, with one complaining that "the Germans are beating us at our own game".[22] The Nazis went further, however, killing tens of thousands of the institutionalized disabled through compulsory "euthanasia" programs. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics)

When you're less human, then you arent worthy of basic human rights. But hey that woulnt have ever happened in America right, because they wouldnt let people do that to innocents, right?

Eugenics was supported by Woodrow Wilson, and, in 1907, helped to make Indiana the first of more than thirty states to adopt legislation aimed at compulsory sterilization of certain individuals.[29] Although the law was overturned by the Indiana Supreme Court in 1921,[30] the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a Virginia law allowing for the compulsory sterilization of patients of state mental institutions in 1927.[31]
....
By 1945 over 45,000 mentally ill individuals in the United States had been forcibly sterilized.[citation needed] All in all, 60,000 Americans suffered from sterilization.[33]
....
When Nazi administrators went on trial for war crimes in Nuremberg after World War II, they justified the mass sterilizations (over 450,000 in less than a decade) by citing the United States as their inspiration

Ibid.

WAIT did they just say that the US inspired the atrocities of the Nazis... Yes they did. The nazis were made to face justice for that you know. Learn anything yet?


Oh and and back to the issue of Tyranny as applies to GWB... Reporter: Mr. President, following up on Vladimir Putin for a moment, he said recently that next year, when he has to step down according to the constitution, as the president, he may become prime minister; in effect keeping power and dashing any hopes for a genuine democratic transition there ...

Bush: I've been planning that myself. (http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/bush-quip-might.html)
But you know what.... the people who dont want to know will forget all about these things in no time flat anyway.

It's like they say in Psalms: Vir insipiens non cognoscet et stultus non intelleget haec.

[phoenix31tt]

yes yes so america started the slave trade... hmm...

far as i recall it was africans selling africans...

in either case it is not americas fault that terrorism exists...

u say terrorism existed in other countries alone and america started pissing them off... 2 things

1. what exactly did they do to piss them off

2. err... it eh really matter where it existed... it woulda spread neways


...

all u guys who sit @ home watchin the news on ur tv's etc... i would like to see yall put in a postion to make these tough decisions for the sake of freedom and democracy... no yall will stay here and critisize the people that make the tought decision...

lemme guess ur views on the a-bomb in hiroshima... it shouldnt have been done right?... if it wasnt the war probrably woulda claim more lives than that bomb... what would u have done???

who said these men that brought the case was innocent neways?... yes maybe innocents are being held in Gbay... but which prison doesnt house innocent men? not to mention the guyz that prolly got tortured werent very innocent huh... guess u never really tought about that... no jus sit on ur pc (which u prolly order from the states) and critisize... while the world goes to hell because of that mentality

[Xecutiona]

yes yes so america started the slave trade... hmm...

far as i recall it was africans selling africans...

in either case it is not americas fault that terrorism exists...

u say terrorism existed in other countries alone and america started pissing them off... 2 things

1. what exactly did they do to piss them off

2. err... it eh really matter where it existed... it woulda spread neways




...

all u guys who sit @ home watchin the news on ur tv's etc... i would like to see yall put in a postion to make these tough decisions for the sake of freedom and democracy... no yall will stay here and critisize the people that make the tought decision...

lemme guess ur views on the a-bomb in hiroshima... it shouldnt have been done right?... if it wasnt the war probrably woulda claim more lives than that bomb... what would u have done???

who said these men that brought the case was innocent neways?... yes maybe innocents are being held in Gbay... but which prison doesnt house innocent men? not to mention the guyz that prolly got tortured werent very innocent huh... guess u never really tought about that... no jus sit on ur pc (which u prolly order from the states) and critisize... while the world goes to hell because of that mentality
ok, when one tribe would take pows of another, they would be made slaves yes, but not chattel slaves. their children would be raised as members of that tribe, while the slave would be like a servant.

vastly different to the european/american view of slavery, which entitled them through pillaging and selling, the right to treat that slave however he deemed fit, kill if he wanted to etc...and his children were also "property" of the slave owner.

in every country there are examples of terrorism. look at the IRA in england n ireland, look at tim. mcveigh.

there are many socio-economic factors whch attribute to the atrocity towards america

1. the wholehearted endorsement of israel, a country viewed as illegal and of no right to exist religiously( a war which goes back over a thousand years)

2.the economic crisis left by the americans after the overthrowing of the soviet union

etc etc etc etc

most based on US policy which had been cemented throughout history. "if we cant control ou with our ways we'll invade you're ass....especially if you have stuff we need"

perfect example before afghanistan and iraq......vietnam

ooooh and as for hiroshima, the war was already over!!! and the people that died and were affected after be the high caesium doses were CIVILIANS!!!...and what do you call the mass murder of civillians for political gain...is it not terrorism?

u trying and tell me that the thousands of people who were affected and still are being affected by hiroshima deserved that? babies born with severe deformities, cancer...all radation borne sickness... im sorry but that move by truman was an evil one.

and dont even comment saying a thing about pearl harbour....cuz that was a military installment. civillians were NOT harmed.

[gambitt]

yes yes so america started the slave trade... hmm...

far as i recall it was africans selling africans...

in either case it is not americas fault that terrorism exists...

u say terrorism existed in other countries alone and america started pissing them off... 2 things

1. what exactly did they do to piss them off

2. err... it eh really matter where it existed... it woulda spread neways


...

all u guys who sit @ home watchin the news on ur tv's etc... i would like to see yall put in a postion to make these tough decisions for the sake of freedom and democracy... no yall will stay here and critisize the people that make the tought decision...

lemme guess ur views on the a-bomb in hiroshima... it shouldnt have been done right?... if it wasnt the war probrably woulda claim more lives than that bomb... what would u have done???

who said these men that brought the case was innocent neways?... yes maybe innocents are being held in Gbay... but which prison doesnt house innocent men? not to mention the guyz that prolly got tortured werent very innocent huh... guess u never really tought about that... no jus sit on ur pc (which u prolly order from the states) and critisize... while the world goes to hell because of that mentality


America did not start the slave trade (and at the start of what we will call the african trade it wasnt even America really), but long after they became a country they still kept slavery, despite what their presidents said about slavery (and just so you know we're talking about the president that was having sex with a black woman and making babies by her).

Hell, even after they abolished slavery, what happened?
Sit yo @$$ on the back of the bus, miss Parks, because the back of the bus is where you belong, not up front with us.
Hey boy, you can't come in this restaurant because your kind is not allowed. There's a restaurant for your kind down the road.
No sonny, you can't come to this school, because your skin's the wrong colour. Go away now.

Yup, black people still didnt have the same rights accorded to "persons". And this was LOOOOONG after slavery ended. Oh and if an American decides to kidnap you and sell you as a slave, does that make it acceptable?



Do you even know that Japan had already offered to surrender BEFORE the bombs were dropped? Go educate yourself man. Then come back and tell us how many people would have needed to die if the bombs were never dropped.What I woulda done? Sure as $#!7 I would not refuse, flat out, to accept their surrender.


And just so you know, America's legal system said that they were innocents. Innocent until proven guilty. Many of them were never proven guilty of anything. Most prisons do not set out to hold people who have not been proven guilty of anything, especially not ones who haven't been formally charged, and most prisoners are not subjected to that little torture thing.


In the book A man for all seasons, someone discusses with Thomas Moore a question about the law. They describe the law as a forest, and that the Devil hides behind the trees of that forest. Thomas says that he wouldnt cut down the trees to expose the Devil (meaning bend or break the laws to catch the guilty) because sooner or later you are going to find yourself in a place, stuck with the Devil himself and nothing to hide behind. (Meaning that the laws are what protect us from the guilty, if you are willing to allow them to be broken to convict someone, then sooner or later someone is going to break them to convict YOU.) Just so's you know, Thomas Moore was executed when people who were willing to bend the law to convict him got their way.

Can you understand the point that Thomas was making?



Now you make the comment about how they was torturing the not so innocent. How you can say that if they never get a trial? And explain to me what good it does to torture those men? You have the first clue what torture entails? Nobody ever grab you and twist your arm up behind your back, at that point in time you willing to say WHATEVER it is you think they want to hear to make them stop. Does that men that you'll tell them the truth? No. Most places agree that torture is NOT effective at gathering information and pretty much EVERYONE agrees that it is not an acceptable form of punishment during incarceration.

Pardner one thing is pretty obvious, you dont know as much about the history of the country you calling home as you think you do. As I said earlier, go educate yourself and then come back.

BTW, most of the stuff in my PC make in asia. Where does most of the stuff made in your home come from. Does that mean that if china decides to put it's boot up America's collective arse that we should just support them? That's where your last piece of logic leads.

[phoenix31tt]

ok i'm not gonna comment on any of the other stuff cuz is jus the same thing we saying over and over... and well u guyz will eventually see for urselfs that i know more than u and more than u think u know...

but jus 2 points


Pardner one thing is pretty obvious, you dont know as much about the history of the country you calling home as you think you do. As I said earlier, go educate yourself and then come back.
.

err so amm... what country am i calling home?... cuz my home is trinidad eh... and what about trinidad history we talk bout here?


BTW, most of the stuff in my PC make in asia. Where does most of the stuff made in your home come from. Does that mean that if china decides to put it's boot up America's collective arse that we should just support them? That's where your last piece of logic leads.

did i say anything of where the parts were made? nope i said u bought them from the states... which is what u did... and what that has to do with supporting china if the war against usa?... err... u not readin between the lines ... u inserting comments between them or somethin? :S

[gambitt]

jus to clarify...
isnt Guantanamo Bay where they keep suspected terrorsits??? and also those who are no longer suspects and are being held there until they find a place to put them?

and well... they had to make that decision else Guantanamo Bay woulda prolly get shut down, and also it would be weakness in the eyes of terrorists thus givin them more incentive to attack...

yup... that's price of freedom...
and for any idiot that gonna say we not free... go live in a land where there is a tyrant... then come back and talk to me ;)


You care to disambiguate the use of the word we in there? Talk is about yankeeland and yankeeland politics and the lack of freedoms in yankeeland. You talking about a land and free and using the word "WE" in the same breath and wondering why I seeing you as talking about yankeeland being the group you associating yourself with? :rolleyes:

I buy the pieces from a place in town. By your current "logic" the source of my equipment was T&T, not the states, so your claim was still flawed. You going to suggest that the company buy them from the states, I can agree with that, but as I said a further application of your logic would then lead us back to the original source as being mostly from various parts of asia. Choose which is more favorable to you and let me know. :rolleyes:

But yeah, nice dodge of the whole A-bomb talks. :rolleyes:

[phoenix31tt]

I buy the pieces from a place in town. By your current "logic" the source of my equipment was T&T, not the states, so your claim was still flawed. You going to suggest that the company buy them from the states, I can agree with that, but as I said a further application of your logic would then lead us back to the original source as being mostly from various parts of asia. Choose which is more favorable to you and let me know. :rolleyes:


nah i wasnt goin to... whats the point of that... just thought u ordered them online...

n i didnt dodge... jus realised when it does neither party good to say more...

[gambitt]

nah i wasnt goin to... whats the point of that... just thought u ordered them online...

n i didnt dodge... jus realised when it does neither party good to say more...

I'm one of them old fogeys who doesnt trust this whole newfingled technology :mad: so I doh place orders online with credit cards.

Actually, to be totally honest I doh trust banks much either:mad:, so I doh have a credit card. :( This could explain why I'm not in debt up to my eyeballs, :D of course it could just as easily explain why I doh get tempted to buy as much stuff online as I most probably would. Hmmmmmmmm. :)

[Xecutiona]

al least we know that gambitt doesnt keep his money in a bank...who say under the bed in a shoebox ftw!

this argument makin no more sense than we cud possibly make from it oui.

[Geese]

i could never understand why people could quarrel and yet be civil when talking about foreign politics, but when you talk local politics a set a shit does take place..

[Xecutiona]

because people feel inclined to stand firmly on one side(race) and not on anything else.

[gambitt]

I usually stay a lot calmer when discussing local politics. I'm a cynic at heart, I dont support any of the local parties. I think that the whole party system as it exists in this country is flawed.

Hell we're so badly off we dont even get good manifestos. I mean what does it say when your politicians arent even good at putting out lies?

We also need a N.O.T.A. ballot sheet. It is wrong to remove it from the ballot sheet once more than 2 people are running. The single largest election choice made in our country is NOTA. People dont feel strongly enough to vote for ANY of the parties to go and vote for one or the other and the choice of the lesser of two or least of three evils is NOT an acceptable choice for leadership of a country.

Hey, at least we dont have Bush and company in charge, I suppose. Imagine the kind of havoc they could wreak with our already dysfunctional constitution. :eek:

[ecktt]

i could never understand why people could quarrel and yet be civil when talking about foreign politics, but when you talk local politics a set a shit does take place..


Simple.
Local politics revolves around various crooks who tax my ass to put money in someone else pocket to keep them in power. When I leave work to see an effin blimp that does nothing useful to me in the air or a 5 billion dollar air port that never have enuff place to sit, yuh expect me to remain civil?

Back to the topic at hand:
If we have something they want (oil, diamonds,etc) what's there to stop the US from saying were a bunch of terrorist (or worse yet not even human), raiding us, rape the land and leave us to rot? The US has time and time again demonstrated that they have no respect for the sovereignty of other nations. If they were turely defending the world from terrorist why didn't they send armed forced into Czechoslovakia (yes i had to google to get the right spelling) when mass genocide was going on or any of the hundreds of other conflicts around the world. I'll tell you why. They had NOTHING of commercial interest to them. Is that a bad thing. NO. Why should they expend their resources for zero return. But doh effin tell me you have the right to bully anyone outside you country for your own gratification, cause thats whats going on.Right now i think smoking kills more Americans than terrorist. I think its high time they send armed forces into the tobacco field.

Does that sound stupid? Well their war on "terror" is that stupid to me. And how could a person be less than human? If a definition is all they need then:

From hence forth I consider Americans less than Human and not prive to treatment as such.

Of course I'm not being serious. I seriously doubt 250 million people could unanimously support such rubbish. So i'll narrow it down to just the people who are so full of sh1t that support that nonsense.

[phoenix31tt]

i could never understand why people could quarrel and yet be civil when talking about foreign politics, but when you talk local politics a set a shit does take place..

because its home and people let emotions get into it to much...

@ ecktt...

if thats what yuh think america doing well then get ready cuz they gonna be invading everybody... cuz everybody have something they want...

hell they might even invade guyana for they rice :eek:

and who said america trying to save the world from terrorists?... just themselves... lol @ yuh feel america ups and say lewee invade iraq and take the oil...
then they self plot to blow up the trade centers to make it look like terrorists to start a false war on terrorists to invade iraq... hmm... ur right on man ;)... ah well

[ecktt]

...and who said america trying to save the world from terrorists?...
George Bush

lol @ yuh feel america ups and say lewee invade iraq and take the oil...
Humm.. remind me why they did again for?

;)

[Xecutiona]

because its home and people let emotions get into it to much...

@ ecktt...

if thats what yuh think america doing well then get ready cuz they gonna be invading everybody... cuz everybody have something they want...

hell they might even invade guyana for they rice :eek:

and who said america trying to save the world from terrorists?... just themselves... lol @ yuh feel america ups and say lewee invade iraq and take the oil...
then they self plot to blow up the trade centers to make it look like terrorists to start a false war on terrorists to invade iraq... hmm... ur right on man ;)... ah well
wow@ ups and invade iraq.....

where have you been from the past 5 years??

gwb-"we need a way to secure our oil for the next 50 years...my supporters like to drive around in hummers and big rigs and they need gas"

DICK- "well...., there is that one place that we didnt really get back when ur daddy was in power"

gwb- thats right!!! eyerack!! they gos plenty oil, lets go git it!"

Dick+Rumsfeld- "im pretty sure its iraq sir, but we gotta plan a way to get into iraq"

Colin Powell- "man are you sure u wanna do this man? those guys didnt do anything to us really...so what excuse are we gonn-"

gwb+rumsfeld+cheney- "SHUT UP COLIN!!!!!!"

"o o o ok suh"

intern- "sir these alluminum tubes look like wmd dont they?"

gwb- "gosh darnit i dont know, but just for argument sake lets say they got them...CHENEY!! CALL TONY BLAIR AND TELL HIM WE GONNA GET SOME OIL!!"

2 years later........

"sir were losing this one...what should we do to distract the population?"

gwb- "i know the right plan for this...im gonna ban gay marriage"

"uh......ok"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL5Lj6zRBEk

[phoenix31tt]

why ignore the rest of my statement?

err oh maybe wtc was just opportune...


so who here agrees with sadaam and his tyranny of iraq?

dont give me no bs runaround...

did u agree with sadaam's government or not?

[Xecutiona]

wtc both 1 and 2 was a product of the US's own policy, as well as the inefficiencies of their intelligence service.

the fact is, they dindt go to war with white supremacists in the US when tim. mcveigh bombed oklahoma city, or when kennedy was shot....and that was INTERNAL.

whether i agree or not with saddaam's reign over iraq is not the issue. i dont agree with how trinidad is run, i dont agree with both parties. does that give me the right to run amok and stage a coup? hell friggin no so whats the difference? 3 letters with a black substance that just so happens to be precious material. O I L.

oh and just in case u didnt know, the war on terror was for afghanistan. the war on iraq is called "operation iraqi freedom"...well after the world realised that there were no WMDs.

real reason for afghanistan -to secure the oil pipeline from iraq to US allies.
real reason for iraq - to have oil to pump through that pipeline.

[phoenix31tt]

the fact is, they dindt go to war with white supremacists in the US when tim. mcveigh bombed oklahoma city, or when kennedy was shot....and that was INTERNAL.


right because it was internal... duh...

not to mention wtc1 and 2 was a result of us's policies how... its the WORLD trade center...

neways i sayin i wasnt gonna say anything else.. so think what u think... n we'll see in the end ;)...

p.s. you sound liek u watch a lil to much michael moore's with that statement :O...

M Out

[Xecutiona]

ok man...i dont know what uve been fed over the years, but look objectively at what the Us has been doing over the years...

the US, even though they had slaves and supported the slave trade at the time gave the rebel slaves guns to fight the french and the english in haiti, even though they would need the french later on in the civil war....after which, many puppet presidents and assasinations later, enforcing trade embargos etc have made haiti the most deplorable state in the western hemisphere.

they sponsored the bay of pigs invasion of cuba and resulted in the massacre of many civillians.

they gave the mujahadeen(including yuh boy osama) guns, stinger weapons, normal rpgs, smart grenates etc to fight the soviets, but failed in the rebuilding of afghanistan...forming the taliban and al quaeda, giving the generals specialist CIA training, methods they now use to train insurgents and future terrorists...

i say future terrorists because a man isnt a terrorist until he commits an act of terror...the same way a criminal isnt a criminal until he commits a crime.

policy like that is what makes people hate america.

man, arm urself with information, and you would see that this isnt new

[gambitt]

man, arm urself with information, and you would see that this isnt new

You tell him facts, I tell him facts, ecktt tell him the facts. Our stories ent change and I eh know about the two of you, but I know I ent get no PMs telling me what it is we going to tell him. ;)

You'd think that he might bother to look into it and see if all of we just trying to chain his head up or if the 5.7 billion people in the rest of the world really getting a different set of news from the ones he getting. :rolleyes:

Pardner, I doh know about none of allyuh, but I was really worried when I look at what they claim was WMDs being found in Iraq at the beginning of the invasion.

Highschool chemistry labs. Chlorine canisters in water treatment plants, fertiliser production facilities. We produce more fertiliser than most countries of the world here in T&T, and that's even without the regular contributions of parliament. Wasa leaves old chlorine tanks laying outside some of their stations for YEARS. According to the ministry propaganda it have PLENTY highschool chemistry labs. Does that mean we have WMDS and are overdue for an invasion? :eek:

Oh wait, I almost forget :rolleyes: our oil and gas running out. :D


Wait.... that's not a good thing either. :(