Text 9384, 85 rader
Skriven 2009-02-23 02:28:12 av JOHN FITZGERALD (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av DAN CEPPA
Ärende: GITMO DISTORIONS EXPOSED
================================
-

 
JF>  You're referring to some of the techniques used to make some of  
JF>  them them talk.   Poor baby didn't have a blanket?  How horrible!

DC>  That is against the Geneva Conventions. 

  Does the Geneva convention also outline how much toilet paper they are
entitled to?   Somehow I don't think the G.C. outlines things like 
blankets, etc.  Seems like you're rather well versed.  Can you show me
the section that pertains to blankets, and other creature comforts?


JF>   Is suicide bombing against the Geneva convention?  
JF>   Are beheadings against the Geneva convention?

DC>   Well, so far US troops haven't been found guilty of 
DC>   those practices.  They have been found guilty of 
DC>   pther instances of breaches against the 
DC>   Geneva Conventions. 

   Yes, and because they most often have to deal with extraordinary
situations we should make every attempt to understand what they have
done and why.  Seems that some folks could care less.  ie.Get Bush.
Often it's easy to see that this is the only motivating force behind
their criticisms.  How about you, Dan?



JF>  I've listened to several interviews from people who worked there. 
JF>  They said that because of all the media hype, the ACLU, 
JF>  and foreign interests sticking their noses into affairs...

DC>  And others are coming forward to document the abuses.

JF>  While others put that "abuse" in its proper context.

DC>  There is no "proper context" for abuse. 

   There most certainly is.  If an inmate spits in your face, you punch
his lights out.  If an inmate attacks you, and many have, you mop the
floor with him in front of the other inmates.  To not do so only
encourages others to act without fear of reprisal.  To not do so would
only encourage the other inmates to abuse the guards, and their safety
comes first, not the inmate's.   So if some guard "abuses" an inmate
because that inmate threw dung or urine at him, I'm looking the other
way...you can drag him into court and embolden our enemies if you like.
Or do you seriously think they would not be amused by your choice?



JF>  There were a couple of guards who got way out of line, but only  
JF>  in response to being spit at and having dung thrown at them.  
JF>  Of course you'll believe the inmate's versions along with those  
JF>  of their activist lawyers before you will believe our guys ...

DC>  The situation that caused the known abuses is systemic.

JF>  Are you saying the situation there has been planned? 
JF>  In any event, there are many reasons for "abuses".

DC>  Absolutely.  Rumsfeld put in place the policies to 
DC>  lead to those abuses.  As to torture in Gitmo? 
DC>  That was approved at the highest level.

   Good for them.  At least they knew that they have to get tough when
dealing with hardened combatants, most of whom would slit your throat
and behead your wife if given the chance.  These are the people you are
protecting, whether that is your intention or not.

   Matters of war and conflict are not always black and white, and as
such there is always an exception to the rules, and if you think not
then in your naivety, you are a slave to those rules.  No thanks.

  If I have to break a law to save my brother, I will break that law,
and to hell with the Geneva convention.  If someone didn't make the same
sacrifice for their brother, or innocent people, then I submit their
'sense of honor' is something they only wear on their selves so they
can get over in a debate for partisan purposes only.



---
 * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)