Text 9332, 157 rader
Skriven 2009-02-21 20:01:00 av JOHN FITZGERALD (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av DAN CEPPA
Ärende: GITMO DISTORIONS EXPOSED
================================
-
 
JF> in one's eye and  waterboarding.   Yet you have these things 
JF> all lumped together.
  
DC>  Waterbaording meets all of the definitions of torture.
 
JF>  A legal distinction.  Again, your label hanging will never put
JF>  waterboarding in the same category as real torture, 
JF>  where eyes are dug out ...
  
DC>  Are you actually defending torture?

  Only waterboarding.  Not real torture.  Suggest you run your label
game on someone who doesn't know any better.
  
 
DC>   Your problem is that you believe Bush and company with 
DC>   their Orwellian re-dedfinitions  of the word.  
 
JF>  Your problem is if some one hangs the word torture on it, you'll
JF>  believe it and lump it all together with red-hot pokers in the eye,
JF>  etc. A rather typical partisan pathology apparently.
 
DC>  Ever been waterbaorded?  Get back to me after a session.

  That's like saying to someone who is sticking up for our troops:

    'Ever been shot?  Get back to me after you have.'


 
JF>  Who has made that claim, and moreover, how can they make that 
JF>  'estimation' when the detainees have yet to be tried?
  
DC>  The US Military, for one. 
 
JF> Show me where they made such a claim, and then try to explain how
JF> they did so if, as you claim, they were never tried.
 
DC> Just how many prisoners were sent to Gitmo?  How many are   
DC>  there now? How many trials have been held?

  I don't know.  How many?

 
  
JF>  And how do you know they weren't released just so they could 
JF>  find out where they would go and to whom they were reporting to?
  
DC>  Not only that, those that did so aren't even identified.  I think 
DC>  that 3 is the number of cases that can actually be verified.
 
JF>  Empty claim.  Show your sources.  This is obviously a partisan beef 
JF>  that only attempts to give weight to it with the spurious claim that 
 
DC>  You would think that the gvt would know.  But, they cannot provide 
DC>  that information.  I'm not about to look for what isn't there.  

  Yet it seems you want to draw conclusions from what is not there.


DC> Many were.   Many were turned in by their neighbors  
DC> simply for the reward money. 
 
JF> Now we're supposed to believe that they carted away anyone who was
JF> turned in by a phone call.  Baloney.  Cite me one confirmed example.
 
DC>  Ask the people who are detained.  Oh, that's right.  
DC>  They aren't allowed to  even communicate with their lawyers...  

   Then what basis do you have to make any conclusions here?


  
JF>  While we're at it, conditions at Gitmo are much better 
JF>  than they are in an average prison in the US, 
JF>  which are over crowded, for openers.
  
DC>  You mean like, 24 hr lighting, lack of blanckets,
DC>  let alone bedding? 
 
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 agains the Geneva Conventions.  

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

 
JF>  I've listened to several interviews from people who worked there. 
JF>  They said that because of all the media hype, the ACLU, and foreign 
 
DC>  And others are coming forward to document the abuses.

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

 
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. 

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

  Just how do you expect us to get any info out of them, info that will
save the lives of our guys and others, if you want to tuck them in at 
night with a warm blanket and serve them tea whenever they want?
They're not running a homeless shelter...it's a POW camp.


DC>   The problem came from the Rules of Engagement provided 
DC>   by the WH itself.  It's not about a "few bad apples".  

  Interesting opinion.  I'm sure it's shared by all of the terrorists in
this world.


DC>  Those bad apples were placed purposely there.  

  How do you know?



JF> This is obviously a partisan and spiteful issue for you.
JF> Try to retain some objectivity.
 
DC>  I'm not the one condoning torture.

   I'm not the one providing public relations services for terrorists 
and enemy combatants, while our guys are out there in the field.

   I'm not the one trying to undermine our military and intelligence 
through our legal system as many foreign entities are trying to do.

   I am not the one who is more outraged at "abuses" in a POW camp than 
I am about acts of terrorism and those who are trying to hold us to a 
higher standard than they have ever lived up to.

   Standards are all well and good, but I resist all efforts by those who
try to make us wear them like a ball and chain while they run around 
unimpaired by these things.

   So while you're sitting there with your pinky in the air looking down 
your nose at those who have to deal with these prisoners, just remember 
you're playing right into the hands of our enemies.


---
 *   All those not present, raise your hands.     *


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