[rockwool]

That was a good one N8!

 

[$tinkle]

O! the inhumanity! will it never cease?

I’ve just returned from a one-day press trip to Guantanamo Bay, on which there will be more to say. But an observation while digesting the experience —

Only in America would you find authorities trying to cope with terrorist detainees by over-feeding them. We of the media were served the same halal meal as that offered to the detainees, which meant a lunch including — this is only a partial list — spiced meat patty, egg salad, tuna, yogurt, fresh dates, freshly baked bread, juice, and a down-home Middle Eastern dessert, which left us licking from our fingers the honey and nuts of the same baklava we were told is served to Hambali, Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the rest of the gang. Of course, this being Ramadan, the detainees have the option of dining on a different schedule, fasting by day and tucking into the baklava at night. All told, they are offered a menu that provides 4,200 calories per day — more than the 3,800 allotted for a U.S. combat soldier in Iraq.

Apparently, Al Qaeda is eating this up. Guantanamo officers say that while most of the detainees upon arrival at Gitmo ranged from underweight to normal, today the 460 or so held on the base range from normal to overweight to mildly obese. Even the two detainees currently on hunger strike, being fed through tubes, are close to normal weight. We were told that one detainee, who apparently cleans his plate — or his styrofoam meal box — weighs 410 pounds, though we did not get to see him (it is against the Geneva Conventions to put prisoners on display, so our military follows the same rule for the Gitmo detainees). “His choice,” said one of our Gitmo guides. At risk of triggering a human-rights campaign for Guantanamo Lite, I have to wonder if there’s method to this menu. There’s something very disturbing about coddling terrorists, but in some ways this helps cut them down to size: Yep, it’s Al Qaeda… with a weight problem.

claudia rosett

 

[RenegadeRick]

O! the inhumanity! will it never cease?claudia rosett

So is this the best we can come up with?

4,200 calories/day > freedom

Really?

 

[$tinkle]

So is this the best we can come up with?

4,200 calories/day > freedom

Really?

have you never heard of "fattening before the kill"?

at minimun, we're americanizing these foie gras

 

[RenegadeRick]

And since we are talking techincally, it's not a law until the decider decides to sign it.

I'm banana sure Bush will do the right thing and veto it.

Also, I'm sure we can count on the courts to protect us from it's unconstitutionality.
Oh wait, "no court has jurisdiction", you say?

He signed it. I'm shocked.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061017/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_terrorism_16;_ylt=AjSsk0z2Z7lKm86kF_h2PjFU.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA2ZGZwam4yBHNlYwNmYw--

Here are some choicer bits from the article.

The American Civil Liberties Union said the new law is "one of the worst civil liberties measures ever enacted in American history."

"The president can now, with the approval of Congress, indefinitely hold people without charge, take away protections against horrific abuse, put people on trial based on hearsay evidence, authorize trials that can sentence people to death based on testimony literally beaten out of witnesses, and slam shut the courthouse door for habeas petitions," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero.

"Nothing could be further from the American values we all hold in our hearts than the Military Commissions Act," he said.

The legislation also says the president can "interpret the meaning and application" of international standards for prisoner treatment, a provision intended to allow him to authorize aggressive interrogation methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts.

This statement truly disgusts me:

"The bill I sign today helps secure this country and it sends a clear message: This nation is patient and decent and fair and we will never back down from threats to our freedom," Bush said.

What a funking liar. This bill is the biggest threat to freedom America has ever faced.

 

[ElTORO]

CA - Nay!! Thank God!!!

Hey and we didn't vote for Bush either!!! So don't lump us in with the rest of America!!

It's bills like this that make me proud to be an American!!!

 

[RenegadeRick]

Thank you California!

Here is another article on the subject:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061017/pl_nm/security_bush_dc_4;_ylt=Aua.OCfMyJBC1h.1xmH1WoUGw_IE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2ZGZwam4yBHNlYwNmYw--

This one is so bad it is almost funny (or would be if this weren't so funking ridiculous):

"I am deeply disappointed that Congress enacted this law," said Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold (news, bio, voting record). "We will look back on this day as a stain on our nation's history."

Agreed.

The new law means Bush can continue a secret CIA program for interrogating terrorism suspects whom he believes have vital information that could thwart a plot against America.

Human rights groups charge that the measure, likely to face legal challenges that go up as far as the Supreme Court, would allow harsh techniques bordering on torture, such as sleep deprivation and induced hypothermia.

Bush said it would allow intelligence professionals to question suspects without fear of being sued by them later.

"This bill spells out specific recognizable offenses that would be considered crimes in the handling of detainees so that our men and women who question captured terrorists can perform their duties to the fullest extent of the law," he said.

The White House has refused to describe what techniques will be allowed or banned.

And the Decider is unquestioningly authorized to make this decision. It isn't torture if the Decider decides it isn't!

Critics and legal experts have predicted the law will draw vigorous court challenges and could be struck down for violating rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.

They cited provisions that strip foreign suspects of the right to challenge their detentions in U.S. courts and what they described as unfair rules for military trials.

Detainees have NO right to challenge their status. And those words above about "foreign suspects"... they are NOT in the bill. Anyone could be subject to this. Americans too. Do not be fooled.

Bush insisted the law complies with the spirit and letter of international agreements. "As I've said before, the United States does not torture. It's against our laws and it's against our values," he said.

What a funking liar, or maybe not... It isn't torture unless the Decider says so. This bill proves it.

Shortly after Bush signed the law, the Republican National Committee issued a press releasing headlined, "Democrats would let terrorists free" and listed the names of many Democrats in the House of Representatives and the Senate who opposed it.

Please vote for these people. They are the ones TRYING to safeguard YOUR freedom.

 

[Changleen]

I am pretty disgusted with this I have to say. I hope it is removed ASAP.

 

[ElTORO]

What do you think America would do if another country adopted this bill. What would we do if we had are citizans in Jail as supposed "Enemy Combatants", Tortured and Detained with no trail and without any opportunity to challenge it or to view the evidence against them.

We would freak out!!!

 

[N8 v2.0]

What do you think America would do if another country adopted this bill. What would we do if we had are citizans in Jail as supposed "Enemy Combatants", Tortured and Detained with no trail and without any opportunity to challenge it or to view the evidence against them.

We would freak out!!!

LOL!

They just behead them silly...

 

[ElTORO]

LOL!

They just behead them silly...

HAHA!!! I totally forgot arn't we at war with people like that!!

 

[RenegadeRick]

HAHA!!! I totally forgot arn't we at war with people like that!!

Yeah. Because the Decider lied us into it.

 

[RenegadeRick]

Simple:

Enlist the help of major universities silly! Take advantage of !

http://www.chris-floyd.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=887&Itemid=135

 

[RenegadeRick]

Sheesh. I'm talking to myself here.
Either America doesn't care or we are too scared to care.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

I went from outraged to not even looking anymore. I didn't even see apathy I went so fast.... This is pathetic. It's gonna involve alotta bad stuff....so what. I don't care anymore.

Carry on.

 

[rockwool]

"The bill I sign today helps secure this country and it sends a clear message: This nation is patient and decent and fair and we will never back down from threats to our freedom," Bush said.

$tinkle, your a serious guy. Please explain how can the common republican view be that it is decent with torture and indifinate detention?

How can it be fair to "put people on trial based on hearsay evidence,
authorize trials that can sentence people to death based on testimony literally beaten out of witnesses,
and slam shut the courthouse door for habeas petitions"?

Patience, wow, that is a true jedi skill. Do you find GWB policies come anything close to Yoda's?


I can't figure out how some people fail to see that your presidents actions are the exact opposite of his own words. He is actulay altering the true meaning of words, in this case; patient, decent and fair.

What is your view on this?

 

[Silver]

$tinkle, your a serious guy. Please explain how can the common republican view be that it is decent with torture and indifinate detention?

It's a common enough American view (and probably human, unfortunately), not exclusively Republican. You want to get an American fired up about something, scare them. There are a lot of self described liberals who wouldn't hesitate to torture an innocent person if it meant that there was a chance it could protect their own ass.

 

[BurlyShirley]

It's a common enough American view (and probably human, unfortunately), not exclusively Republican. You want to get an American fired up about something, scare them. There are a lot of self described liberals who wouldn't hesitate to torture an innocent person if it meant that there was a chance it could protect their own ass.

That's not an American trait. Thats a human trait. Just in most places it isnt exploited for gain.

 

[Changleen]

Sheesh. I'm talking to myself here.
Either America doesn't care or we are too scared to care.

I think from looking at Google News the rest of the world cares more than the US.

 

[rockwool]

Sheesh. I'm talking to myself here.
Either America doesn't care or we are too scared to care.

Probably both. Comparing our countries, yours is even more depolitisezed.

 

[rockwool]

That's not an American trait. Thats a human trait. Just in most places it isnt exploited for gain.

Not to the same extent perhaps. But that is the way to heard the sheep, you scare them into the path you want.

 

[skinny mike]

I think from looking at Google News the rest of the world cares more than the US.

no, it's because our media barely even covers this matter. the american media contains so much propaganda.

i think i should apply for canadian citizenship now. so that way when i don't participate in the draft i can't be called a terrorist and get shipped off to gitmo.

 

[Changleen]

People thinking Torture is OK:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/6063386.stm

Nearly a third of people worldwide back the use of torture in prisons in some circumstances, a BBC survey suggests.

Although 59% were opposed to torture, 29% thought it acceptable to use some degree of torture to combat terrorism.

While most polled in the US are against torture, opposition there is less robust than in Europe and elsewhere.

More than 27,000 people in 25 countries were asked if torture was acceptable if it could provide information to save innocent lives.

Some 36% of those questioned in the US agreed that this use of torture was acceptable, while 58% were unwilling to compromise on human rights.

The percentage favouring torture in certain cases makes it one of the highest of all the countries polled.

The majority of those questioned in the BBC World Service poll - 19 of the 25 countries surveyed - agree that clear rules against torture in prisons should be maintained because it is immoral and its use would weaken human rights standards.

"The dominant view around the world is that terrorism does not warrant bending the rules against torture," said Steven Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA), whose organisation helped conduct the survey.

Saving lives?

All of the countries surveyed have signed up to the Geneva Conventions which prohibit the use of torture and cruel and degrading behaviour.

But countries that face political violence are more likely to accept the idea that some degree of torture is permissible because of the extreme threat posed by terrorists.

Israel has the largest percentage of those polled endorsing the use of a degree of torture on prisoners, with 43% saying they agreed that some degree of torture should be allowed.

However, a larger percentage - 48% - think it should remain prohibited.

Other countries that polled higher levels of acceptance of the use of torture include Iraq (42%), the Philippines (40%), Indonesia (40%), Russia (37%) and China (37%).

The Israeli figure conceals a stark difference in attitude within the country, split along religious lines.

A majority of Jewish respondents in Israel, 53%, favour allowing governments to use some degree of torture to obtain information from those in custody, while 39% want clear rules against it.

But Muslims in Israel, who represent 16% of the total number polled, are overwhelmingly against any use of torture.

Meanwhile opposition to the practise is highest in Italy, where 81% of those questioned think torture is never justified.

Australia, France, Canada, the UK and Germany also registered high levels of opposition to any use of torture.

The survey was carried out for the BBC World Service by polling firm Globescan and the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA).

See link for full results.

Israel sucks.

 

[Silver]

Israel sucks.

Some Isrealis suck. Some on this issue suck a lot. Looks to me like 43%. That doesn't mean that the 48% who are against torture do.

Look, if you disagree with the current rhetorical tactic of "Any criticism of Israel means you are a racist Jew hater!" then don't do the same thing in reverse.

 

[Changleen]

Some Isrealis suck. Some on this issue suck a lot. Looks to me like 43%. That doesn't mean that the 48% who are against torture do.

Look, if you disagree with the current rhetorical tactic of "Any criticism of Israel means you are a racist Jew hater!" then don't do the same thing in reverse.

Yeah yeah. There's a Israeli chick at my work who is hawt. Natalie Portman is hawt too. You know what I mean.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

So is this the best we can come up with?

4,200 calories/day > freedom

Really?

not that i support the gitmo ways, but i bet you can find people willing to disprove your operator.

and changleen, in a curious twist, the peruvian zones hit the hardest by the guerrillas (civilians getting killed both by guerrillas and anti-guerilla armies) were the ones that favored extreme anti-guerrilla tactics the most.
interestingly enough, lima (barely hit when compared to the southern highlands) was the place were people were the most sensitive/pedantic about the issue. take that for whatever its worth.

 

[Changleen]

and changleen, in a curious twist, the peruvian zones hit the hardest by the guerrillas (civilians getting killed both by guerrillas and anti-guerilla armies) were the ones that favored extreme anti-guerrilla tactics the most.
interestingly enough, lima (barely hit when compared to the southern highlands) was the place were people were the most sensitive/pedantic about the issue. take that for whatever its worth.

Look at all the countries that have the most violence in their societies. It seems to me to be a pretty good correlation between level of extremity in society and willingness to torture. Why is that a 'twist'? Niggaz cain't hit niggaz they cain't see.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Look at all the countries that have the most violence in their societies. It seems to me to be a pretty good correlation between level of extremity in society and willingness to torture. Why is that a 'twist'? Niggaz cain't hit niggaz they cain't see.

you are proposing a chicken or egg kinda deal here.

its a twist, if you dont accept that willingness to torture is correlated to a society´s violent manners, but instead a response to inflicted violence coming from portion of said society.. even if violent retaliation means also self-harm.

to crack the chicken/egg dilemma, going back to the israeli example. pre-zionist jewish societies werent exactly known for their ferocity....

 

[Changleen]

to crack the chicken/egg dilemma, going back to the israeli example. pre-zionist jewish societies werent exactly known for their ferocity....

Haha, are you serious? Pre-2000 years ago?

So it's OK, they've only been known to be violent for basically 2000 years. It's too early to judge them.

Edit: I realise the extreme hypocracy in this post in relation to Europe. Still, whatever. We stopped like at least 50-150 whole years ago... Keep up.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Haha, are you serious? Pre-2000 years ago?

So it's OK, they've only been known to be violent for basically 2000 years. It's too early to judge them.

Edit: I realise the extreme hypocracy in this post in relation to Europe. Still, whatever. We stopped like at least 50-150 whole years ago... Keep up.

c´mon, 2000 years ago genocide and pillaging was in. it was the moral gold standard of the day.

am talking about modern societies and relative contexts, and my explanation of "people support desperate meassures as a response to desperate times" being more relevant than your "some people like torture because they are intrinsecally violent/evil". that sounds like a bushism.

 

[Changleen]

...than your "some people like torture because they are intrinsecally violent/evil". that sounds like a bushism.

That's not what I was trying to say.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

That's not what I was trying to say.

what did you mean then?

 

[Changleen]

Why, something else of course.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Why, something else of course.

yeah, but what exactly?

 

[Changleen]

Seriously, I wasn't actually trying to imply anyone was more evil than anyone else. I was just pointing out the correlation. Another correlation might be perception of threat to one's way of life.

 

[rockwool]

Niggaz cain't hit niggaz they cain't see.

"I moved out the hood for good, you blame me?"

 

[RenegadeRick]

Here is a well-reasoned analysis of the Military Commissions Act.

http://ccr-ny.org/v2/legal/Docs/MCA_Signing_Briefing_Paper.pdf

It is clear that I am providing material support to the terrorists by continuing to post this nonsense.
Where do I report to begin my indefinite detention as an enemy combatant?

 

[rockwool]

Here is a well-reasoned analysis of the Military Commissions Act.

http://ccr-ny.org/v2/legal/Docs/MCA_Signing_Briefing_Paper.pdf

It is clear that I am providing material support to the terrorists by continuing to post this nonsense.
Where do I report to begin my indefinite detention as an enemy combatant?

Does that linky realy work? I had to close down all my e-windows twice because it stuck and noting wanted to work..

 

[syadasti]

Does that linky realy work? I had to close down all my e-windows twice because it stuck and noting wanted to work..

That happens with pdf some times - right-click, save-as. Save to desktop and then open locally - adobe's autoloading in the browser is teh suck

 

[Reactor]

It's pretty clear the terrorists have succeeded, thev've destroyed america and george bush was their greatest weapon.