Amnesty International talks about orture or ill-treatment by Coalition Forces - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-24-2003, 05:13 PM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 07:02 AM
FizzingWhizzbees,

"And if you know they didn't happen then prove it. After all, you can't say a person can't be expected to prove they did *not* do something as you expected Saddam to prove he did *not* have any weapons."

In March of 1991, Saddam signed a ceacefire agreement in which he agreed to give up all his WMD. As of 1998, this process had not been completed and Saddam was still in possession of 30,000 Biio/Chem capable shells, thousands of liters of Anthrax and hundreds of tons of Mustard Gas. This is from the UN inspectors. They had to leave at the end of 1998 and were not allowed back into the country.

November 2002, UN inspectors are finally allowed back into the country. Its Saddam's obligation to do one of two things

a: turn over the 30,000 Bio/Chem capable shells, Thousands of liters of Anthrax and hundreds of tons of Mustard Gas.

b: if these items were destroyed in the years 1998-2002, then Saddam must show the evidence of their destruction of which there would be plenty of according to former UN inspectors.

The point here is that SADDAM was already been proven guilty and had admitted it. In addition, Saddam had the means with which to comply with the resolutions. Saddam had two options to comply, either A or B. SADDAM did neither.

Saddam has already been proven guilty of possesion of WMD. None of these allegations against the US military has been proven at all.

"And tell me why your friends word of mouth report can be trusted by those of Iraqi citizens can't be."

Tell me why I should not believe my friend.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 07-24-2003, 05:16 PM   #17
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 07:02 AM
Sorry Dread, I didn't explain myself clearly. I didn't mean to call Sting's friends liars, I meant that if Sting could dismiss Amnesty's report because it's based on word of mouth reports I don't see why he should apply a different standard to word of mouth reports because they're from a friend of his. I'm sure the military is just like any other profession: there are honest people and dishonest people there.

All I can really say on this subject is that firstly I do place a significant amount of trust in Amnesty International, they're an organisation I have campaigned with for five or six years now and I believe their reports are accurate and truthful. Secondly, if this report is true I'm appalled and saddened that the US military would stoop to the level of Saddam by torturing and ill-treating prisoners.
__________________

__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 07-24-2003, 05:18 PM   #18
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 07:02 AM
Sting,
I didn't mean you should disbelieve your friend. I meant that your friend's account of what is happening in Iraq is also word-of-mouth and so it seems that if you dismiss Amnety's report as based on word-of-mouth accounts then I don't see why you can believe what your friend tells you because that must also be based on word-of-mouth accounts (assuming, that is, that your friend can't possibly have seen everything which has occured in Iraq.)

Fizz.

P.S. I really didn't mean to suggest your friend is untrustworthy, I know that would be an offensive thing for me to say and I honestly didn't meant to imply that.
__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 07-24-2003, 05:20 PM   #19
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 02:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by FizzingWhizzbees
Secondly, if this report is true I'm appalled and saddened that the US military would stoop to the level of Saddam by torturing and ill-treating prisoners.
No apology, I understood you.

However, as I said in my post, you cannot say with a blanket statement that the US Military is acting this way as a policy. I have a problem with statements like this. If there is proof that this is a "Policy" and it is being carried out system wide throughout the military....there should be evidence.

There are BAD people everywhere. This does not exclude the military. If the reports are true, they should be held accountable.

Peace
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-24-2003, 05:22 PM   #20
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
sulawesigirl4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,416
Local Time: 02:02 AM
STING2, I find it fascinating how you make it a practice to make vague statements and then when challenged attempt to twist those challenges into attacks upon your integrity. Quite frankly, I find it childish. Especially since it appears that you have no qualms in engaging is such ad hominem attacks yourself. These statements are a classic case.

Quote:
If you know these things have happened, prove it. There has been a lot of shit thrown at the US government and Military which there is no evidence or even basis for. People don't like the Presidents policy's in general, so they run around cooking up charges, with out a true prior basis, and being unable to prove them in any way shape or form.
1. I have not made any allegations. Those allegations were made by a respected third party known as Amnesty International. Therefore, I don't have to prove anything. However, I find it telling that you seem to indicate that anyone who claims they have been abused must be dismissed out of hand as a liar. Last time I checked, the lives of all people are valuable whether they happen to be Iraqi or American.

2. We won't know if there is any "evidence" or "basis" for these allegations if they are not even allowed to be voiced. Silencing criticism precludes the process of investigation and the wheels of justice. If the US military or government has nothing to hide, than there should be no fear of investigation.

3. Your statement about people "cooking up" charges because they don't like the President's policy is in itself baseless. You haven't shown any proof that would indicate this is any more than your personal opinion. As for proof, please see point #2.

Quote:
Great Men and Women in the US military including many of my friends are working hard every day in difficult conditions to make this world a better place. Considering their sacrifices, the least you could do is give them the benefit of the doubt before you posts the most unsubstantiated allegations against them accusing them of human rights abuses. Think of what it would be like if someone falsely accused you of horrible crimes like this.
Thank you for the chest-thumping rhetoric. But you can save it. Whether or not you realize it, many of my friends are also working in the military. My closest childhood friend is guarding the airport in Baghdad. My cousin is serving on a ship in the Gulf. My father served in Vietnam with the US Marine Corps. So don't you dare hurl accusations at me or set yourself up as the only person on this board who has any connection or involvement with the armed forces. It's rude, insulting and presumptuous.

You should realize that while I hope for and expect the very highest quality of work from US troops, I am also not naive enough to think that mistakes never happen and that abuse is impossible. If anything, I believe in justice for everyone, not just for Americans. I'm not assuming guilt. I'm saying that "innocent until proven guilty" means that allegations of guilt must be investigated, not shunted aside, and that no one is above the law, regardless of their sacrifices.
__________________
"I can't change the world, but I can change the world in me." - Bono

sulawesigirl4 is offline  
Old 07-24-2003, 05:28 PM   #21
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
kobayashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: the ether
Posts: 5,142
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
kobayashi and sulawesigirl4,

If you know these things have happened, prove it. There has been a lot of shit thrown at the US government and Military which there is no evidence or even basis for. People don't like the Presidents policy's in general, so they run around cooking up charges, with out a true prior basis, and being unable to prove them in any way shape or form.

Great Men and Women in the US military including many of my friends are working hard every day in difficult conditions to make this world a better place. Considering their sacrifices, the least you could do is give them the benefit of the doubt before you posts the most unsubstantiated allegations against them accusing them of human rights abuses. Think of what it would be like if someone falsely accused you of horrible crimes like this.

i respect that.

you pointed out that the amnesty claim is largely based on word of mouth.
the evidence you presented also was largely based on word of mouth.

they appeared to me to be of equal value so i pointed that out. but thank you for reiterating how great the people of your armed forces are. i agree, people everywhere are, for the most part, good people.

no one is saying your friends are to be disbelieved. word of mouth is word of mouth.
__________________
im the candyman. and the candyman is back.
kobayashi is offline  
Old 07-24-2003, 05:32 PM   #22
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 02:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by sulawesigirl4
You should realize that while I hope for and expect the very highest quality of work from US troops, I am also not naive enough to think that mistakes never happen and that abuse is impossible. If anything, I believe in justice for everyone, not just for Americans. I'm not assuming guilt. I'm saying that "innocent until proven guilty" means that allegations of guilt must be investigated, not shunted aside, and that no one is above the law, regardless of their sacrifices.
It is interesting that you have said how I feel. Throughtout Military Police School and throughout the NCO Acadamy it was drilled into my head that we had to be better than other soldiers because we were supposed to uphold the rules.

However, I would stress the innocent until proven guilty part, and the fact that I believe in my heart that many in the world would cry foul if they were found innocent believing the investigation and trial a farce.

Peace
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-24-2003, 06:01 PM   #23
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 08:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox

...
I will say that from my experience in the military, we as MP's were trainined in the Geneva Convention, and we were trained how to properly take care of prisoners.
...
There are crappy people in this world, and like the world, some are in the military. There were people in Boot Camp and MP School that I would not have trusted to watch my back. It is likely that there are people being mistreated, but I would bet that it is NOT as frequent, nor as widespread, as some would have us believe. That said, those, if they are doing these things, should be prosecuted court-martialed, ect.
And this is exactly the problem the US military should be thankful about every report they get so that they can throw out the people who abused their power (if i remember it correctly they did it at least with one M.D.). If you don't throw people who Torture or treat people ill the whole organisation (the army) will get a bad reputation.

Back to the Geneva Convention, didn't Rumsfeld violate the Geneva Convention when he published the pictures?
I understand that he had to prove it in some way (as far as i can remember it was the 3rd time the Pentagon reported that they got these people). But independent M.D.s (In this case German or French institutes maybe?) who research and agree that it was them would have bin better. But i was glad that at least they didn't publish the picture of the 14 year old boy.

Sting: with informations you have allways the problem of trustworthienes, so the US military could just remember the good reputation of ai in these cases and start to research on their own if it is true or not and help these organisations - behaviour like that would help to polish the image of the US forces internationally (and the image of them is my far not as good internationally as inside the US)

Klaus
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 07-24-2003, 06:51 PM   #24
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:02 PM
I may be wrong, but it looks like the report goes to the press before it goes to the US military.

Nothing like the court of public opinion for trying a case.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-24-2003, 08:27 PM   #25
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 07:02 AM
sulawesigirl4,

"STING2, I find it fascinating how you make it a practice to make vague statements and then when challenged attempt to twist those challenges into attacks upon your integrity. Quite frankly, I find it childish. Especially since it appears that you have no qualms in engaging is such ad hominem attacks yourself. These statements are a classic case."

I've not claimed my integrity has been attacked in any way in this thread. What the hell are you talking about? Who did I attack? Your evidence for these claims is:


"If you know these things have happened, prove it. There has been a lot of shit thrown at the US government and Military which there is no evidence or even basis for. People don't like the Presidents policy's in general, so they run around cooking up charges, with out a true prior basis, and being unable to prove them in any way shape or form."

I stand by everything I said here and in no place was it directed at you personally. Republicans and Democrats in the house and senate are guilty of doing this when the opposite party has the presidency.


"1. I have not made any allegations. Those allegations were made by a respected third party known as Amnesty International. Therefore, I don't have to prove anything. However, I find it telling that you seem to indicate that anyone who claims they have been abused must be dismissed out of hand as a liar. Last time I checked, the lives of all people are valuable whether they happen to be Iraqi or American."

I have not stated that you have made any allegations. Amnesty International didn't make any allegations either, they just reported them. I said IF you know these things have happened, prove it. The emphasis being on IF, not saying that you do know.

Where did I say that anyone should be dismissed out of hand as a liar? Where did I say US lives are more important than anyone elses lives?

"2. We won't know if there is any "evidence" or "basis" for these allegations if they are not even allowed to be voiced. Silencing criticism precludes the process of investigation and the wheels of justice. If the US military or government has nothing to hide, than there should be no fear of investigation."

Allowing unsubstantiated allegations to clog the wheels of justice does not help either. No one has prevented these things from being voiced. If there is evidence to warrent an investigation, then do so.


"3. Your statement about people "cooking up" charges because they don't like the President's policy is in itself baseless. You haven't shown any proof that would indicate this is any more than your personal opinion. As for proof, please see point #2."

Any study of the political parties will show that what I said is partly true. The same people calling for investigations of this alleged error or that alleged error, were not calling for investigations when their man was in the White House.



"Great Men and Women in the US military including many of my friends are working hard every day in difficult conditions to make this world a better place. Considering their sacrifices, the least you could do is give them the benefit of the doubt before you posts the most unsubstantiated allegations against them accusing them of human rights abuses. Think of what it would be like if someone falsely accused you of horrible crimes like this."

"Thank you for the chest-thumping rhetoric. But you can save it. Whether or not you realize it, many of my friends are also working in the military. My closest childhood friend is guarding the airport in Baghdad. My cousin is serving on a ship in the Gulf. My father served in Vietnam with the US Marine Corps. So don't you dare hurl accusations at me or set yourself up as the only person on this board who has any connection or involvement with the armed forces. It's rude, insulting and presumptuous."

You know, I simply asked that a group to be treated fairly and I'm accused of being RUDE, INSULTING, and PRESUMPTUOUS. What type of behavior is that?

I'm sorry that I mentioned my friends. I'm sorry that I have an opinion that seems to anger you and that your opposed to. But I do not deserve to be accused or labled with any of this. Talk about being PRESUMPTUOUS.

"You should realize that while I hope for and expect the very highest quality of work from US troops, I am also not naive enough to think that mistakes never happen and that abuse is impossible"

Thats good. I've never stated though that mistakes never happen and that abuse is impossible.


"I'm not assuming guilt. I'm saying that "innocent until proven guilty" means that allegations of guilt must be investigated, not shunted aside, and that no one is above the law, regardless of their sacrifices."

No one ever claimed to be above the law, just that they be treated fairly and that does not happen when only one side of the story gets told or is given vastly more coverage regardless of whether it is true or factual in any way. Jenin, last year being the ultimate example of this.

I mentioned my one friend in this thread because he was involved in the actual detention of prisoners in Afghanistan when he was there for 6 months in 2002, and is relevant to the topic being discussed here. I don't see anything wrong with mentioning this and his experience.

I stand by my statement of wanting to see US soldiers be treated fairly. If you want to twist that and other things into something else, thats your problem.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 07-24-2003, 11:53 PM   #26
I serve MacPhisto
 
unforgettableFOXfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 2,053
Local Time: 02:02 AM
Well, I dont have too much to add... but I would like to say a couple things.


In regards to A.I.'s report which made reference to torture and so forth in Iraq, whether it be true or not, and whether it be an allegation made by Amnesty or a party seperated from Amnesty... I find it rather interesting that people want proof of these allegations, when it seems that there wasnt convincing proof to even go to war in the first place - at least, not under the premises originally proposed before the war began (ie, weapons of mass destruction and not the need for aiding the Iraqi people which was postulated after the war had already begun).

Perhaps Amnesty should get some satellite photos and circle a bunch of people, placing a text box near it which says 'torture and beating of Iraqi's by US troops', because thatd be just about as accurate as a picture of some random building and calling it a missle silo.

It seems odd to ask for tangible proof when someone opposes you, ask for benefit of the doubt, when you are incapable of giving it to others - especially when talking about impeding the wheels of justice, treating people justly, demanding that people be fair in their criticisms. It would seem to me that there are "terrorists", people subject to Patriot Act laws, who are being held without proof, without question, who are by no standard of measure being treated justly... As far as I understood, justice was about equality and fairness of treatment, is it not hypocritcal and contrary to the entire point of this so-called justice to demand it for yourself but to be completely incapable of giving it to anyone else?

All I know for certain is that I trust Amnesty International more than I trust anything I see in the media, coming straight out of the presidents back pocket. There are very few parties who can project even the least unbiased 3rd party information, and I feel AI is one of them, but, only time will tell who is right and who is not...
__________________
unforgettableFOXfire is offline  
Old 07-25-2003, 12:23 AM   #27
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 02:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
I stand by everything I said here and in no place was it directed at you personally.
How can you possibly say this?

[Q]kobayashi and sulawesigirl4, [/Q]

You address them directly....


[Q]If you know these things have happened, prove it.[/Q]

You immediately challenge them.


[Q]Great Men and Women in the US military including many of my friends are working hard every day in difficult conditions to make this world a better place. Considering their sacrifices, the least you could do is give them the benefit of the doubt before you posts the most unsubstantiated allegations against them accusing them of human rights abuses. Think of what it would be like if someone falsely accused you of horrible crimes like this.[/Q]


You basically imply that she is being somehow disloyal to people who serve in the United States service. You bring your friends into it, as if she were accusing your friends of the crime. You make imply that she does not understand the sacrafices of people in the service when she and many others here do understand. You tell her she should not be posting such things. You say it is unsubstantiated.

Klaus posted an article. I have asked you to post a link to substantiate your opinions so that I and others could better understand your postion on things, but to no avail. What is up? Why should he have to substantiate anything when I and others ask for it from you throughout this board, and get nothing.

Is it not possible to believe that there may be cases of wrong doings and be supportive of the troops? Asking that our troops behave above and beyond what is expected towards another human being is somehow not the right thing to do?

I am sorry, but your comments were personal and directed at her. For you to say otherwise is just not true. Yes the "comments" were rude, insulting and presumptuous.


To the mods....I would have rather PM'd or emailed STING with these comments, however his account does not allow me to do so.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-25-2003, 12:34 AM   #28
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 01:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ~unforgettableFOXfire~
Well, I dont have too much to add... but I would like to say a couple things.


In regards to A.I.'s report which made reference to torture and so forth in Iraq, whether it be true or not, and whether it be an allegation made by Amnesty or a party seperated from Amnesty... I find it rather interesting that people want proof of these allegations, when it seems that there wasnt convincing proof to even go to war in the first place - at least, not under the premises originally proposed before the war began (ie, weapons of mass destruction and not the need for aiding the Iraqi people which was postulated after the war had already begun).

Perhaps Amnesty should get some satellite photos and circle a bunch of people, placing a text box near it which says 'torture and beating of Iraqi's by US troops', because thatd be just about as accurate as a picture of some random building and calling it a missle silo.

It seems odd to ask for tangible proof when someone opposes you, ask for benefit of the doubt, when you are incapable of giving it to others - especially when talking about impeding the wheels of justice, treating people justly, demanding that people be fair in their criticisms. It would seem to me that there are "terrorists", people subject to Patriot Act laws, who are being held without proof, without question, who are by no standard of measure being treated justly... As far as I understood, justice was about equality and fairness of treatment, is it not hypocritcal and contrary to the entire point of this so-called justice to demand it for yourself but to be completely incapable of giving it to anyone else?

All I know for certain is that I trust Amnesty International more than I trust anything I see in the media, coming straight out of the presidents back pocket. There are very few parties who can project even the least unbiased 3rd party information, and I feel AI is one of them, but, only time will tell who is right and who is not...
Couldn't have said it better. Right on.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 07-25-2003, 12:39 AM   #29
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 02:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ~unforgettableFOXfire~
Perhaps Amnesty should get some satellite photos and circle a bunch of people, placing a text box near it which says 'torture and beating of Iraqi's by US troops', because thatd be just about as accurate as a picture of some random building and calling it a missle silo.
While I do not completel agree with your post....I will say this....this part made me smile.

Thanks.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 07-25-2003, 02:13 AM   #30
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 07:02 AM
Dreadsox,


"You basically imply that she is being somehow disloyal to people who serve in the United States service."

No, it is you that have implied that. I was only asking that US soldiers be given the benefit of the doubt before people jump to conclusions with various things.

"You bring your friends into it, as if she were accusing your friends of the crime."

Yes, I mentioned my friends. I never said she was accusing my friends of a crime.

"You make imply that she does not understand the sacrafices of people in the service when she and many others here do understand. You tell her she should not be posting such things. You say it is unsubstantiated."

No, I said that soldiers should be given the benefit of the doubt before such things are posted. I never said such things could not be posted. Yes, many of the allegations of abuse are unsubstantiated.

"Klaus posted an article. I have asked you to post a link to substantiate your opinions so that I and others could better understand your postion on things, but to no avail. What is up? Why should he have to substantiate anything when I and others ask for it from you throughout this board, and get nothing."

I didn't ask Klaus to substantiate anything, only to remember that the allegations made in the Amnesty Report were unsubstantiated. This is a discussion board. If people see an article they like and post it, fine. If one simply comes to post their own views rather than someone elses, thats ok to.

"Is it not possible to believe that there may be cases of wrong doings and be supportive of the troops?"

Of course its possible, I never stated that it was not.

"Asking that our troops behave above and beyond what is expected towards another human being is somehow not the right thing to do?"

Asking that our soldiers be treated fairly is somehow not the right thing to do?

"I am sorry, but your comments were personal and directed at her. For you to say otherwise is just not true. Yes the "comments" were rude, insulting and presumptuous."

Yes, simply asking that US soldiers be treated fairly, be given the benefit of the doubt is "rude", "insulting", "presumptuous".


"To the mods....I would have rather PM'd or emailed STING with these comments, however his account does not allow me to do so."

Thats interesting since a posts of yours that came on the heels of mind did not mention any of the following.

Another interesting thing is the way that kobayashi and sulawesigirl4 respond to my posts.

Kobayashi in fact says that he respects what I posted. Sulawesigirl4 implies something else that was not meant by what I posted.

I can and should indeed be careful about what I posts to insure that it is not mis-interpreted. But instead of insisting that I indeed meant this or that in a personal way, why not ask me first what I meant?
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com