UN Source: US has tortured at Guantanamo, Iraq, and Afghanistan

[Irvine511]

US acknowledges torture at Guantanamo and Iraq, Afghanistan: UN source 2 hours, 52 minutes ago



Washington has for the first time acknowledged to the United Nations that prisoners have been tortured at US detention centres in Guantanamo Bay, as well as Afghanistan and Iraq, a UN source said.

The acknowledgement was made in a report submitted to the UN Committee against Torture, said a member of the ten-person panel, speaking on on condition of anonymity.

"They are no longer trying to duck this, and have respected their obligation to inform the UN," the Committee member told AFP.

"They they will have to explain themselves (to the Committee). Nothing should be kept in the dark."

UN sources said it was the first time the world body has received such a frank statement on torture from US authorities.

The Committee, which monitors respect for the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, is gathering information from the US ahead of hearings in May 2006.

Signatories of the convention are expected to submit to scrutiny of their implementation of the 1984 convention and to provide information to the Committee.

The document from Washington will not be formally made public until the hearings.

"They haven't avoided anything in their answers, whether concerning prisoners in Iraq, in Afghanistan or Guantanamo, and other accusations of mistreatment and of torture," the Committee member said.

"They said it was a question of isolated cases, that there was nothing systematic and that the guilty were in the process of being punished."

The US report said that those involved were low-ranking members of the military and that their acts were not approved by their superiors, the member added.

The US has faced criticism from UN human rights experts and international groups for mistreatment of detainees -- some of whom died in custody -- in Afghanistan and Iraq, particularly during last year's prisoner abuse scandal surrounding the Abu Ghraib facility there.

Scores of US military personnel have been investigated, and several tried and convicted, for abuse of people detained during the US-led campaign against Islamic terrorist groups.

At the Guantanamo Bay naval base, a US toehold in Cuba where around 520 suspects of some 40 nationalities are held, allegations of torture have combined with other claims of human rights breaches.

The US has faced widespread criticism for keeping the Guantanamo detainees in a "legal black hole," notably for its refusal to grant them prisoner of war status and allegedly sluggish moves to charge or try them.

Washington's report to the Committee reaffirms the US position that the Guantanamo detainees are classed as "enemy combatants," and therefore do not benefit from the POW status set out in the Geneva Conventions, the Committee member said.

Four UN human rights experts on Thursday slammed the United States for stalling on a request to allow visits to terrorism suspects held at the Guantanamo Bay naval base, and said they planned to carry out an indirect probe of conditions there.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/2005062...DswOR2tOrgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-

 

[financeguy]

Nothing systematic, isolated cases, low ranking personnel, Bush bashing, support our troops or shut up, etc, etc.

 

[unosdostres14]

Remember the good ole days of the Clinton admin, when this kind of thing didn't happen?




Really.....I'm not joking. Those seriously were so much better days.

 

[nbcrusader]

Did they specifically site the Christina Aguilera music?

 

[80sU2isBest]

Remember the good ole days of the Clinton admin, when this kind of thing didn't happen?




Really.....I'm not joking. Those seriously were so much better days.

Oh I sure do. As I posted in another thread, I remember Clinton's feds at Ruby Ridge, shooting and killing a 13 year old in the back as he fled, and then killing an unarmed woman.

I also remember the feds lying about not being able to arrest David Koresh in Waco, so that they'd have an excuse to stage an all-out frontal assault on a compound full of innocent men, women and children, who had been not been convicted of or charged with any crime. Then I remember them using psychological torture on those people, who had not been convicted of or even charged with any crime, in an effort to get them to give up.

Then, I remember the illegal stormtrooping and taking at gunpoint of a frightened little boy named Elian Gonzales.

Oh, those were the "good old days", when abuse of power didn't happen.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Remember the good ole days of the Clinton admin, when this kind of thing didn't happen?




Really.....I'm not joking. Those seriously were so much better days.

ahhh yes... the good ole days when we let islamic fundamentalists commit acts of terroism against our assets world wide and responded with a law suit... mmmmmm yea... how i miss those days.

 

[unosdostres14]

Oh I sure do. As I posted in another thread, I remember Clinton's feds at Ruby Ridge, shooting and killing a 13 year old in the back as he fled, and then killing an unarmed woman.

I also remember the feds lying about not being able to arrest David Koresh in Waco, so that they'd have an excuse to stage an all-out frontal assault on a compound full of innocent men, women and children, who had been not been convicted of or charged with any crime. Then I remember them using psychological torture on those people, who had not been convicted of or even charged with any crime, in an effort to get them to give up.

Then, I remember the illegal stormtrooping and taking at gunpoint of a frightened little boy named Elian Gonzales.

Oh, those were the "good old days", when abuse of power didn't happen.

Yeah, this post isn't ridiculously biased.

 

[Irvine511]

i have an idea. let's talk about the article.

we're seeing again the notion that the administration did nothing to encourage or allow such practices.

garbage.

why did the CIA demand memos providing legal cover for their violation of US law?

why did W create a loop-hole for "military necessity"?

we'll have to wait for the confiramtion of the veracity of this UN source, but, clearly, the evidence for violations of U.S. law is mounting.

and it makes our troops less safe.

that's what i dont' understand about people who want to shrug at the idea of torture as a kind of boys-will-be-boys sideshow. this makes our captured troops much more likely to be tortured in Afghanistan and Iraq. eye for an eye.

 

[sulawesigirl4]

The USA used to have a very high reputation for human rights. Sadly, in my day-to-day contact with people in the outside world, I would have to say that this is no longer the general concensus. It is sickening that torture is being committed by and for America (yes, shipping suspects to other countries where more lax justice systems overlook police brutality is still on our heads). If we want to have any sort of credibility when we demand freedom, democracy and human rights in the wider world, we had best look to our own backyard first.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Yeah, this post isn't ridiculously biased.

Biased? It all happened, did it not?

I'd say you were the biased one, saying that the days in whcih Ruby Ridge and Waco happened were "good old days".

 

[Irvine511]

Biased? It all happened, did it not?

I'd say you were the biased one, saying that the days in whcih Ruby Ridge and Waco happened were "good old days".

this has nothing to do with this thread. you have your own thread where you've been talking about Waco and Ruby Ridge.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Someone said that this kind of stuff didn't happen during Clinton's admin. He brought up clinton, not me.

 

[Irvine511]

Someone said that this kind of stuff didn't happen during Clinton's admin. He brought up clinton, not me.

Clinton might be applicable, i don't see how Ruby Ridge and Waco are at all appropriate when we're talking about US troops torturing detainees.

 

[Dreadsox]

Just curious....does everyone really believe that this has not happened at any other time?

 

[randhail]

I'm sure this never ever happened during the Cold War

 

[A_Wanderer]

ahhh yes... the good ole days when we let islamic fundamentalists commit acts of terroism against our assets world wide and responded with a law suit... mmmmmm yea... how i miss those days.

Hey don't be a warmonger; if you leave them alone they will leave you alone, don't you know anything about these misunderstood people.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Just curious....does everyone really believe that this has not happened at any other time?

No in WW2 spies and those captured out of uniform were just tried and executed.

 

[financeguy]

ahhh yes... the good ole days when we let islamic fundamentalists commit acts of terroism against our assets world wide and responded with a law suit... mmmmmm yea... how i miss those days.

What a load of crap you talk.

It was under Bush that terrorism was ignored, why do you think that Sep 11 happened?

 

[financeguy]

Hey don't be a warmonger; if you leave them alone they will leave you alone, don't you know anything about these misunderstood people.

Another disgusting slur on liberals. People like you are either useful idiots for the neo-cons, or you're plain stupid, or else you're on the payroll.

It's as simple as that.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Another disgusting slur on liberals. People like you are either useful idiots for the neo-cons, or you're plain stupid, or else you're on the payroll.

It's as simple as that.

Yes because when somebody says it mockingly it is a disgusting slur but when it is said seriously it is lauded as wise counsel (such as cries to understand the "root causes" of an Islamists anger, or the recognition of cultural differences as a form of justification for subjegation of women, execution of homosexuals and all out extermination of religious minorities). The entire cultural left of Chomsky, Sontag, Vidal, and their fellow travellers who have hijacked the term liberal are the ones who deserve the credit for making what I said a disgusting slur on liberals.

I would have considered myself liberal, pro-drugs, pro-choice, in favour of full and equal gay rights extending to marriage, IVF and adoption, free markets, democratic government, universal suffrage, individual rights, in favour of liberty for all people regardless of race or religion as a fundamental human right. But that would sooner make me a neoconservative and a libertarian than a liberal. It would seem that Old Whig thought has no place in modern liberal dogma.

I would much rather be a neoconservative who advocates a campaign that would see dictators deposed, free democratic movements and governments actively supported and religious zealotry diminished as a result than be associated with the sanctimonious NIMN crowd who blame America first and then turn around to defend the status quo.

What a load of crap you talk.

It was under Bush that terrorism was ignored, why do you think that Sep 11 happened?

Because a bunch of Islamic Zealots believed that they had defeated the Soviet Union by the will of their God in Afghanistan and that they could defeat the America as well. That by doing this Islam would dominate the world under a global ummah and the Caliphate would be reborn. They decided to use the tools of the globalised world against the US and kill as many people as they could with whatever means they could.

They attacked incrimentally plotting larger and larger plans, consolidating their resources. They were not dealt with properly in the 1990's and the problem grew, there were some sucesses like the foiling of the Bojinka plot but not enough. The plans for a great attack came to fruition on September 11 and it finally woke most people up to the threat posed by these groups. Although there are people who seem content to get everybody to go back to sleep and insist that there is no real threat, or that it has been manipulated and blown out of all proportion by the Bush administration, or that it is the fault of America and it is caused by America supressing Muslims worldwide and allowing poverty to exist.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

What a load of crap you talk.

It was under Bush that terrorism was ignored, why do you think that Sep 11 happened?

ahh... so apparently the 1993 world trade center bombing, the khobar towers, the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the USS cole all didn't happen.

 

[cardosino]

What a load of crap you talk.

It was under Bush that terrorism was ignored, why do you think that Sep 11 happened?

For a bazillion reasons not related to torture or George Bush.

 

[cardosino]

Yes because when somebody says it mockingly it is a disgusting slur but when it is said seriously it is lauded as wise counsel (such as cries to understand the "root causes" of an Islamists anger, or the recognition of cultural differences as a form of justification for subjegation of women, execution of homosexuals and all out extermination of religious minorities). The entire cultural left of Chomsky, Sontag, Vidal, and their fellow travellers who have hijacked the term liberal are the ones who deserve the credit for making what I said a disgusting slur on liberals.

I would have considered myself liberal, pro-drugs, pro-choice, in favour of full and equal gay rights extending to marriage, IVF and adoption, free markets, democratic government, universal suffrage, individual rights, in favour of liberty for all people regardless of race or religion as a fundamental human right. But that would sooner make me a neoconservative and a libertarian than a liberal. It would seem that Old Whig thought has no place in modern liberal dogma.

I would much rather be a neoconservative who advocates a campaign that would see dictators deposed, free democratic movements and governments actively supported and religious zealotry diminished as a result than be associated with the sanctimonious NIMN crowd who blame America first and then turn around to defend the status quo.
Because a bunch of Islamic Zealots believed that they had defeated the Soviet Union by the will of their God in Afghanistan and that they could defeat the America as well. That by doing this Islam would dominate the world under a global ummah and the Caliphate would be reborn. They decided to use the tools of the globalised world against the US and kill as many people as they could with whatever means they could.

They attacked incrimentally plotting larger and larger plans, consolidating their resources. They were not dealt with properly in the 1990's and the problem grew, there were some sucesses like the foiling of the Bojinka plot but not enough. The plans for a great attack came to fruition on September 11 and it finally woke most people up to the threat posed by these groups. Although there are people who seem content to get everybody to go back to sleep and insist that there is no real threat, or that it has been manipulated and blown out of all proportion by the Bush administration, or that it is the fault of America and it is caused by America supressing Muslims worldwide and allowing poverty to exist.

A lot of good stuff you write, but no discussion of 9/11 is complete without mentioning of the US's preferential treatment and support of Israel.

 

[deep]

I would much rather be a neoconservative who advocates a campaign that would

see dictators deposed,


free democratic movements and governments actively supported

and religious zealotry diminished

as a result than be associated with the sanctimonious NIMN crowd who blame America first and then turn around to defend the status quo.

This is a load of CRAP!

uninformed or delisional?

 

[Diemen]

free democratic movements and governments actively supported and religious zealotry diminished as a result

You mean, free democratic movements and governments actively supported*

*As long as they play by our rules.

And do you honestly believe that religious zealotry has diminished as a result of our actions? If anything it has increased, both in the US and abroad.

 

[Dreadsox]

What a load of crap you talk.

It was under Bush that terrorism was ignored, why do you think that Sep 11 happened?

Ummm...then you really did miss the Clinton years......

 

[A_Wanderer]

This is a load of CRAP!

uninformed or delisional?

Always playing the man and not the ball. I am informed, but I just have different ideas than you.

 

[Earnie Shavers]

FUCK we are all great at straying from the point.

Forget all this other useless whatever about Clinton/Bush/911 blah blah blah and answer me these questions...

a) You simply can not deny that the US is using, at the very least, shady tactics with it's detainees. The simple fact that they fly them to 'unknown locations' in 3rd party countries and that this prison is based in Cuba is an admission of that fact. If there were no reason to fear either US or international law, it wouldn't be done that way. So, you either agree with it or disagree with it. Forget extremities for now (hardcore abuses commited by, for the sake of this argument, isolated idiots), and just admit that the system is designed to let things happen without anyone seeing, and there's a reason why. You may agree that this is a distasteful necessity, or you may support it and not find it distasteful at all, or you may disagree with the whole notion. To deny that it happens is just dumb. The only argument is in where you stand, and how far you believe it should go.

b) Imagine that a loony group is created in the US of far right guys with very extreme views or are sure that this is a Christian vs Muslim thing and that it's an epic crusade over good and evil blah blah and they have taken it all too far. They fly to Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country in the world, and bomb a mosque, believing they are doing what is right as part of this epic struggle. These are, aside from what goes on inside their heads, average middle aged white guys who you could easily know in any of your cities or towns in the US. A man is detained by Indonesian authorities.The US Govt repeatedly ask for evidence from the Indonesian Govt proving that the guy they have is 100% linked to the bombing, which Indonesia refuse to supply. His family back home in the States are all over the media claiming he is innocent and was there for some other reason, business or whatever. Indonesia have clear laws on how he should be interrogated, held, charged, tried etc. So they fly him to Iran where they can hold him for as long as they want, and do whatever they want to him to find out about the other right wing loonys from the US who intend to bomb mosques in Jakarta. He most likely is tortured while there, but it is believed to be a necessary for the protection of the Indonesian people. If there were a middle aged white guy from the suburbs of Denver who had been arrested over a suspision that he was involved in a mosque bombing in Indonesia flown to Iran and tortured at the behest of an Indonesian Govt who refuse to hand over any evidence of his guilt to the US Govt, do you (a) agree with Indonesia that this is simply what they have to do to protect their people, ugly, but necessary (b) think that the media coverage of this in the US (including whether the guy is guilty or not guilty) would whip up a firestorm of hate towards Indonesia?