M
- Status
B
BillP
Guest
Letâs deal with them as they deserve. After we figure out beyond a reasonable doubt, who they are.
First off, lets avoid the personal attacks shall we? And no, I am not stupid. If you look at the link I posted upstream (defenselink.mil/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=10582) to the US Department of Defense, youâll see that the MAJORITY of those who have ever been incarcerated in Gitmo have been released, so no, its by no means âthe majorityâ, unless of course you think the DOD is âstupidâ as well.
Well, thats too bad. You should care about them. you should care about them for two reasons, first they are children of God and have to be treated with the dignity accorded Human beings. And the ends donât justify the means, now where did I hear that? Oh, yeah! The Church!
The second reason you should care is that when we persecute, imprison, torture and ultimately kill innocent people, we play into the hands of the terrorists who are out there telling their co-religionists âSee? The Amercians are trying to exterminate all Muslims!â
E
Ender
Guest
This is nonsense. They werenât released because they were tried and found innocent, they were released because it was determined that they posed little current threat and were of no further intelligence value - as your own source explained.
"The ARB is a review process which provides an opportunity for the detainee to appear before and present information to a three-member board of military officers.* The outcome, which is based primarily on current threat assessment and intelligence value of each detainee**, can be to release, to transfer to the control of another country, or to continue to detain the detainee at Guantanamo for another year."
*Ender
S
SoCalRC
Guest
A significant number of detainees have been waiting five years for review. That is, in many cases, we do not yet have a determination.
The Pentagon itself estimates that at least 30% of the detainees may be innocent of any terrorist activity, a consequence of the original detention mechanisms used. The US paid bounties and militia factions used them as an opporunity to both make money and elliminate territorial enemies.
This should be of no surprise, there have been significant numbers of releases, but very few charges, even in a military legal system that even participating prosecutors have questioned as unfair.
Perhaps that is why our prayers for unity and peace are not answered from Mass. The Church teaches that a nation that does not respect the inalienable rights of the human person is not valid in the eyes of God.
E
Ender
Guest
That seems unlikely based on the information in the link BillP provided which stated that 2006 saw the completion of the second annual review. Of the 385 detainees at Gitmo as of 3/07, 328 specific recommendations had been made based on that review. The link was unclear as to whether the other 57 detainees had not been interviewed or that final decisions on them had not yet been made. The latter seems more likely.
Cite a source for this claim.
If our nation is invalid in the eyes of God it is because of the 1.3M abortions performed each year, not the 385 terrorists temporarily imprisoned in Guantanamo.
Ender
S
SoCalRC
Guest
Iâm sorry, I am a Roman Catholic, not a member of the Church of Ender.
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html
This is an ecumenical teaching being cited, hence:
Your desire to elevate fetal life to a special status above all others is not compatible with Catholic doctrine. Nor is your consistant rejection of the Magesterium and repeated assertions that your moral authority and doctrinal interpretations carry more weight than the Popeâs.
I am sorry that the concept of devout Catholicism is seemingly repugnant to you. But nothing you can say is going to make me abridge or compromise on the Churchâs teaching regarding the fundemental and inalienable right to life.
If you cannot see detainees each as a unique creations of God, infinitately loved by Him, then your beliefs about abortion may overlap the Churchâs, but they are based on a different ideology.
Y
Yerusalyim
Guest
First, torture is not taking place at GITMO, and unless you know something I donât, waterboarding, which was practiced in a VERY LIMITED fashion, has not been shown to be torture in spite of what the Dems yell.
The detainees at GITMO are treated better than most Soldiers in military prisons, and eat and live better than most of their guards.
If people would get out of the way these guys would get the MILITARY TRIBUNAL (not a trial in a civil court). We started with over 600âŠweâre down to less than 400, the process is working.
Part of the problem with GITMO is many of the governments of the detainees will not accept their citizens back (because they know they are bad actors?)
The detainees at GITMO are treated better than most Soldiers in military prisons, and eat and live better than most of their guards.
If people would get out of the way these guys would get the MILITARY TRIBUNAL (not a trial in a civil court). We started with over 600âŠweâre down to less than 400, the process is working.
Part of the problem with GITMO is many of the governments of the detainees will not accept their citizens back (because they know they are bad actors?)
S
strngrnrth
Guest
Iâm one of those people who follow a few issues at a time and when I get around to learning about one sometimes the rest of the newswatchers know all the terms and I donât. I somehow missed the definition of waterboarding. In fact, the first several times I heard of it I thought the reference was to the very popular activity around here of riverboarding, a sport, and I lost the meaning of the discussion completely. Can anyone take pity and catch me up?
C
ChrisWRIT
Guest
Water-boarding has been considered torture by all of Christianity for at least 500 years. (Since the Inquisition, when an early form of it comprised one of the three primary forms of torture that was allowed to be used at the time.)
The Church has come to regret the excesses of the Inquisition, including the use of even âapprovedâ methods of torture, and the Catechism opposes torture, meaning anything which uses physical or moral violence.
Paragraphs 2297-2298 point out that torture is one of seven practices that are contrary to respect for the bodily integrity of the human person.
âTorture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity.â
As to the OPâs question of âwhy is there such fanatical demand that Gitmo stays open in the conservative branch?â
I suspect it is because Gitmo is a POW camp, in fact, if not in name. However, that isnât something that can be admitted, since we arenât at âwarâ (except in the âwar of the soundbiteâ).
Chris
D
Dtmccameron
Guest
Further proof, if any was needed, that morality is a nicety of peace and security. If however, the bubble of security breaks, we can abandon such wastes of effort, and focus instead on whatâs really important, survival.
Animals. Where are your souls? WHERE IS THE SPARK OF THE DIVINE? Where is your god of âloveâ when fear shows up, hmm? Oh my, your loving god canât save you from fanatics and their weapons! Goodness!
Who is the master here? You people or your god? Who orders things, and sets them in motion, and holds the entirety of existance in his palm?!?! Where is your faith in the Almighty? And where is your loyalty?
I scarcely care what a person has done, they are still human beings, created in Godâs image, whom He still loves! Does one crime deserve another? Maim his children at your own peril!
The way to Final Victory is not through hate, or pain, or war, the way of the Enemy!; but of love and peace! So many crushed souls, so many broken hearts, so many twisted minds! Crying out for healing, the whole of humanity! Bring the healing! That is our road, our path, our way! By it we will come to Final Victory!
M
Mirdath
Guest
The victim is restrained, laid head tilted slightly downwards, and water is poured in through the nose and mouth until it fills the throat. Water does not enter the lungs due to the position of the body, but it renders breathing impossible and simulates drowning.
I think I read somewhere that people who have been trained to resist such techniques and knew what to expect (and knew that it was a test) cracked in around fourteen seconds.
R
rpp
Guest
My understanding of it is a little different. The victim is restrained laying down on his back. A cloth is placed over the face and water is poured onto the cloth, this greatly restricts breathing and immediately induces the sense of drowning.
I did a little research and found this Wikipedia article. The interesting thind is that there are apparently conflicts at Wikipedia so they have locked the waterboarding page from edits. (See here.)
It appears that this has evolved over time. Mirdath, your description seems to describe some of the older methods while the one I had first heard appears to have originated with the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.
This method seems much less severe than the one Mirdath described. Still, it would be most unpleasant.
In a related story, The CIA admits to using waterboarding on three prisoners. cnn.com/2008/US/02/05/terror.threat/index.html
S
strngrnrth
Guest
Either way. When are governments going to admit that torture isnât a reliable way of getting the truth? 
R
rpp
Guest
When people stop confessing under torture, I suppose.Either way. When are governments going to admit that torture isnât a reliable way of getting the truth?
Torture is wrong. It is evil. But, most sadly, one cannot deny its effectiveness.
S
SoCalRC
Guest
Actually, we have no evidence to suggest that it is effective at all. Most of the major âbreak throughsâ attributed to aggressive interogation in the war-on-terror have either since been recanted, or proven to be false (case in point, the non-existant âmobile biological labsâ the president told the nation about before we invaded Iraq).
Thatâs the problem with torture. People will tell you what they think you want to hear to make it stop.
T
tomarin
Guest
eh? it may be effective at extracting confessions, but one cannot be sure they are truthful because one will say anything to make the pain stop. thatâs what iâve read from intelligence agents, anyway.
there must be some reason why confessions extracted under duress are not admissible in court.
M
Meathead
Guest
Ill try to remember that when they are dragging our soldiers burning carcasses through the streets.
I
IvanKaramozov
Guest
R
rpp
Guest
What is the source of this photo?
- Status