« Q: does alcohol abuse destroy ... | Main | Battlestar Galactica »
January 14, 2005
HRW - assbackwards
... and we should be surprised?
America's moral authority in the war on terror has been undermined by the abuse of prisoners in Iraq and the secretive detention and coercive techniques used against prisoners elsewhere, a human rights group said on Thursday. According to BBC News, Ken Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, stated that the U.S. must renounce the policies that led to the Abu Ghraib scandal or it won't be able to "re-establish what had been a strong norm against torture or redeem its credibility as a proponent of human rights." Administration officials insist they do not condone the torture or abuse of prisoners, but have defended the practice of holding and aggressively interrogating prisoners suspected of terrorist ties.
Abu Ghraib was already under investigation when the "mainstream" media pretended they were breaking a story "no one" knew about. People have been or are being tried, in full compliance with the USMCJ (I guess for HRW and other :::ahem::: human rights organizations, everyone is entitled to "rights" except for Americans, especially members of the military.) US response to Abu Ghraib actually strengthens the US moral authority.
Then Roth's HRW goes on with this mendacity
In its annual report, Human Rights Watch says that when a country as dominant as the US openly defies the law, it invites others to do the same.
What f**king LAW are you babbling about?? It ain't the Geneva Conventions, because as I read it, there's nothing in the Conventions that cover Al Qaeda. Infact, the Conventions are nothing more than incentive to stop terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hizbolleh, etc, by NOT affording them any protection.
Roth, you human sack of sh*t, you are attacking and condemning a government and a people who actually follow moral concepts, even as they occassionally fail (and then correct those failures) while saying little about the terrorists who sneer and blatantly reject any morality under Geneva or "international law" [**cough**cough**]. Maybe you ought to consider that you are nothing more than a useful infidel for the Islamofascists and they'd be just as happy to behead you as they did Danny Pearl or Nick Berg. Maybe at the moment the knife was at your neck you just might realize it is NOT always the fault of America.
Please, go assert your version of "human rights" among the Islamofascists ...say Iran? ... and see how long your head stays attached to your shoulders.
feh.
Posted by Darleen at January 14, 2005 06:49 AM
Comments
- The passage "when a country as dominant as the US" tells you all you need to know concerning just why America is under constant attack by the socialist based orgs and countries, the rats nest of pravaracating theiving UN, and the asshat libtards right here at home....We are the lead dog, but with a difference; We lead and enable and support and save but we don't enforce, subjegate, demand, imprison, or punish countries and foreigners who want to speak out against us or demonstrate, or even lie about us which is almost always the case when theres a liberal agenda at work. All of the other non-democratic countries, including the Marxist/Communist/Socialist groups here in the Us who "hide" in the Democratic party and pretend to care about the American system and values think we're stupid for not using our power in a dictitorial way which frustrates them highly because it reduces them to having to distort and lie to keep up the drumbeat of what a monster we are. This is the same game the European countries have played on each other for centuries. Problem is that at least for now America is the only bogeyman available....
Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at January 14, 2005 12:05 PM
I just love your perspective on things! I am sick of the Abu booboo thing. The only ones interested in this story and driving it this long are KOOKS! Sorry I haven't stopped buy in a while- forgive me! It has truly been MY loss!
Posted by: Sherri aka eeevil conservative at January 14, 2005 02:25 PM
In 1966 when I was in the service, we were taught to handle all prisoners firmly and fairly. To conduct ourselves in a manner that would foster respect. I don't know what they are teaching soldiers in the military now, but the soldiers at Abu Graib knew their superiors would not have approved of their behavior. They took to excess what was suggested as softening up the suspects prior to interrogation. I am glad they were caught. I read an article by an Iraqi who was intrigued to actually see justice at work. The trial may help to teach the benefits of having a democratic society. Something denied them during the reign of terror by mad man Saddam.
Of course the fanatical groups used the incident as a cause to degrade the US soldiers, at the same time ignoring that they had desecrated the bodies of dead Americans and drug them through the streets like trophies. The hateful bastards even killed a woman, who had spent the last ten years doing all she could to improve the lives of the Iraqi people. She was the wife of an Iraqi, but in spite of all that they killed her because she was born in England. They chopped off the "hand" that was attempting to feed them. I don't think the average American can comprehend that sort of logic.
Posted by: Morgan at January 25, 2005 12:27 AM
I was wondering if the Geneva conventions rules applied in this instance because I don't think war had been officially declared as it had in WWII.
The following is excerpts from the Geneva convention rules.
Article 3
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) Taking of hostages;
(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;
Article 4
A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:
3.1.C clearly forbids humiliating and degrading treatment
4.A.1. defines even volunteer militia or organized resistance as being covered by the rules of the convention.
So, using that literally, it seems the Al Qaeda are covered.
Now, I don't consider it inhumane to sedate those prisoners with sleeping gas and inject them with truth serum to learn who they are and what they know. It would be much faster than the methods currently being used and I suspect the results would be much more accurate. I suppose someone would protest that as violating the prisoners right to lie or some lame thing like that. But we need to get practical about how to deal with these fanatics.
Posted by: Morgan at January 25, 2005 12:52 AM