Senator Durbin, I respectfully submit,


PDA






Onmilo
June 22, 2005, 12:25 PM
Your apology is not enough.

The apathy of the voters of Illinois to elect someone of your caliber to be our representative in Washington D.C. is in itself reprehensible and shameful.

The fact that you made a statement condemning our volunteer Servicemen with no basis in the fact of your accusation is in and of itself an act of Treason Sir.
The fact that one week after making this statement you had the audacity to go before a Congressional Board composed of your peers and argue that Military bases in Illinois should not be closed while demanding the outright closure of the Guantanimo Bay Security Facility, which, in your statement, you made it sound as if you wished to close the whole base, shows just how two faced you can be Sir.

The fact that as a postscript to your apology, a fellow Illinois elected Senator, a Junior Senator, made a condescending follow up is again sickening.
If that is the best you can come up with, Sir, then it is time for you, and all those elected officials who think and feel as you do, to step down.

We are in a war, Sir.
The people whom we are fighting against wish to see everything this Country represents crushed, destroyed and smeared from the records of History.
Those people, our enemy, KILL our citizens, KILL our soldiers, and KILL our allies.
Mr. Durbin, I have never seen a video that has originated from Guantanimo Bay showing American Service Personnel sawing the head off any captive being held there.
Neither have you and you won't.
Not because clandestine operations will cover the whole thing up.
Because it just won't happen, Sir.
I cannot say the same for our enemies.

As a matter of fact, our Government, the one we the People of Illinois elected you to act with as our representatve,
Our Government has seen fit to admit to the world that we, as a people, are not perfect and acts that are reprehensible to other citizens of this planet can and will be performed by citizens of our great Country.
Acts that, most assuredly, are not condoned by the general citizenry.

That is the Beauty and the Curse of a free people, Sir.
A Beauty and Curse that you seem to have forgotten.

We are not forced to tow the line in lockstep with what our Elected Officals may wish us to do, be it good or evil, right or wrong.
We, as a People, have the freedom to make that choice.

We, those same People, have a Government that is big enough to stand up and admit to the world that wrongs have been commited.
Wrongs that are not sanctioned by our government nor by the will of the People as a whole.
Wrongs may be commited in the future, but make no mistake, those wrongs will not be willingly allowed by our Government, nor our People, to approach the level of wrongs perpetrated by our current enemy.
This I firmly believe, Sir.

For you to make a statement comparing our actions at the Guantanimo Bay Detention Center to the policies and actions of former repressive Governments and despots shows just how far gone is your grasp of reality Sir.

The only apology I can accept from you, Sir, is your immediate resignation from Elected Office.

If you enjoyed reading about "Senator Durbin, I respectfully submit," here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
RealGun
June 22, 2005, 01:03 PM
I wouldn't insult the military, but I don't think much of PC policing or taking offense where there is none likely intended. I would say that Durbin should be thoughtful, even discreet, but not lose the ability to speak frankly. Senate decorum and pure BS are hard to distinguish. If the Dems are inquiring about Gitmo, I don't think the response should in effect be "bite me".

Bobarino
June 22, 2005, 01:45 PM
that wasn't an apology. an apology is "i am sorry for my actions". Durbin's "apology" was, "i'm sorry you were offended". that was a politics apology. not a heartfelt one. he's not one iota sorry.

Bobby

MechAg94
June 22, 2005, 02:01 PM
The proper response should be: Vote for the other guy!

Rebar
June 22, 2005, 04:33 PM
Sen. Durbin - or a staffer acting on his behalf - prepared the remarks in question. Sen. Durbin took to the floor of the United States Senate, one of the cornerstones of our Republic, and accused our government and our military officers of engaging in practices that not only did not happen but also were those of the gulag and the death camp. He did so with malice aforethought. His remarks were not misinterpreted nor were they a mistake - he meant to say what he said because they were, and are, what he thinks and believes will help his party out in 2006 and damage President Bush in the short run politically. That Senators allow this craven act to stand is nearly as horrifying as the remarks themselves.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4588

Couldn't say it better myself.

ceetee
June 22, 2005, 09:40 PM
Except for the fact that the practices alluded to did indeed happen, and were witnessed by officials from Amnesty International, the International Red Cross and the FBI...

If you missed it, or if you don't feel like actually reading the text of the speech, the practices alluded to involved using cuffs and shackles to restrain a naked person in the fetal position for days, until he had urinated and defecated on himself. While he's lying there, turn the temperature down so he spends the days shivering uncontrollably, Give him no food or water. (I guess that's to put a stop to the urinating and defecating, what?) Turn the heat up until the temperatures are enough to make a grown man pull his own hair out of his head in agony. Earsplittingly loud noise. For days.

Those actually are torture techniques. Durbin never called our soldiers Nazis, or Commies, or whatever the Republicans are alleging these days. He said, "This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

The orders to carry out these actions came from Rumsfeld. They may have originated with Bush or Cheney, but they came from Rumsfeld. This lets you know how this administration intends to deal with anybody they consider an enemy. This is why they just inked a hundred-million-dollar contract with a Halliburton subsidiary to build a new 500-bed prison facility at Gitmo, instead of just using 500 of the thousands of already existing beds in Federal prisons stateside. Because the laws are different there, and Americans aren't Americans in the eyes of the law.

Why is this a bad thing? Because this is not what "America" means, to me, and to millions of other Americans. We have equal protection under the law. We can't be tortured on a whim, and we can't be held without due process. It's not the American way. It's wrong, and it shows you just how Un-American this President and his Cabinet members really are.


Oh, and if anybody doubts the ability of loud rap music to make you lose your mind, well, you don't have teenagers, that's all I can say.

Standing Wolf
June 22, 2005, 09:48 PM
The only apology I can accept from you, Sir, is your immediate resignation from Elected Office.

Representatives of the Democratic (sic) party don't apologize or resign: they get more important committee assignments and lots of free national leftist extremist so-called "news" coverage.

chaim
June 22, 2005, 09:57 PM
Except for the fact that the practices alluded to did indeed happen, and were witnessed by officials from Amnesty International, the International Red Cross and the FBI...

Except, they were not witnessed by these groups. Members of these groups reported these kinds of abuses based on interviews with inmates.



If you missed it, or if you don't feel like actually reading the text of the speech, the practices alluded to...

I don't think anyone is defending some of the abuses that have occurred. I think people are offended at Durban saying they rise to the standards of being equal to offenses committed by Pol Pot, Stalin's Gulags, and the Nazi concentration camps. As an American and former American soldier I find the comments highly offensive as even the worst abuses don't rise to that level. Also, Durban was hinting at something I've heard more and more from the left- once again, just like the 1960s, they are starting to paint all US soldiers with the "human rights abuse" brush. What's more, as a Jew I am highly offended at his minimization of the crimes of the Nazis by claiming what we are doing in Gitmo by using common interrogation techniques that are unpleasant, accomponied by some (relatively rare) abuses, is similar to gassing, starving, and working 6 million Jews and 3 million Gypsies, gays, and political prisoners to death.

An apology is the least we should expect. I'd prefer a resignation.

Dr.Who
June 22, 2005, 10:07 PM
Dick Durbin is just living up to his first name... :fire:

I don't like him and never will. My son got a letter congratulating him on being an Eagle Scout. It got torn up... I can not say any more without causing a moderator problem.....

If you live in Illinois around Chicago, you will understand...

ceetee
June 22, 2005, 10:20 PM
Thnese act were indeed witnessed by the FBI:"On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water," the FBI agent wrote on Aug. 2, 2004. "Most times they had urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18 to 24 hours or more."

In one case, the agent continued, "the detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his own hair out throughout the night."
Story (http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/terrorwar/liberties/2004/1221impersonators.htm)


But as Americans, holding people prisoner for violating American law, we just don't do things like that.

"The documents also make it clear that some personnel at Guantanamo Bay believed they were relying on authority from senior officials in Washington to conduct aggressive interrogations. One FBI agent wrote a memo referring to a presidential order that approved interrogation methods "beyond the bounds of standard FBI practice," although White House and FBI officials said yesterday that such an order does not exist. Instead, FBI and Pentagon officials said, the order in question was signed by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld in December 2002 and then revised four months later after complaints from military lawyers that he had authorized methods that violated international and domestic law. "

And as a Jew, you should feel nothing but contempt for those who say, "We were just following orders..."

Onmilo
June 22, 2005, 10:28 PM
RealGun this is what speaking frankly is all about.
I am about as far away from Political Correctness as one can get and I believe that is what you are implying with the PC abbreviation.

The words you see typed in my beginning thread are verbatum of the letter I sent to Mr Durbins office.

"Bite me" was not included because the letter wasn't about me.
The letter was written to express dissatisfaction with the actions of an elected official and to suggest what one who is considered to be an honorable elected official should do when that persons actions or words,displayed or spoken without proof of conviction directly insult the good citizens and volunteer service members of this country.

ceetee, again I ask where the head removing video from Gitmo may be?
One should wish our fellow citizens held hostage in Iraq could be so fortunate to simply pull their hair out in frustration of their situation.
18 to 24 chained to a chair, feces and urine to stick to their lair.
How is this worse than the treatment citizens of Cambodia and Laos faced prior to their death by violence in government sanctioned internment camps?
Does this make it right, probably not but then again i haven't been there.
I don't know the games the prisoners play and neither do you.
The games the soldiers play may be retalitory and flushing a book is less heinous than killing a person in cold blood in my book of opinion.
Maybe we should put all the poor souls in Gitmo in a public housing unit in Las Vegas and give them government subsidized employment in the gaming industry.
Would that make all you concerned citizens more comfortable?

The folks that are interred in Cuba are there for a reason.
They are similar to the folks who find themselves on death row.
They didn't get there being a stand up kind of guy.

If you elect to side with the view of Mr. Durbin so be it.
This is a free country.
But walk a mile in a soldiers shoes before you make that choice.

scottgun
June 22, 2005, 10:34 PM
Bringing up Hitler or Nazis in an argument that has no relation to the Germans or WWII should be an immediate disqualification. Its a tired analogy that doesn't really fit.

Liberals are still frothing at the mouth over the guy who stole the presidency, twice and lied. Guess what - he didn't do either. :neener:

Moondoggie
June 22, 2005, 10:47 PM
I think it must be a humbling experience for Senator Durbin, supposedly the second most powerful democrat in the Senate, to be brought to heel by the Mayor of Chicago. News reports attribute the impetus of Durbin's apology to Mayor Daley.

That speaks volumes about the state of politics in Il-annoy.

(Actually, on third thought, I guess you have to have a conscience to have a humbling experience..so maybe he's just mildly embarassed.)

ceetee
June 22, 2005, 11:17 PM
Onmilo, I understand your argument. I completely understand your passion. You have the right to have your opinion, and say your say, and I wouldn't have it any other way. Because that's how it is in America.

These guys probably aren't choir boys. But in three years, none of them have been charged with any kind of crime, and all the torture hasn't produced one whit of usable intelligence. Not one iota.

In America, we don't torture people. We don't saw their heads off. And we don't imprison people forever, without access to the outside world, or attorneys. If these guys deserve to be in prison, we could do it a lot cheaper, and safer in American prisons on American soil. More legal that way, too. If they don't deserve to be in an American prison, then they probably don't deserve to be in prison at all...

scottgun
June 22, 2005, 11:23 PM
we could do it a lot cheaper, and safer in American prisons on American soil.

Bring known terrorists onto American soil??, are you serious? Putting terrorists into America prisons is the worst idea I have ever heard. You think they're being abused now, put them in the general prison population, see how long they last.

They are prisoners of war. .

RevDisk
June 22, 2005, 11:42 PM
They are prisoners of war.

Erm, the politically correct term is "enemy combatants" or whatever. POW's are accorded specific rights under the Geneva Convention, Hague, et al. All soldiers are trained on laws of warfare. For whatever reason, the Bush administration does not want said prisoners to be considered POW. Please use the correct terms, Citizen, or else you might need to spend some time with the Thought Police being re-educated. ;)


Onmilo, did Senator Durbin meantion only Gitmo, or the Iraqi prison abuse also? I'm not sure about any official reports on Gitmo, but Major General Antonio M. Taguba filed a report on the Abu Ghraib Prison abuses. Are you going to accuse him of treason also? He also made statements "condemning our volunteer Servicemen".

ceetee
June 22, 2005, 11:46 PM
Why haven't these "known terrorists" been charged, found guilty, and shot? As far as that goes, why hasn't any case been made at all against them?

scottgun
June 22, 2005, 11:51 PM
Why haven't these "known terrorists" been charged, found guilty, and shot? As far as that goes, why hasn't any case been made at all against them?

Because that isn't what you do with prisoners of war, err I mean terrorists, err wait .. enemy combatants :scrutiny:

Call them what you will, until their power base is dismantled they aren't going anywhere.

RevDisk
June 23, 2005, 12:08 AM
Because that isn't what you do with prisoners of war, err I mean terrorists, err wait .. enemy combatants

Call them what you will, until their power base is dismantled they aren't going anywhere.

Actually, in many cases it is fully legal to execute prisoners. Spies, for instance. Remember that old photo of an Vietcong captain in civilian clothing being executed by the police chief of Saigon? Fully legal under the Geneva Convention.

The biggest thing is that prisoners are accorded rights. These rights do not mean prisoners cannot be punished for their actions, nor do these rights prohibit their execution if they are convicted by trial. Whatever made you think that POW's cannot be punished for their crimes under legal circumstances?

scottgun
June 23, 2005, 12:28 AM
Whatever made you think that POW's cannot be punished for their crimes under legal circumstances?

These enemy combatants will never be "charged, found guilty, and shot" Although prisoners have been executed in the past, I really don't think the prisoners at Guantanimo Bay Detention Center will ever be "found guilty and shot".

But you are correct that they certainly can be punished. So what's all the complaining about?

Waffen
June 23, 2005, 12:36 AM
If they did not fight in a "Saddam Era" Iraqi unit why should they be considered POW's? If they were not sanctioned by any army, just a band of rebels, why do they deserve the same rights as an actual soldier?

Point being is, a lot of these guys did not wear a uniform, were not funded by the govt.

If what I have said is the case, I would hope they are tried, and if found guilty of crimes against the US, or murder of a US soldier, they would be shot. End of story.

2 armies fighting eachother is one thing, but a band of rebels taking pot shots and then attempting to blend in with civillians is a whole other thing in my book.

scottgun
June 23, 2005, 12:49 AM
If they did not fight in a "Saddam Era" Iraqi unit why should they be considered POW's? If they were not sanctioned by any army, just a band of rebels, why do they deserve the same rights as an actual soldier?

Point being is, a lot of these guys did not wear a uniform, were not funded by the govt.



They are not POWs as pointed out by RevDisk, they're enemy combatants.

You're right many of them didn't wear uniforms, but rather what appears to be sheets and towels. I would like to see them punished too, if found guilty, but the days of the firing squads are long gone.

Could you imagine what rhetoric Durbin would spew if the enemy combatants were ever shot, firing squad style?

Waffen
June 23, 2005, 12:53 AM
He could spew "I saved the tax payers of this country over $1000 a combatent, in funds that would have been spent processing all this legal mumbo-jumbo. I basically cut out the middle man, and spent 5 cents on 1 bullet ranther that what would have taken President Bush $1000 to do"

Thats what I would spew if I had a voice.


Somtimes I think libs want to give more rights to the enemy than they do to the soldiers themselves.

Blue Jays
June 23, 2005, 01:41 AM
Hi All-

Senator Dick Turban is an absolute disgrace to this country and a seditious traitor. To viciously lie about the brave men and women who stand atop the wall defending our freedoms is inexcusable. He should resign in shame.

~ Blue Jays ~

Remington788
June 23, 2005, 01:50 AM
These guys probably aren't choir boys. But in three years, none of them have been charged with any kind of crime, and all the torture hasn't produced one whit of usable intelligence. Not one iota.

So you work for the CIA.

Malone LaVeigh
June 23, 2005, 02:07 AM
This country being up till now a constitutional democratic republic, the military is supposed to be subservient to the civilian leadership. The main disgrace around here is that a bunch of PC thought police in the so-called "liberal media" have forced one of our representatives to recant his comments excoriating certain military personnel for practices which just happen to have been documented. He said that an outside person hearing what was done in Guantanamo might think such tactics belong to the Communists, Nazis, etc. How can anyone argue with that? Oh, yeah, by being a partisan, dittohead parrot.

I suppose next there will be a show trial.

Of course, our enemies are very aware about the Guantanamo abuses. They make us all look bad to the rest of the world. Now how do you think it looks for the one person in public life who has spoken out to have been disciplined by the thought police? And before some one jumps in with their know-nothing jingoistic, "I don't care what the rest of the world thinks, reflect on how this is making our troops jobs more difficult and endangering their lives.

Now, I don't know a thing about Durbins politics, but since he's a big-city Democrat, I suppose he's probably got a bad record re gun control. If so, feel free to nail him to the wall any way you can. But this witch hunt mentality does not speak very well for any of us.

chaim
June 23, 2005, 02:15 AM
And as a Jew, you should feel nothing but contempt for those who say, "We were just following orders..."

Who the heck do you think you are?!!

You have no right to tell me who I should and should not be upset with. You also have no right to even imply these US soldiers who are providing some discomfort to these prisoners somehow is analygous to the Nazi soldiers who contributed to the deaths of 6 million of my co-religionists (BTW- I know a few survivors, and I know many who are children of survivors and/or had family killed in the camps).

Second, I never once defended those few who are involved in some of these abuses. I think they should be tried and punished, no matter who they are. I also think these prisoners should be either treated as criminals (with all the rights that attend to that status) or as POWs (with all the rights that attend that status).

However, what we are doing, even in the few most extreme cases, is in no way comparable to the Nazis, the Gulags, or Pol Pot. We aren't killing millions of people who's religion or politics we disagree with. We aren't gassing or shooting people by the million. We aren't working and starving people to death.

To equate what we are doing with these atrocities strongly diminishes what those victims went through.

To equate what our soldiers are doing with the Nazis is a slap to the face to every survivor and family member of victims, and to every Jew in general. My rabbi's parents survived the war by hiding in a Ukrainian forest from the Nazis for several years. I know people who lost parents, cousins, brothers and sisters in the camps. I've met quite a few people with numbers tatooed on their arms. I know many people who will never meet their grandparents due to what the Nazis did. Again, 9 million people were systematically murdered by the Nazis, 6 million of them simply for being Jewish. Tell me again how forcing people into uncomfortable positions or making their cells' temperatures uncomfortable is somehow similar. :cuss:

TonkinTwentyMil
June 23, 2005, 02:36 AM
... and all his fellow Hate-America, conflict-averse, wimp-snit travellers on the Left and in the Media...

... when -- 35 to 40 years ago -- American POW's who fought the Vietnam War IN UNIFORM...

... were routinely subjected to years of physical and psychological torture that makes Git'mo and Abu Graihib look like Boy Scout camps?

Did Durbin et al publicly DEMAND that Hanoi and the Viet Cong clean up their act?

Did Durbin et al explicitly DENOUNCE them for their egregious breaches of the Geneva Accords re U.S. POW treatment?

Did Durbin et al go to ANY lengths to bring national AND international pressure on those communist miscreants (not the U.S.) to "play by the rules?"

(Note: measures to simply bash the U.S. gov't/military and undermine that (Vietnam) war effort to facilitate "bringing the troops home", " stop the bloodshed at any cost", etcetera, blah-blah-blah... DO NOT count.)

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Durbin et al: Guilty as charged. Case closed. Say goodnight, Dick.

R.H. Lee
June 23, 2005, 02:45 AM
Of course, our enemies are very aware about the Guantanamo abuses. What "abuses"? Or is it just the Goebbels/modern leftist tactic of 'repeat a big lie often enough until it becomes the truth'?

Durbin's whiney crying 'non-apology' was as shameful as his original tirade, which had little to do with Guantanamo prisoners and everything to do with undermining the current administration at whatever cost.

Blue Jays
June 23, 2005, 02:45 AM
Hi All-

Senator Dick Turban has never been to a college campus when young men and women are pledging to fraternities and sororities. Those pranks are far tougher than the lightweight stuff (Ooh-ooh, the evil ventilation system spritzed water on my sacred Koran!) these terrorist sissies ever experienced in the Gitmo prison.

Jihad, my left foot! Those limp-wristed pansies couldn't overthrow a kindergarten class with all their crying and bellyaching about loud music and bland food.

~ Blue Jays ~

Malone LaVeigh
June 23, 2005, 02:55 AM
What "abuses"? Or is it just the Goebbels/modern leftist tactic of 'repeat a big lie often enough until it becomes the truth'? The ones documented by the FBI, maybe? As was already pointed out above.

Now, I'm totally willing to believe that the FBI can lie. But what would be the purpose here?

R.H. Lee
June 23, 2005, 03:16 AM
That's old news. There were some indictments, trials, convictions and prison sentences. The military justice system worked. What's the beef?

Onmilo
June 23, 2005, 10:38 AM
You all may notice that in not one instance did I make any reference to a persons religious conviction.

Enemy Combatants fight for a cause they suppose to be condoned by their religion.
Soldiers fight for the political convictions they swear to support.

Perhaps that definition will help the confused to understand the difference.

A persons religion makes no difference to me.
If religious conviction gives one a sense of peace then I have no issue with a persons faith, no matter what that faith may be.
When people use a religious conviction to justify murder in cold blood they defile that religion and all those who truely stand by the faith of that religion.

There is no justification for murder in cold blood, religious or otherwise, and again I ask where the proof lies that murder in cold blood has been perpetrated or condoned by the Officers and Guards at Guantanamo Bay?

Again I ask where Mr. Durbin found sources to condone the statements he made that the detention center in Guantanamo is the same sort that the Nazi Regime, Stalin, or Pol Pot set up for the purpose of murdering innocent, in most cases non-combatant civilians, enmasse?

RealGun
June 23, 2005, 11:05 AM
Again I ask where Mr. Durbin found sources to condone the statements he made that the detention center in Guantanamo is the same sort that the Nazi Regime, Stalin, or Pol Pot set up for the purpose of murdering innocent, in most cases non-combatant civilians, enmasse? - onmilo

You made it about "murder". Durbin didn't. He is asking for accountability, using poor taste and judgment in the process, which defeated his point. The assumption of partisanship doesn't help either.

BenW
June 23, 2005, 11:48 AM
Of course, our enemies are very aware about the Guantanamo abuses.
Perhaps some of our members who have been in combat can respond, but from what I've been told by people at work that went through SERE school, what the aggressors do to students for training is worse than most of the stuff reported out of Gauntanamo.

Our enemies do far worse to their own people in the name of justice (e.g., cutting off hands, stoning, Saddam's playrooms). Our enemy's awareness is not the awareness of abuses. It's the awareness of political clout they're getting from delicate people of the West over incidents that wouldn't even qualify as light punishment in most of the Middle East.

edit: spelin

RevDisk
June 23, 2005, 01:43 PM
These enemy combatants will never be "charged, found guilty, and shot" Although prisoners have been executed in the past, I really don't think the prisoners at Guantanimo Bay Detention Center will ever be "found guilty and shot".

But you are correct that they certainly can be punished. So what's all the complaining about?

Accountability. In American prisons (civilian or military), prisoners are allowed to have access to a lawyer. They are listed. (This is so none can 'disappear', NKVD style.) Without oversight, any branch of the government turns bad. Absolute power corrupts, that simple.

That's what this whole mess is over. If these prisoners are guilty of something, put them on trial and sentence them appropriately. If prisoners are dumped in a black hole and forgotten indefinitely, without trial, we're well down a dark path. If you think it won't start applying to regular American citizens, ask Padilla. When the government says "He's guilty, but we have no evidence so just trust us..." Heh, sorry, that don't fly here in America. Or shouldn't.


Perhaps some of our members who have been in combat can respond, but from what I've been told by people at work that went through SEER school, what the aggressors do to students for training is worse than most of the stuff reported out of Gauntanamo.

SERE school is voluntary. I'm only familiar with the US Army SERE school, but you also had the option of quitting.


When people use a religious conviction to justify murder in cold blood they defile that religion and all those who truely stand by the faith of that religion.

For once, Onmilo, we are in perfect agreement. Now if only more religions would get that concept, the world would be a better place. And that is why I keep a loaded 12 guage at home and CCW everywhere I go.


If they did not fight in a "Saddam Era" Iraqi unit why should they be considered POW's? If they were not sanctioned by any army, just a band of rebels, why do they deserve the same rights as an actual soldier?

Because we declared war on them? (Sorta) I'm confused to how the Iraqi liberation/occupation is connected to the "War on Terrorism". But if they are actually terrorists, then we did declare war on them. Again, sorta. If they're insurgents, that falls under a different catagory. Domestic insurrection or whatnot.


If what I have said is the case, I would hope they are tried, and if found guilty of crimes against the US, or murder of a US soldier, they would be shot. End of story.

If given a relatively fair trial, sure. I'd have no problem with that. Nor would most people. I wouldn't exactly care whether they were shot, hung or just ordered to turn big rocks into small rocks for the rest of their life.

Art Eatman
June 23, 2005, 05:54 PM
In the FWIW department, from today's (June 23) Limbaugh show: Of the roughly 200 prisoners released from Gitmo and returned to their country of origin, twelve have been re-captured after they were caught shooting at our troops.

I don't care whether or not Congress has "Declared War!" We're at war, per the actions of OBL's folks on 9/11 and thereafter. How it's waged is as much our choice as OBL's and his allies of whatever sort. Just because a war is unconventional does not mean it's not a war. Yeah, we could quit and come home, but that won't keep Americans from being killed...

And I note that German POWs were interned in camps in the US for several years, until the end of hostilities. I have no sympathy as regards the length of time hostiles are held at Gitmo.

Edit add: As far as those captured following some sort of combat, I don't see why they should be treated differently from German or Japanese soldiers of WW II. In this sort of war, uniforms don't seem to be at all expected of those fighting against us. I don't see it as criminal that they fight us.

Insofar as the FBI guy's observations: What were the antecedent conditions? Was the shackling ordinary procedure, "just for the heck of it"? Or was it as a punishment? And, if it were a punishment, how many previous events had occurred, if any? Without some background, I don't know if this were casual brutality or if it were harsh punishment for repeated infractions.

Art

Delmar
June 23, 2005, 06:15 PM
"And I note that German POWs were interned in camps in the US for several years"

Thank you, Art. I was born a few years after WWII, so I was not there. I do have questions, however.

Was congress yelling for an exit strategy during WWII?

Were the POW's locked up for the duration of the war, and was congress demanding a determination of said duration?

Did they have some sniveling, whiny group of senators more worried about POW's and their meals than the crap our soldiers had to eat?

Edited to add: I have no issues with the government shutting down the Gitmo prison. I think they should, and send them all to Angola prison.

Malone LaVeigh
June 24, 2005, 12:23 AM
In the FWIW department, from today's (June 23) Limbaugh show: Of the roughly 200 prisoners released from Gitmo and returned to their country of origin, twelve have been re-captured after they were caught shooting at our troops.First, I need a credible source. Next, what does how some prisoners were treated have to do with what some prisoners did after release? If there's a causal relationship here, it's probably not favorable toward torturing and then releasing.

Either those prisoners were guilty of something or they weren't. If they were, they should have been dealt with appropriately. Not released. If they weren't guilty, then releasing them was appropriate. Either way, we don't know anything about their treatment, unless you're saying all prisoners are tortured.

I don't care whether or not Congress has "Declared War!" We're at war, per the actions of OBL's folks on 9/11 and thereafter. How it's waged is as much our choice as OBL's and his allies of whatever sort.Are you always for disregarding the Constitution, or just when it's inconvenient?

And regardless of whether we at war or not, that can't be used as justification for doing anything we want. I leave it to you to consider what that could mean.

Our leaders have decided to wage it by attacking a country that had nothing to do with the "actions of OBL's folks on 9/11." When does it end?

And I note that German POWs were interned in camps in the US for several years, until the end of hostilities. I have no sympathy as regards the length of time hostiles are held at Gitmo. As POWs, they had rights that were encoded in treaties to which we were bound. They were allowed visits by the Red Cross. See a difference there?

As far as those captured following some sort of combat, I don't see why they should be treated differently from German or Japanese soldiers of WW II. Exactly. As POW's the German and Japanese prisoners were accounted for and their treatment was at least somewhat monitored.

R.H. Lee
June 24, 2005, 12:31 AM
As POW's the German and Japanese prisoners were accounted for and their treatment was at least somewhat monitored. Bad comparison. No equivalence. German and Japanese soldiers wore uniforms, many fought valiantly for their countries (in other words, they didn't blow up innocent women and children on a routine basis), and they came from identifiable geographical locations.

Our leaders have decided to wage it by attacking a country that had nothing to do with the "actions of OBL's folks on 9/11." When does it end?
By my reckoning, it will end on January 20, 2009.

Delmar
June 24, 2005, 12:37 AM
From what I can gather at this time-Durbin has based his tirade on a single, unverified report and went half cocked to the podium to grand stand as if he is the "one in the know".

Whether the charges are true or false has not been verified. It does make Durbin look foolish to proclaim the sky is falling, based on a single, unverified year old report. One would think that he has the horsepower to gather additional facts regarding his position before he slams the report down on the Senate floor like he is Perry Mason.

LoneStranger
June 24, 2005, 03:15 AM
"From a credible source!" I have seen this silly line spouted by many. My question to those who use it is what is a "Credible Source"? And no the "New York Times" of Jayson Blair fame is not credible. My thoughts are that the "Weekly World News" is just as credible.

"What are they GUILTY of" This would presupose that we are talking of a criminal proceeding. If we are engaged in a War then there are not criminal proceedings on the whole. While certain individuals might conduct criminal activities these are not the main objective of the combat. These detainee's are not being held for criminal processing, they are being detained for their participation in combat activities against the US. As such, the detainee's would not fall into any criminal jurisprudence activity

If the detainee's are combatants then their stay in Gitmo will be as long as we, US, are engaged in combat with Terrorist Groups. This is why POW's are not sent home after a set amount of time in a war, but only after cessation of hostilities and the conclusion of terms of cessation.

As Enemy Combatants they would have no reason to have recourse to the courts of this country and the desire of some to try to make them other than "Enemy Combatants" leaves me with questions.

"They are being Tortured!!" I would really like to hear someone explain exactly when does being interrorgated become torture? For those who make statement about being in the eye of the beholder, I'm sorry but in my eyes they are not being tortured. If you question that statement then you must explain away what has happened to those captured and interroragated by the various Terrorist groups and why that is good and right.

Whether Iraq was the correct place to take the fight to Terrorism is subject to debate and I'm sure the numerous Monday Morning Quarterbacks of the MSM and the Liberal Left will have a lot to say on Tuesday Morning. The reality is that we are in a fight that we cannot lose or walk away from. If the various people who selfproclaim their righteous belief in Peace have some solution that does not require being on knees and placing oral organs on either front or back of Terrorist I would like to hear it.

As for the war being about OIL, remember we can drill through glass and the participation of the local populace is not required. The fact that we have not adopted that policy speaks loads of the better quality of our governing system as compared to those based on feudal-socialist concepts.

Art Eatman
June 24, 2005, 02:05 PM
Malone, no, you don't *need* a "credible" source. You're free to *want* whatever you wish. I didn't offer the comment as an absolute; I just made a casual comment about Gitmo alumni.

People get way too focussed on legal semantics and go to dancing through the rose bushes--which is a bit sticky. The deal is simple: There is at least one highly-organized, well-funded group that hates the US as its primary enemy. Al Qaida. Per their own statements, they're not at all pleased with any western secularism, anywhere, but We're #1 on the hate list.

It is, for Al Qaida, a religious war. Since no one country is involved as a traditional nation-state foe of the US, talky-talk types can't deal with it--as is obvious from all this worrying about terminology.

The Gitmo Guys are being treated, generally, as good as or better than our WW II prisoners. Again, I won't accept the accusations of the FBI guy until the antecedent conditions are known. I want to know WHY the prisoner was shackled, etc. I don't see that as unreasonable as a basis for judgement. (Unless, of course, any government person's action is taken as guilty until proven otherwise.)

The Gitmo Guys from Afghanistan or Iraq are not criminals in the usual sense. There is nothing for which to try them in any criminal court, IMO. They have functioned as enemy soldiers, and you hold POWs (regardless of label) until hostilities cease. At least, that's what history tells us has been the norm.

Anybody who doesn't think there is a religious war being waged by militant Islamic jihadists hasn't been reading even the New York Times, much less any conservative rag.

Art

RevDisk
June 25, 2005, 05:29 AM
Of the roughly 200 prisoners released from Gitmo and returned to their country of origin, twelve have been re-captured after they were caught shooting at our troops.

Assuming correct numbers, 6%, eh? Granted, I'd prefer it to be 0%. Out of mere curiousity, I hope said re-captures are grilled for why they took up arms (again). Might be very educating.


I don't care whether or not Congress has "Declared War!" We're at war, per the actions of OBL's folks on 9/11 and thereafter. How it's waged is as much our choice as OBL's and his allies of whatever sort. Just because a war is unconventional does not mean it's not a war. Yeah, we could quit and come home, but that won't keep Americans from being killed...

Ah... I believe the current politically correct stance is that we are liberating Iraq because Saddam was a bad person. Thus, nothing to do with the War on Terrorism and nothing to do with OBL. (The ISG has confirmed that Iraq had no WMD, and no active links to OBL.) I think you're confusing your wars.



And I note that German POWs were interned in camps in the US for several years, until the end of hostilities. I have no sympathy as regards the length of time hostiles are held at Gitmo.

Nor I. But the German POW's were accorded rights under various treaties and such. They were acknowledged, accounted and inspected by neutral organizations such as the Red Cross. If they were thought guilty of crimes, they were given fair trials and sentenced appropriately. (Nuremburg and such)


Edit add: As far as those captured following some sort of combat, I don't see why they should be treated differently from German or Japanese soldiers of WW II. In this sort of war, uniforms don't seem to be at all expected of those fighting against us. I don't see it as criminal that they fight us.

Exactly my point.

Art Eatman
June 25, 2005, 11:56 AM
RevDisk, was not the majority of those imprisoned at Gitmo taken in Afghanistan?

I don't see how Nuremburg applies; I don't think the POWs of WW II were involved in "war crimes"; they were regular military.

What I have objected to insofar as holding people at Gitmo has to do with the value of any intelligence any of the Taliban types may have or have had. Generally, after some length of time whatever they know is no longer useful. Assuming they wouldn't re-takeup shooting at us, I'd cut'em loose, re-patriate...

Art

ravinraven
June 25, 2005, 02:03 PM
I hope you choke on your turban, Durban.

Hey. I like it. Spelling and all.

rr

RevDisk
June 25, 2005, 10:47 PM
RevDisk, was not the majority of those imprisoned at Gitmo taken in Afghanistan?

Unknown. That information is probably classified, but I'm sure with a Google search one could find out anyways. ;)


I don't see how Nuremburg applies; I don't think the POWs of WW II were involved in "war crimes"; they were regular military.

Most were not involved in war crimes and were cut loose at the end of hostilities. Still, those POW's were held accountable for their actions. If any violated the 'laws' of war, they were punished.


What I have objected to insofar as holding people at Gitmo has to do with the value of any intelligence any of the Taliban types may have or have had. Generally, after some length of time whatever they know is no longer useful. Assuming they wouldn't re-takeup shooting at us, I'd cut'em loose, re-patriate...

We very much agree. Hence, trial. There is nothing wrong with holding prisoners for a prolonged period of time if there is even half a decent reason to hold them. Nothing wrong with erring on the side of caution.

Onmilo
June 26, 2005, 11:41 AM
As a follow-up, Senator Durbin again apologized at a VFW Convention in the City of Peoria Illinois on Friday, 24 June, 2005.
50-50 split with the vets in attendance, some forgave him, some felt he was doing nothing but blowing smoke up their keisters.

Senator Durbin made no mention of any desire or need to step down for a statement of accusation that could be considered treasonous,,,,,,,,,

If you enjoyed reading about "Senator Durbin, I respectfully submit," here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!