Are videotaped beheadings covered by Geneva?

Status
Not open for further replies.

progunner1957

member
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
831
Location
A wolf living in Sheeple land
From Human Events online comes thoughts on prisoner treatment and John McCain's political game playing by America's favorite crumudgeon, Ann Coulter...:D


Are Videotaped Beheadings Covered by Geneva?

by Ann Coulter

Sen. John McCain has been carrying so much water for his friends in the mainstream media that he now has to state for the record to Republican audiences: "I hold no brief for al Qaeda."

Well, that's a relief.

It turns out, the only reason McCain is demanding that prisoners like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed -- mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, the beheading of journalist Daniel Pearl and other atrocities -- be treated like Martha Stewart facing an insider trading charge is this: "It's all about the United States of America and what is going to happen to Americans who are taken prisoner in future wars."

McCain, along with Sen. Lindsey Graham and Sen. John Warner -- or, as the Times now calls him, the "courtly Virginian" -- want terrorists treated like Americans accused of crimes, with full access to classified information against them and a list of the undercover agents involved in their capture. Liberals' interest in protecting classified information started and ended with Valerie Plame.

As Graham explained, he doesn't want procedures used against terrorists at Guantanamo "to become clubs to be used against our people." Actually, clubs would be a step up from videotaped beheadings.

Or as the New York Times wrote in the original weasel talking points earlier this summer: "The Geneva Conventions protect Americans. If this country changes the rules, it's changing the rules for Americans taken prisoner abroad. That is far too high a price to pay so this administration can hang on to its misbegotten policies."

There hasn't been this much railing about the mistreatment of a hostage since Monica Lewinsky was served canapes at the Pentagon City Ritz-Carlton Hotel while being detained by the FBI.

The belief that we can impress the enemy with our magnanimity is an idea that just won't die. It's worse than the idea that paying welfare recipients benefits won't discourage them from working. (Some tiny minority might still seek work.) It's worse than the idea that taxes can be raised endlessly without reducing tax receipts. (As the Laffer Curve illustrates, at some point -- a point this country will never reach -- taxes could theoretically be cut so much that tax revenues would decline.)

But being nice to enemies is an idea that has never worked, no matter how many times liberals make us do it. It didn't work with the Soviet Union, Imperial Japan, Hitler or the North Vietnamese -- enemies notable for being more civilized than the Islamic savages we are at war with today.

By the way, how did the Geneva Conventions work out for McCain at the Hanoi Hilton?

It doesn't even work with the Democrats, whom Bush kept sucking up to his first year in office. No more movie nights at the White House with Teddy Kennedy these days, I'm guessing.

It was this idea (Be nice!) that fueled liberals' rage at Reagan when he vanquished the Soviet Union with his macho "cowboy diplomacy" that was going to get us all blown up. As the Times editorial page hysterically described Reagan's first year in office: "Mr. Reagan looked at the world through gun sights." Yes, he did! And now the Evil Empire is no more.

It was this idiotic idea of being nice to predators that drove liberal crime policies in the '60s and '70s -- leading like night into day to unprecedented crime rates. Now these same liberal ninnies want to extend their tender mercies not just to rapists and murderers, but to Islamic terrorists.

Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Ronald Reagan and Winston Churchill had a different idea: Instead of rewarding bad behavior, punish bad behavior. How many times does punishment have to work and coddling have to fail before we never have to hear again that if we treat terrorists well, the terrorists will treat our prisoners well?

Fortunately, history always begins this morning for liberals, so they can keep flogging the same idiotic idea that has never, ever worked: Be nice to our enemies and they will reward us with good behavior.

Never mind trusting liberals with national security. Never mind trusting them with raising kids. These people shouldn't even be allowed to own pets.

If the Democrats and the four pathetic Republicans angling to be called "mavericks" by the New York Times really believe we need to treat captured terrorists nicely in order to ensure that the next American they capture will be well-treated, then why stop at 600-thread-count sheets for the Guantanamo detainees? We must adopt Sharia law.

As McCain might put it, I hold no brief for al Qaeda, but what would better protect Americans they take prisoner than if America went whole hog and became an Islamic republic? On the plus side, we can finally put Rosie O'Donnell in a burka.
Source: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17148
 
Geneva is irrelevant where, as here,

you are dealing with NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations). In short, there is no state to sign the convention, still less to abide by it.
 
I am ashamed that my country has come to the point where "We torture. We murder. We routinely abuse prisoners. We hide them from the Red Cross. But we're slightly better than the worst the terrorists do" is our point of national pride.
 
I am ashamed that my country has come to the point where "We torture. We murder. We routinely abuse prisoners. We hide them from the Red Cross. But we're slightly better than the worst the terrorists do" is our point of national pride.
Oh, yes - how horrid. It would be MUCH better if we were all murdered by terrorists. After all, we are Americans and therefore we have it coming.:barf:
 
I am ashamed that my country has come to the point where "We torture. We murder. We routinely abuse prisoners. We hide them from the Red Cross. But we're slightly better than the worst the terrorists do" is our point of national pride.

Agreed. We are no better than them if we stoop to their level. It doesnt matter if they dont follow the rules, we should because we're better than them.
 
Oh, yes - how horrid. It would be MUCH better if we were all murdered by terrorists. After all, we are Americans and therefore we have it coming

No one said any such thing. No one even implied any such thing.
 
Tellner, stop!

you're making me cry.......


koooombuya M'Lord koooombuya M'Lord koooombuya

We torture. We murder. We routinely abuse prisoners.

WE do not.


But we should treat beheaders a bit stronger then our jay walkers!:barf:
 
I am ashamed that my country has come to the point where "We torture. We murder. We routinely abuse prisoners. We hide them from the Red Cross. But we're slightly better than the worst the terrorists do" is our point of national pride.
I concur. The time to be ruthless with our enemies is when we are engaged in battle with them. Once our enemy is our prisoner, we must treat them fairly and not abuse them.
WE do not.

Nope, no abuse here. None at all. Move along, move along... :barf:
 
We are no better than them if we stoop to their level. It doesnt matter if they dont(sic) follow the rules, we should because we're better than them.
So someone is suggesting we behead them like they did to Mr. Pearl?
I don't think so.
The aggressive interogation techniques we are trying to use are not torture.
I know dweebs like Human Rights Watch claim they are, and also claim "aggressive intoerogation" doesn't work, but most actual experience seems to show otherwise. We have apparantly thwarted a dozen or so terrorist plots with info gleaned from these techniques.

So much of this assinine debate is pettifoggery and blather.......:banghead:
 
But we should treat beheaders a bit stronger then our jay walkers

Who's saying we shouldnt?

If they've commited a crime or offense against people, put them on trial. It should be pretty quick considering these idiots capture their crimes on tape. When they're found guilty, execute them or banish them to some remote island for life.
 
abu ghraib???

LOL

Boot camp was worse!!!! being in the millitary and getting hazed is worse.
A dog barkig at you? gee whiz, a naked game of pyramid?
oooooh real tourtre there!:barf:

going to sleep away camp as a boy scout in the 1960's were worse then the "tourture" at abu ghraib.

I have only one question for that private England, how much do you charge , dear?:evil:

You can make a lot of money in SF with those shiny boots of leather!
 
Beware when ye fight monsters, lest ye become a monster yourself...

And I'm sure some of these arguments I'm seeing here have been used by many a totalitarian regime. I'm sure the Soviet peasants discussed the same in coffeehouses during Stalin's rise.

This is NOT HOW AMERICA SHOULD BE.

We're better. We stand for something. We're not animals. We have honor. We're better.

Or we were.

In the end, if this is the way we turn to fight...what, really, are we fighting for in the end?
 
sigh

9-11%20(1).bmp
 
abu ghraib??? that was not torture!

if you think that is torture,( having a girl laugh at you)
how on earth did you ever survive high school?

A dog barking at you is not torture!.

missing a meal and being forced to listen to metallica is not torture!

these guys are hardened murderers/terrorist ...frowning at them and treating them like criminals is going to make them giggle with delight!

if you think that they were tortured because they had to listen to alice cooper and stand naked while a girl laughed at them, then your definiton of torture is so weak we might as well give up and say "please don't hurt us Osama, we will convert to Wahabbi and kill our sisters and moms because we are afraid of you mean terrorist":barf:

Did you know that you have to kill people to win a war?

it's like that Monty Python skit!!! "fecth me the comfy chair!"
 
I am ashamed that my country has come to the point where "We torture. We murder. We routinely abuse prisoners. We hide them from the Red Cross. But we're slightly better than the worst the terrorists do" is our point of national pride.

I concur. The time to be ruthless with our enemies is when we are engaged in battle with them. Once our enemy is our prisoner, we must treat them fairly and not abuse them.
Quote:
WE do not.


Nope, no abuse here. None at all. Move along, move along...

That is truly CLASSIC thinking from a liberal. First accuse someone of torture and murder, then to back up the claim cite an insulated, old example of humiliation, not torture, not murder...just humiliation. And then don't even bother referring to how the folks that did the humiliation were prosecuted. Do people like you even understand the concept of proof?

If you're going to support a position be prepared to support it with at least ONE relevant, PROVABLE allegation of specifically TORTURE and MURDER, must less ROUTINE ABUSE.

Is it any wonder people like this believe 9/11 was a government plot? Probably has something to do with too much granola in their diet. Or maybe they just don't understand the difference between torture, murder, routine abuse and humiliation. I suggest you volunteer to be a hostage for the terrorists for a week or two so you can understand the differences.
 
Agreed. We are no better than them if we stoop to their level. It doesnt matter if they dont follow the rules, we should because we're better than them.

You're exactly right. Right up until it stats affecting lives in reality. If we can win with the gloves on, I'm 100% for it. But the key point is winning. If those higher ideals cause us to lose and cause American soldiers to die, it's time to lose the gloves. Maintaining a higher morality is a very important secondary goal.
 
Beware when ye fight monsters, lest ye become a monster yourself...

This old proverb pretty much sums it up.

As a soldier/OIF Veteran who is literally a Geneva Card carrier I AM in
favor of retaining GenCon3 in all the spirit of its time honored original
pre-neocon interpretation. We are not suppose to act like the Bad Guys.
Yes, they cut off heads --that does NOT mean we lower ourselves to
their level. In fact, I'll even joke about putting a dotted line around my
neck prior to a convoy. I'm sure they would have video'd my GenCon ID
card with my pile of personal effects right before they be-headed me.

I am under no illusion that THEY do NOT share my values, but I will
certainly NOT adopt theirs!

This includes NOT stacking people up in naked pyramids and all the other
Abu G-string stuff that was going on there. It's sick and just plain WRONG.
Those of you who find absolutely no problem with what was done there need
to consider your reaction if it was your relative who had the same thing done
by (insert street gang/drug cartel here) even if they were later safely
released. WE're suppose to be the Good Guys wearing the white hats.
Would you want to see John Wayne doing that kind of stuff in one of his
movies?! No, that's John Wayne GACY stuff.

I use to think that complying with GenCon was as easy as asking the
following question: If you took a picture of what you were doing and
couldn't show it to your mom, you shouldn't be doing it. However, our
society has fallen so far that these people actually sent these photos
home and they were posted by their relatives at big-mart!

Undo the moral underpinnings of GenCon and you will risk a future in which
the JBTs value our children far less than they already have in the recent
past. So be careful what you wish for.
 
If I was Setting Detainee Policy

I would order the heads twisted off any Non-american if I think they have one iota of information about potential pending terrorist attacks. I agree in an ideal world that it would be nice to have standards and ethics. However, we have been afforded no such courtesies at all from our enemies as of late. IMHO, it is about survival, and lately, the entire world is out to get us.
 
Romma, suggest you study up on the French in Algeria to see how well
this approach worked in our more "modern" era. Older historical antecedents
include putting entire villages to the sword, burning crops, poisoning
water supplies, and on more mercyful days, taking slaves for forced labor
and sexual servicing.....oh yeah, can't forget the more recent "comfort
girls" that the Japanese Empire had during WWII. Also postwar Europeans
often breathed a sigh of relief when it was the Americans or Brits stationed
in their towns rather than the Soviets who had a rep for raping/looting.

This is typically where human behavior will devolve to if there is not ethical
leadership and proper moral guidance with strong discipline to keep it in
check.

An "ideal world" will include the majority of humans evolving past the point
of tearing each other apart for a scrap of meat outside their caves. The
"rest of the world" hates us just as much as many of us hate parts of
the world and are willing throw away the precious gold of mercy for a trifle.
 
Thin Black Line

I suppose I am angry at how the world is dumping on us at the present time. We are expected to behave and hold ourselves to higher standards and fight fair, yet it is perfectly fine for our enemies to wear brass knuckles under Their boxing gloves. I know I don't sound very HighRoad at the present time, but I think turn about is fair play... We as Americans are boxed into a corner like never before.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top