US accused on 'missing' prisoners

[tchocky-2]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

I went to HRW's website and searched their site for 2 words: Jihad and Islam. Other than names of terrorist groups and some individuals named Jihad or Islam, the resulting list contains nothing much else. Jihad and Islam are apparently not problems or causes of massive worldwide HR abuses, when it comes to HRW.

From what I can see, HRW focuses on governments and not religions, and in governments where Islam is closely tied to the rule of law, they have been active. For example, clicking on the Middle East tab (just an inch or so above Search:?) brings up many articles, with a large number of them relating to Saudi Arabia.

Originally Posted by ASWnut101

:rotfl: :rotfl: That's pretty funny. Where did people come up with this stuff?

Well, GWB for one - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5321606.stm

During the last great war the precedent was already set. Remember the US detained all the Japanese living in the USA during the war for the duration of the war.

If these guys are the enemy of the USA and not in uniform and they have declared war against the USA then they have no rights. However if they are US Citizens then it's different IMHO.

This has indeed been done before, but that doesn't make it right.
If these people are indeed enemies of the USA, and have committed crimes or fought against the US, then that's clear enough. They should be charged and brought to trial. What of the many people captured/bought by the US without having done anything other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Many Americans living and working in Iraq and other foreign countries have been executed without due process. Some even had their heads cut off and the entire episode was taped and distributed on the Internet for all to see.

What are you saying? The barbarity of others should have no effect on civilised people, other than to strenghten their resolve in fighting said barbarity.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by tchocky-2

From what I can see, HRW focuses on governments and not religions

And here I was mistakenly thinking their goal was to focus on humans. Silly me!

Thanks for clearing that up.

[U-533]

38 my...my 38.

If they are missing they more than likely deserve it or they do not wish to be found.

Its strange but I never hear of other country's so called dirty laundry being thrown about trying to undermine integrity.
And don't say your country has no prisoners missing, I believe you'd be a liar.

Spies and other people who play with the things they play with know the consequences of their being caught.
So just except it and lets get on with life.

[tchocky-2]

Originally Posted by U-533

38 my...my 38.

If they are missing they more than likely deserve it or they do not wish to be found.

Well, already it's happened to one guy whose name was similiar to a wanted terrorist. If it's only 38 missing, I'd want to know for damn sure they deserve it. hey, why not try them and find out.
It terrifies me that the government can just up and snatch you away for ne reason other than "we say so". The argument that if I have nothing too hide I have nothing to fear works two ways; if they're clearly guilty, then try them and be done with it.

Its strange but I never hear of other country's so called dirty laundry being thrown about trying to undermine integrity.
And don't say your country has no prisoners missing, I believe you'd be a liar.

most other countries keep it to themselves. I honestly don't think we have anyone amiss at the moment, but I could be wrong.

Spies and other people who play with the things they play with know the consequences of their being caught.
So just except it and lets get on with life.

Uh-huh, if they are guilty. Which we don't know, and have seen evidence to the contrary.
Oh yes, consider this excepted, hence the thread. I think most people would take exception to being "rendered".

[Skybird]

If the argument that someone is considered guilty is "proven" by refering to the fact that he was arrested, and saying that "he would not have been arrested if he would not have been guilty", then this is simply circular logic, and it is extremely dangerous and damaging to a free society's self-understanding. It hollows out valid laws, it also mimics the way of self-justification as practiced for example by the Nazigerman GeStaPo. When "being arrested" is synonymous with "being guilty", then the necessary step of "examination and prooving the guilt" has been deleted. that is the death of the legal system as understood in Western civilization. But it makes the job easier for the concerned authorities.

They also evade democratic countercontrol and checking the balances of power. You not only loose the legal system of the West of which you are so proud of, you also loose democracy that way. Instead, power gets ursurped. That is the beginning of a police dictatorship.

That way, our enemies are right when accusing us that our values are lies and that we use different standards to judge our doing, and that of others. Is it clever to give them that argument? Hardly. we need to accept that we have to go the more difficult way. We must not assume their guilt - we mujst proove it. Hear-say and belief and fantasy and conclusions alone have no place at court.

[Marcantilan]

Well, you could win a terror war by legal means (trials, jails, lawyers, so on) Italy, in the late ´70´s done that with the Red Brigades (not a minor terrorist group, for sure, but a very pro and communist supported one)

In the other side, the argentine government, also in the ´70, fought a terror war with the seme methods the terrorism use (people vanished, were tortured or were thrown from aircrafts, so on).

In the opinion of a lot of people, many of the now dead deserved the punishment, but´s not the point.

The point is, after 30 years, theres no peace in the argentinian society, which is today very fragmented.

Sure, with terrorist means you could win a couple of battles, but you are going to lose the war in the long term. The war about integrity.

[dean_acheson]

HRW and their ilk are more than smucks. They are, to paraphrase Lenin, useful idiots.

It's like in my law school where the chancellor was an immigrant from Chile. We had this ugly statute in the basement to all the poor victims of torture and oppression there under Pinochet, and constant protests about the School of the Americas, and yet no-one ever had the temerity to mention the abuses of the Sandanistas or the current Cuban Administration. Much less the millions killed by Socialist/Communist regimes in Eastern Europe, Africa, and Asia.

I hate oppressive governments equally, but the wolf crys of groups like HRW really fail to move me much. Their lamatations concerning 'human rights' abuses are more about politics than they are about deprivations of natural rights.

http://www.hrw.org/doc/?t=americas

If one can't see the focus of their 'articles' here, it is beyond my poor powers to elucidate that person as to the agenda they are pushing. We need trials and international action when it concerns right-wing regimes, and an excercise of restraint when it comes to left-wing ones. If one looks at their Asia page, it mainly consists of stories about Pakistan and India, while failing to point a finger at China and/or North Korea.

[dean_acheson]

Here is a good use of the phrase Chutzpah in a sentence. lol.

http://tigerhawk.blogspot.com/2007/02/character.html