Prisoners 'killed' at US base

[kiwimac]

From the BBC (ref at bottom of article)


Prisoners 'killed' at US base
Two Afghan prisoners were killed while in US custody at their base at Bagram, a military coroner has concluded.

The report said "blunt force trauma" had contributed to the deaths.

The detainees had spent about a week in the detention facility when they died last December.

However, US spokesman Colonel Roger King told BBC News Online the pathologists' verdict was not final - a military investigation had been launched and was due to be completed later this month.

There are hundreds of former Taleban and al-Qaeda prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and in various overseas facilities.

Last month, human rights groups accused the US Government of subjecting the prisoners to physical abuse leading to a number of deaths and attempted suicides in custody.

Washington described the allegations of torture as "ridiculous".

The first

The US spokesman at Bagram said the two men who died there had been under allied custody for about 10 days altogether.

The first man died on 3 December after a blood clot in his lungs, and the second died a week later after developing blood clots as well as suffering a heart attack.


[The homicide entry on the [military death certificate] form is different from the legal meaning of the term
Colonel Roger King US spokesman at Bagram ]

But Colonel King vehemently denied the prisoners had been mistreated by US forces. "They are the first detainees to have required medical treatment at the Bagram facility," he said, and "the only casualties" so far.

Pathologists, he said, had a limited choice when filling the military death certificate.

Torture allegations

Specific allegations of prisoner torture were first published in the Washington Post in December last year.

According to the paper, interrogators from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had been subjecting Taleban and al-Qaeda suspects to "stress and duress" techniques of dubious legality.

Suspects at US facilities in Afghanistan and other foreign countries were sometimes held in uncomfortable positions for hours and deprived of sleep, the paper alleged.

About 650 men have been at Guantanamo Bay since the detention base was established in January 2002. Many more are held elsewhere.

Story from BBC NEWS:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/south_asia/2825575.stm


Published: 2003/03/06 13:25:40

© BBC MMIII

[Epoetker]

Okay, obviously this information is highly relevant to the present situation and we should all be concerned. Kiwimac is. Very concerned. Highly concerned. Incredibly concerned. His concerns have concerns. He's concerned about who put the bop in the bop-shu-bop-shu-bop and who put the Ram in the Ramadan-a-ding-dong. Let all logical and informed opinions bow before his concern-ation!

:bow:

[kiwimac]

So the possibility of folk being tortured and / or beaten to death in the 'land of the free and the home of the brave" does not concern you?

Perhaps more than anything else you have written this explains your moral POV.

Kiwimac

[Epoetker]

The fact that the military is willing to report the incident, rather than covering it all up, as they are fully legally and constitutionally capable of doing in wartime for propaganda purposes, leads me to be skeptical about the claims of getting beaten to death. That and the fact that this is the very first incident we've ever seen, coming long after any 9/11 rage could have provoked it.

As for subjecting inmates to "unfair stress and duress" techniques of "dubious legality?" Not letting inmates get their beauty sleep? Cry me a bloody river.

[Epoetker]

Oh, and also: Gitmo ain't IN the "land of the free and the home of the brave"-that's the point of putting people there you may need to apply thumbscrews to extract life-saving information. We'd rather not inflict the type of people who might possibly:

1. Not care about killing as many people as possible if and when they die,
2. Be very, very, well trained in acting the part of the put-upon victim in order to score cash/propaganda points/new recruits-even GWB and WJC were fooled by the high-minded language of people like Sami al-Arain,
3. Become American citizens by abusing the same INS that gave the 9/11 hijackers visas AFTER 9/11,

upon our liberty-loving justice system. It's a war. Questionable stuff happens. Deal with it once the threat is over. Or do you think the capture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed fulfills that requirement?

[ItalianGold]

How naive can you get?

Why do you think these prisoners are being held where they are? Did you think that your government (if you're American) was just going to politely question these men to learn about plots of terrorism? Do you think The US does NOT use physical means of "interrogation?"

One of the most painful things about growing up is realizing that almost nothing is as we hoped it was.

[$cirisme]

They wouldn't allow someone to kill the prisoners because they have way too much valuable information. :ahem:

[kiwimac]

Cirisme,

Interesting statement considering this :
Two Afghan prisoners were killed while in US custody at their base at Bagram, a military coroner has concluded.

The report said "blunt force trauma" had contributed to the deaths.

Normally "BFT" means someone has been beaten to death!
Would you care to comment?

Kiwimac

[spl_cadet]

03-06-2003 @ 07:35 PM
kiwimac:
Normally "BFT" means someone has been beaten to death!
Would you care to comment?

Yes. Simply beating someone up is a terrible interrogation technique. Instead, the judicious use of pain caused by other methods (say, electric shocks or needles or breaking fingers or whatever) works much better. Seeing as how the military knows this, I doubt that these guys were beaten to death.

[kiwimac]

But still we have "Blunt force Trauma" or are you going to suggest they did it to themselves?

Kiwimac

[Ryokan]

It is more likely than anything that the beatings were either a) by soldiers the prisoners mouthed off to, which is regretable, but hardly institutionalized torture, or b)prisoner on prisoner violence, which is also regrettable, but...

Torture, as an interrogation technique, is only useful if you have a very short period of time in which to interrogate the individuals. Other techniques are better if your prisoners aren't going anywhere. And lets be honest, these guys aren't going anywhere.

[Jaltus]

I always forget that perpetrators of evil get more protection than victims.

Silly me.

[Ryokan]

go samurai jack!

[$cirisme]

03-06-2003 @ 08:35 PM
kiwimac:

Cirisme,

Interesting statement considering this :

Normally "BFT" means someone has been beaten to death!
Would you care to comment?

Kiwimac

Yes.

You're an idiot. :bonk:

That does not mean that the government is using torture, what is likely is A) A guard did it. or B) A fellow prisoner did it.

Unless you would like to prove they are using torture. :angel:

Didn't think so. :ahem:

[kiwimac]

Ah Cirisme,

It must be wonderful to live in your world where everything the US does is right and dandy! Pity the rest of us who have to live with the end results don't think so, eh?

As for being an idiot, old saying "takes one to know one!"

Kiwimac

[Epoetker]

:no:
I suddenly have the feeling that kiwimac is going to find yet another moderator against him.

[graceinme]

Kiwimac, what would you like us to do? How do you think we should absorb this information you have given us? We lost 3000 people 9/11. It was a tragedy. If we don't do something it will keep happening, and if we do something it will be a tragedy. We do not live in a perfect world. Even if we don't agree with everything our government does, it is our government. So it seems you are trying to poke a stick at a wounded dog. Be careful not to get bit. We are all born where we are born. Oh, and why don't you stop attaching Cirisme and address the questions and comments that need addressing.

[spl_cadet]

03-06-2003 @ 09:54 PM
kiwimac:

But still we have "Blunt force Trauma" or are you going to suggest they did it to themselves?

Kiwimac

It's possible that they did it themselves. It's also possible that another prisoner did it to them.

[kiwimac]

Graceinme


Kiwimac, what would you like us to do? How do you think we should absorb this information you have given us? We lost 3000 people 9/11. It was a tragedy. If we don't do something it will keep happening, and if we do something it will be a tragedy. We do not live in a perfect world. Even if we don't agree with everything our government does, it is our government. So it seems you are trying to poke a stick at a wounded dog. Be careful not to get bit. We are all born where we are born. Oh, and why don't you stop attaching Cirisme and address the questions and comments that need addressing.

What happened in the Us on the 11 of September 2000 was indeed a tragedy. The problem that I have is that the US insists on seeing this outside of any context. The attack on the WTC has a direct link with years of US foreign policy which sees the US as being a "special country" with a "manifest Destiny" to rule / police the world. WE DON'T WANT IT!

I am not attacking Cirisme, he called me an idiot, which was uncalled for. The mere fact that he and I have a history on another BBS should not carry over to here. I have said nothing which warrants a charge of idiocy from anyone, it is certainly not idiotic to ask people to consider that their government may not always be acting in their best interests.

Kiwimac

[Alden]

What happened in the Us on the 11 of September 2000 was indeed a tragedy. The problem that I have is that the US insists on seeing this outside of any context. The attack on the WTC has a direct link with years of US foreign policy which sees the US as being a "special country" with a "manifest Destiny" to rule / police the world.

That's right, blame the US for 9-11. Sure, we're not perfect, so we deserve it right? Manifest Destiny- the belief that the US is destined by God to span the North American continent from the Atlantic to the Pacific. We've done that, so your use of this term is in error. Pick another.


WE DON'T WANT IT!
Don't worry, we aren't coming. We don't want you or New Zealand.



I have said nothing which warrants a charge of idiocy from anyone :hrm:


it is certainly not idiotic to ask people to consider that their government may not always be acting in their best interests. Don't give us this "poor old me, I'm only trying to enlighten you" garbage. Idiotic to ask people to consider...? No. Idiotic to constantly rage against the US and Britain? Yes. Idiotic to cram views down people's throats and then flame them when they don't eat them with a smile? Most definitely yes.

[kiwimac]

Alden,

I am not asking you to agree with me, nor am I wishing to force you in any way, what I do insist on though is simply civility, I have insulted no one, called no one names. I have made no comments on people's ancestry's. So why attack me?

Moreover, if you read my initial sentence you will see that I did not blame the US for Sept 11, I said it occured within a context as all things do. The US, for better or worse, has the happy knack of alienating folk.

Sometimes this is simply because people always dislike the biggest person in the school, sometimes this is because we hear so much of how wonderful the US is, how enlightened and nifty, that the reality is rather depressing and sometimes its because of the history of the US with regard to its neighbours in Soputh America / Asia.

Since the revolution which brought about your Republic you seem to have gone out of your way to prevent other folk from choosing their governments, your various governments have overthrown democratically elected ones and replaced them with " more US-Centric dictatorships" and strangely enough this annoys folk.

Let me quote Major-General Butler, USMC


Major-General Smedley Butleron Interventionism

"War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people.

Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.

I believe in adequate defence at the coastline and nothing else.

If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns six per cent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 per cent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

I wouldn't go to war again, as I have done, to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for: one is the defence of our homes, and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss": supernationalistic capitalism.

It may seem odd for me, a military man, to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General.

And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers.

In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.

I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long.

I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

During those years, I had--as the boys in the back room would say--a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents."

(Source: Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933 by Major-General Smedley Butler, USMC.)

Kiwimac

[graceinme]

Kiwimac, Have you ever been to America? If you have you would know, that not everyone agrees with what the government does all the time. Like I stated before, right now for you to be "un" asking these questions is an offense to us Americans. You want us to sit back and ponder what you have said. Well we have all pondered the rights and wrongs our government has done, and it gets us No where. It is Government. It is like pondering weather or not your parents are right or wrong. You can't change them. Yes we can change some aspects of our Government, but in general our hands our tied. So again I say to you how would you like us to absorb the information you have presented? We are all very anxious right now at the thought of a war. Everyone has loved ones who will be effected by this. So again I am telling you your words and attitude are like poring salt in a wound.




:gim: Love Grace

[graceinme]

A little skit about Graces disagreement with the USA.......



Grace decides after reading Kiwimac's post that it isn't fare for the Government to do what every Government from the beginning of time has done. So she walks up to the White house door in the middle of the night and knocks. The President opens in just a robe and undies. Grace tells him "Mr President, I do not agree with the way you are handling matter of Government". The president's face-->:hrm: Suddenly a bunch of armed guards throw Grace to the ground, hand cuff her, then throw her in jail. Graces face-->:xmm: But the real question here is..... Where were the guards when she first showed up?

[$cirisme]

It must be wonderful to live in your world where everything the US does is right and dandy!

Thanks for confirming the idiot part. :thumb:

You know perfectly well that was never the argument. :dufus:

[kiwimac]

Grace,

Yes I have indeed been to the US. Interesting place. Like most countries not nearly as interesting as its people however.

You say you can do nothing but of course you can, you live in a country which is almost fanatical in its love of the "person in the street and their opinion", express your opinion. If you are for the war, say so, say why. If you are against it, ditto.

But just sitting on your hands and doing nothing is plain silly.

BTW in your little skit, in NZ, you can walk up to the PM's Private Residence and knock on the door to talk to her. She only lives 1 suburb over from me when she is in Auckland.

Her Wellington residence (Premier House) is a different matter, there you need an appointment but even so, guards are few and far between.

As for you Cirisme, I guess in posting to you I need to be more obvious seeing as you don't have the nous to recognise sarcasm when you see it, I will no preface such remarks to you thusly :[Sarcasm]

Kiwimac

[Alden]

Kiwi, rest assured that nothing you say runs the risk of going over the head of anyone here.

[kiwimac]

Why Alden,

Its true, you do love me!:blush:


Kiwimac

[Epoetker]

You say you can do nothing but of course you can, you live in a country which is almost fanatical in its love of the "person in the street and their opinion", express your opinion. If you are for the war, say so, say why. If you are against it, ditto.

We pro-war people have repeatedly done so. This is an online message board. It is the equivalent of the street for people who have jobs. People generally only take to the physical streets when they either have nowhere else to go or have taken political action as a paid profession. Since our unemployment rate is only around %5 at the moment, and those unemployed are busy searching for jobs, the type of multi-hour noisy street demonstrations are very much out of favor with most Americans.


But just sitting on your hands and doing nothing is plain silly.

Read this particular thread yet?
http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1439

Let's call it the call for violent action NOW.


BTW in your little skit, in NZ, you can walk up to the PM's Private Residence and knock on the door to talk to her. She only lives 1 suburb over from me when she is in Auckland.

Her Wellington residence (Premier House) is a different matter, there you need an appointment but even so, guards are few and far between.

How many wish to kill her?

[Alden]

03-09-2003 @ 06:44 AM
kiwimac:

Why Alden,

Its true, you do love me!:blush:


Kiwimac

Of course I do!

:love:

[Alden]

03-08-2003 @ 03:46 AM
kiwimac:

Alden,

I am not asking you to agree with me, nor am I wishing to force you in any way, what I do insist on though is simply civility, I have insulted no one, called no one names. I have made no comments on people's ancestry's. So why attack me?


Kiwimac

Saying things like "get stuffed" and the like sounds fairly insulting to me.

[wienerdog]

Kiwi,

I recently read the following point in Bill Maher's When You Ride Alone You Ride With Bin Laden: Name one other country in history that had the capacity to conquer the world...and then didn't. Immediately following WW2, the USA was the only country with nuclear weapons.

On balance, the good effect the USA has had significantly outweighs the bad. This is not to ignore the bad which is certainly there. It's just to point out that anger against America is often unjustified, and those who hate us are going to hate us no matter what we do. If we act, we're trying to be the world's policemen. If we refrain from acting, we're trying to be arrogant separatists. If we act only when it's in our best interests to do so, we're being hypocritical opportunists. I've seen all of these arguments made against the USA's current position on the war with terror.