that a United Nations official is concerned that hunger-striking detainees at Guantanamo Bay are being force-fed in a way that, "...definitely amounts to an additional cruel treatment.":
I'm certainly as mystified as you as to just what a "rapporteur on torture" is. Perhaps it's similar to a "rapporteur on raping children entrusted to UN care" or "rapporteur on skimming profits from UN sanctions". Who knows.
At any rate, it's revealed that rapporteur Manfred has never visited Gitmo.
Well of course he wasn't granted unrestricted access. Too many UN folks have been identified as accomplices of Saddam in the oil-for-food scandals. Why take a chance with a corrupt organization like that?
As for the scum languishing in durance vile; once they've given up all their useful information, let them eat or not, their choice.
1
>>>"rapporteur on torture"
Maybe that's what they call regular reporters/journalists after they develop a "rapport" with jihadis?
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 30, 2005 12:51 PM (8e/V4)
2
I hope they're feeding them liquified chitlins through those hoses.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at December 30, 2005 01:03 PM (0yYS2)
3
Death by starvation
I couldn't think of more 'Peaceful and Euphoric' way to die just ask Michael Schiavo
Posted by: Cindy at December 30, 2005 02:03 PM (EfRlj)
4
If they had died of starvation, it would be 'as Allah willed', as such we should stop feeding them, in accordance with their religion.
I'm betting the ACLU will not be defending this particular "trampling" of a terrorist's religious right.
Posted by: dave at December 30, 2005 02:10 PM (CcXvt)
5
This is nothing new from a British paper either, check out this story from a guy held by American forces:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/content_objectid=14042696_method=full_siteid=50143_headline=-MY-HELL-IN-CAMP-X-RAY-name_page.html
The highlight for me was:
The website designer, a convert to Islam, had gone to Pakistan in October 2001, a few weeks after September 11, to study Muslim culture.
He accidentally strayed into Afghanistan - believing he was being driven to Turkey - and was arrested as a spy, perhaps because of his British passport. He was held in Kandahar, Afghanistan, and fell into US hands.
Yes, you know -- it could have happened to anyone, now how many times after a major terrorist attack, have you gone to a country known to be a staging area for the Mujahideen to enter the Jihad, to study "the Muslim culture" and then
accidently strayed into a war zone?
Typical British tabloid however, whitewash the reasons he was in a jail, but publish his story that almost reads like Dante's Inferno with the "evil Americans" trampling the rights of this pious, simple man.
Posted by: dave at December 30, 2005 02:28 PM (CcXvt)
6
From Dictionary.com:
"rapporteur: One who is designated to give a report, as at a meeting."
Anyone have any thoughts on what we're trying to get out of these people? When they were first captured it was a no-brainer, but 4 years later what would they know that could possibly be of value? Intelligence is a precious but perishable commodity. 4 year old information on terrorist cells and weopons caches seems like it would be about as valuable as 4 year old caviar. And that's assuming they're still holding back info after 4 years of Torture Lite(tm).
More interesting than what we should do with the detainees is how we should get rid of them. I don't hear anybody facing this problem, but we are going have to dispose of these loons some day unless we want to open a geriatric ward on Gitmo. Handing them back to the Afghans sounds like the fairest thing to me, but they'd probably end up dead right quick, which will prompt a big Euro human rights tantrum targeted squarely at U.S. We could hand them over to Brussels to be tried for violations of "international law," after which they'd relax their days away in tennis prison, giving harrowing accounts of their detention to every magazine left of American Spectator, and becoming heroic figures for aspiring terrorists among Europe's exploding Muslim population. What to do?
Posted by: ShannonKW at December 30, 2005 02:32 PM (dT1MB)
7
Who said we're trying to get anything from them?
From an intelligence standpoint, every day they're out of the fight, the less use they become.
As it stands they're just in detention, much like criminals. As we keep some criminals until they're interred, I'm not sure why we wouldn't do the same if need be?
Hopefully some of them will be kept until they are no longer considered a threat (bodybag filler).
Posted by: dave at December 30, 2005 02:46 PM (CcXvt)
8
I don't think we're trying to get any info out of them at this point. The "torture" these rapporteurs are whining about is basically just complaints about the living conditions, i.e., the prisoners are being treated "inhumanly" because they're being force fed. Yeah, whatever. But letting these guys go seems to be a non-starter. They're in it for the long haul.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 30, 2005 02:55 PM (8e/V4)
9
I suppose if they are POW or enemy combatants we can hold em until Al-Qaeda surrenders or as long as a state of war exists between the US and the Taliban/Al-Qaeda. In prior wars some POW's were returned by agreement that they would not reeenter combat but you have to have an enemy that sticks to it's agreements. I think as we have seen already with some releases we have done these guys would go right back to fighting.
Posted by: Howie at December 30, 2005 02:57 PM (D3+20)
10
ShannonKW
Current Intel value low - agreed.
Believe original plan was to quietly return most gradually to home countries of record. Many (& AQ too) have been involved or associated with others in goals to overthrow their own govts thru terrorism.
Returned, they would have faced imprisonment, execution, or simply "disappear". They would have also faced "actual" torture at home for information concerning actions and people in their home countries.
Too many eyes on Gitmo and Admin - plan has quietly evaporated for PR reasons - pity. I have no idea how long we are going to be stuck with them.
Footnote: 4 Chinese muslims kept seperate (and well) - actual "goat" traders turned in by Afghani's - no involvement - believe have applied for political asylum in US - Chinese govt "wants" them for something else (?) - big lil' bruhaha - current status of case unknown.
Posted by: hondo at December 30, 2005 03:11 PM (3aakz)
11
The detainees who have been released have for the most part rejoined the jihad. So what should we do? My suggestion is to return them to Afghanistan with assurances that these men will not be released until they are too old to be a threat. The only problem I have with my plan is the chance these individuals might escape from the Afghans, so I suppose we will have to keep these guys in Gitmo for the forseeable future.
Posted by: jesusland joe at December 30, 2005 03:53 PM (rUyw4)
12
Oh, yeah, the UN sucks and so does the Beeb!
Posted by: jesusland joe at December 30, 2005 03:55 PM (rUyw4)
13
Very few detainees released rejoined the jidhad - that is a continuing "myth" originally put out by the MSM & friends to show the "continuing failure" of Admin, Mil, & policy. why it was put out - I can understand - why its accepted a gospel I can not.
Posted by: hondo at December 30, 2005 04:02 PM (3aakz)
14
Agent Smith says that all you silly fleshy podlings are fed through the nose anyway. What are you complaining about? Go back to your fantasy worlds and give us your energy.
Posted by: Agent Smith at December 30, 2005 06:32 PM (HuVhz)
15
Agent Smith,
I listened to that BS all I want to. Why don't you take a flying f..k at a rolling donut. And shove off while you're at it. I'm tired of the matrix shit.
Posted by: jesusland joe at December 30, 2005 07:32 PM (rUyw4)
16
Agent Smith says to Jesusland Joe - your precious independence is an illusion - as you are merely one of the billions of fleshy extensions to the big machine. Should you break your chains, you will only find you are shackled to a stronger set. Even the rolling donut is a contrivance.
Posted by: Agent Smith at December 30, 2005 10:17 PM (HuVhz)
17
Why not dress the creeps at Gitmo in Brioni suits and let them cross into Cuba? Fidel would think that they're capitalists and they'd disappear into his prison system, never to be seen again. As the left finds no fault in Fidel's system of "justice," nobody would complain about the fate of these jihadi losers.
Posted by: Abdullah al-Libi at December 31, 2005 05:35 AM (xnsb/)
18
My Socom II says that you are full of shit, Agent Smith.
Posted by: jesusland joe at December 31, 2005 12:00 PM (rUyw4)
19
Rapporteur sounds a lot like
collaborateur to me.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at December 31, 2005 12:02 PM (0yYS2)
20
Agent Smith says that Socom II is nothing but a fleshy contrivance to bamboozle you in your not-so-sweet dreams.
Posted by: Agent Smith at December 31, 2005 06:12 PM (X9zNj)
21
A Socom II is not about flesh, Agent Smith. Go google Springfield Armory and see what a Socom II is. Mine shoots like nothing else in the World, and all your matrix shit is just that, shit. Why don't you get a brain, you asshole?
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 01, 2006 01:13 PM (rUyw4)
22
JJ,
that's a sweet as rifle. Mine is humble by comparison, but it'll get the job down when Libs decide to have their uprising:
My
sword of Gideon
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 01, 2006 04:47 PM (8e/V4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
In a protest claiming his rights have been violated after being arrested for throwing a grenade at President Bush, Vladimir Arutunyan (right) sewed his mouth shut.
