BS Suicide - an act of war?

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 12:39 PM

Well, here's another thought to mull over...

Where's the proff that these three guys actually killed themselves... A dead body isn't evidence of suicide..

But no matter, either way this is a sad erra for our country when it resorts to "legaleze" to justify torturing folks and disobeying the spirit of international law...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Arne
Date: 15 Jun 06 - 11:48 AM

People need to read this:

The Evil of Banality
by Anthony Alessandrini
www.dissidentvoice.org
June 14, 2006

Send this page to a friend! (http://www.dissidentvoice.org/June06/Alessandrini14.htm)

There are moments that require us to stop everything and take stock of the time in which we are living. This is one such moment. Listen:

“They are smart, they are creative, they are committed,â€쳌 Admiral Harris said. “They have no regard for life, neither ours nor their own. I believe this was not an act of desperation, but an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us.â€쳌

This is Rear Admiral Harry B. Harris, commander of the Guantanamo Bay prison. His words appeared, without comment, in the first news reports about three men, detained indefinitely and subjected to systematic torture at the prison, who committed suicide on Saturday by hanging themselves in their cells.

Take a moment to dwell on the admiral’s words. Look especially at the first sentence, at the adjectives used to describe the dead men: “smart, creative, committed.â€쳌 There is a perverse compliment being paid by the torturer to the tortured.

This attitude is also implicit in the follow-up article printed by the New York Times the next day, with the headline: “Prisoners’ Ruse Is Suspected at Guantanamo.â€쳌 This, we learn from the article, should be the focus of inquiry: not the circumstances that drove three men to their deaths, but the question of how, given the fact that one of the elements of their confinement was constant monitoring by their captors, these men could have managed their “ruse.â€쳌

The point of systematic torture, of course, is to force the tortured to acknowledge, every minute of every day, that his life is in the hands of his torturer. No wonder, then, that the prison’s commanders and their willing mouthpieces in the press are alarmed. In the most macabre and tragic sense, these are the first escapees from Guantanamo.

Of course these were acts of despair, no matter what the torturers may claim. Of course the many attempts by prisoners at Guantanamo to use their bodies -- all that is left to them -- to protest against their systematic and agonizing dehumanization have been acts of desperation. Many of their ongoing efforts -- for example, the hunger strikes that have been violently broken through force-feedings -- have been the tactics of resistance used by other political prisoners: Irish prisoners held by the British in Northern Ireland, South Africans in apartheid jails, Palestinians in Israeli prisons.

These are acts of desperation, but in their tragic way, they are also attempts to claim back some shred of humanity from the grasp of the torturers. And so even the capacity to feel despair has to be denied them by the torturers, at the very moment of their deaths. “I believe this was not an act of desperation," the admiral assures us, "but an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us.â€쳌

Leave aside “asymmetricalâ€쳌 for the moment, although under different circumstances a sustained meditation on the abuse of language inherent in the use of this term would be in order. Go right to this phrase: “an act of warfare waged against us.â€쳌

For this is the lynchpin of it all. “Theyâ€쳌 are being held in Guantanamo, according to this version of the story, for having waged, or tried to wage, or plotted to wage, or thought about waging, war against “usâ€쳌 (thus the invention of the wholly unprecedented but vaguely legal-sounding term “enemy combatantsâ€쳌). The subsequent charge of "terrorism" is itself potent enough to preclude any further inquiry, and, more important, to eliminate any concern for the treatment of the human beings -- human no longer, since they are now of the species known as "terrorist" -- during their confinement. The dehumanization carried out through the physical acts of torture at Guantanamo (and, it should be added, at prisons subsidized and run by the U.S. government throughout the world) is thus both enabled and completed through this linguistic torture.

When the flesh-and-blood human beings being held captive assert their humanity through their bodies, whether through hunger strikes or through suicide attempts, the linguistic torturers have to work overtime. But they are able to do their work without much worry about systematic opposition in this country. The White House dutifully described the three men as “committed terrorists,â€쳌 and in response, Democrats said nothing, since, as the Times reported, they are “concerned about appearing to be sympathizing with detainees who could turn out to have significant terrorist connections.â€쳌

Here we should pause again. Three men at Guantanamo were, in essence, tortured to death. Their names were Mani bin Shaman bin Turki al-Habardi, Yasser Talal Abdulah Yahya al-Zahrani, and Ali Abdullah Ahmedwho.

What is most appalling about the discourse surrounding their suicides is the banality of the language used to address their deaths. It is as though nothing out of the ordinary has happened. This is what should startle us out of our complacency: the thought that a situation in which three men were literally driven to their deaths by the inhumanity of their treatment is in fact all in a day's work for our government.

There are of course groups and individuals who have tried to break this sense of complacency and to place Guantanamo, and the U.S. government’s policies of detainment, extraordinary rendition, secret prisons, and systematic torture more generally, before the eyes of Americans. But the fact that these men's suicides can be reported as “rusesâ€쳌 and “acts of warâ€쳌 without provoking outrage reminds us of how much remains to be done.

One important part of this effort is to combat the specifically dehumanizing work being done by the word “terrorist.â€쳌 It is not necessary to prove the innocence of those being held prisoner at Guantanamo in order to demand an end to their torture. Of course, a cursory glance at the insane methods used to capture those who are now detained there suggests that no legal case could be made against the vast majority of the prisoners.

But the fundamental insistence should be that it simply does not matter. Allowing the focus to be shifted to the question of innocence versus guilt, of good and evil, of terrorism and acts of war, avoids addressing the heart of the matter. Worse, it allows a shift into the banal language that allows for generalizations about “usâ€쳌 and “them,â€쳌 the very language that underwrites the abuses of humanity carried out by this government through its terroristic “war on terror.â€쳌

The real focus must be on a place whose sole purpose is to torture people until the only recourse that remains available to them is to somehow bring about their own deaths. The focus must be on the fact that Guantanamo is not simply an anomaly, not just an embarrassing example of this government’s zeal after September 2001 whose closure will also close that distressing chapter. The focus must be on the larger set of processes set in motion by this government, of which Guantanamo is simply the most visible manifestation.

Appeals to the government to close down Guantanamo are not nearly enough right now. We have to do more to make known the full extent of the horror. Guantanamo Bay is not simply a place where men are dressed in orange jumpsuits and placed in cages. It is a place where humanity is being systematically destroyed. This is no metaphor. Perhaps it is time to see that the responsibility for closing down Guantanamo belongs, not to George W. Bush, but to us.

Listening to the admiral, to the most recent expression of the banality of evil flowing from his lips, only one conclusion can be drawn: the United States has absented itself from humanity. Until those living in this country can find a way to stop this government, the admiral’s phrase should be applied to us: “They have no regard for life.â€쳌

Anthony Alessandrini teaches English at Kingsborough Community College/CUNY in Brooklyn, NY, and is a member of the Action Wednesdays Against War collective in New York City. He can be reached at: [e-mail].

Read it, pass it on to all your friends.

More commentary on this (including some from me) here.

Do the right thing.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 10:22 PM

"Soon there will be only Bush and Blair left"
"When this is the support you get from your last remaining friend, it's surely time to change course."

Little Johnny's still hangin' in there! Biggest arselicker* friend of all!

Damn!

Why does NOBODY remember HIM?

And why can't we Aussies FORGET HIM!?

:-)

* And currently he is bending over for Indonesia over West Papuan Refugees, modifying Aussie Laws to remove all UN rights for refugees...

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Arne
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 09:12 PM

Just for BB's reference, here's some reading.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Arne
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 09:02 PM

Richard Bridge:

Look, it's very simple. Either they are a military force, and entitled to the benefit of the Geneva Convention, or they are not and they are entitled to the benefit of the rule of law. There is no such thing as an un-person.

And the Fourth Geneva Convention as well. If they have committed crimes (i.e., acts in violation of the 'laws of war', say espionage, sabotage, etc.), then try them for that. Regardless, they're either POWs or civilians. Any illegal acts by either should be treated as illegal acts and tried before an appropriate (and recognised) forum. Unless and until "failure to wear a uniform" is a crime (and even then, the Geneva Conventions cover this eventuality), there's no excuse for not applying one or the other of the Geneva Conventions to them.

There is no category for "non-persons" who fall outside the protection of the laws ... except in a totalitarian state.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 07:05 PM

Look, it's very simple. Either they are a military force, and entitled to the benefit of the Geneva Convention, or they are not and they are entitled to the benefit of the rule of law. There is no such thing as an un-person.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: GUEST,saulgoldie
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 06:32 PM

Nutty,
I am stunned and appalled at the comments by Bush admin representatives. But I am not surprised. These people, like Ann Coulter (from the other thread) have no empathy. They are sad, cold people. They should NEVER have been allowed to take the reigns of power. This is what happens when too many good people do nothing.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 07:31 AM

Does anyone remember the band of the Coldstream Guards striking up "The Star Spangled Banner" for a crowd of thousands gathered outside Buckingham Palace after 9/11? In that prevailing mood of "We're all Americans now," who could have predicted how brainlessly Washington would throw it all away?

So far as ther ever was a coalition, it has now been thinned out considerably, with some of the leaders who supported it now out of office. Now the EU Parliament has just called for the closure of Guantanamo.

Soon there will be only Bush and Blair left, and both of these are, to all intents and purposes, dead in the water. Blair in fact has been outmanoevred by his own government colleagues. His chief law officer has said Guantanamo should be closed immediately and his constitutional affairs minister has said it should be closed or put within American jurisdiction. Number Ten has found itself unable to mumble anything in response to either comment.

When this is the support you get from your last remaining friend, it's surely time to change course.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: GUEST,wordy
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 07:07 AM

I think Nutty that the comments from the US are beyond parody, beyond reason, and beyond any sensible comment. We're mostly stunned by the sheer stupidity, our mouths agape, our minds in denial that it could be said. We're shaking our heads and wondering if we should laugh or cry, staring at each other in bewilderment, our eyebrows raised in question ... What did they say????????
When we've recovered we shall go to our history books to check some of the things said by Goebbels and Stalin to see if they got anywhere near it.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: nutty
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 06:43 AM

Given the amount of comment such threads generally produce, I am puzzled by what appears to be a lack of interest or even apathy towards this subject.

Thanks to those who have posted.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 12 Jun 06 - 08:42 PM

"captured by the Northern Alliance, warlords and Pakistani authorities, at a time when the US was shelling out huge bounties for the capture of suspected terrorists"

And when it takes nearly 300 UK Police to raid a terrace house on what now appears to be a frame up, wonder how much British Authorities are paying for similar useless wrong information?

:-)

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 12 Jun 06 - 08:33 PM

Beardedbruce tells us a great deal about what the Guantanamo detainees are not. Presumably his assertions are sourced from his own imagination, but he can tell us.

Here are a couple of reports based on Department of Defense data:

Seton Hall University, Newark NJ

National Journal (Corine Hegland)

From these we learn some interesting things about "the worst of the worst" as the US admin has collectively categorised them. For instance 55 per cent are not accused of any hositlity against the US and a mere 8 per cent (yes, eight per cent) are accused of fighting for terrorist groups. More than 85 per cent of the 450-plus detainees were captured by the Northern Alliance, warlords and Pakistani authorities, at a time when the US was shelling out huge bounties for the capture of suspected terrorists.

I was interested to read WYSIWYG's thoughtful assessment of how people might be affecte by incarceration at Guantanomo. But somehow I found Shafiq Rasul more persuasive on the subject: "There is no hope in Guantanamo. The only thing that goes through your mind day after day is how to get justice or how to kill yourself. It is the despair - not the thought of martyrdom - that sonsumes you there."

Rasul, who is 29, was one of the lucky few who have been released from the camp. Quite why it took nearly three years to establish that there was not a shred of evidence against him, has yet to be explained.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 12 Jun 06 - 07:34 PM

With you there, John!

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: John O'L
Date: 12 Jun 06 - 07:20 PM

Yes it wasn't long ago that the rest of the world was just moderately afraid of the things the US was doing. Now they are laughing hysterically. (This kind of laughter is caused by extreme fear.)

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Jun 06 - 11:32 AM

I have been reading the comments from around the world on Nuttys BBC bluey, and any citizen of the US should cringe with shame at the reaction to the `act of war ` comment from that imbecile in the US Government.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 12 Jun 06 - 11:21 AM

I read with interest and much appreciation that GWBush said he wanted the bodies of the three to be treated with respect.

I now hold my breath awaiting his announcement that this respectful treatment also should be given to the living prisoners in Guantanamo.

Wolfgang

Subject: George and The Underpantheads Neo-Cons Master Plan
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 12 Jun 06 - 08:19 AM

All part of The ***Master Plan!

Yahahahahahaha!

~~~~~

*** George and The Underpantheads Neo-Cons Master Plan
(plagiarised from South Park)

Step 1 - Pu Underpants on head and Bomb The Crap out of the Rest of the World!.
Step 3 - Take Over The World!

What's Step 2?

We haven't worked that part out yet...

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: nutty
Date: 12 Jun 06 - 05:34 AM

Correction .... that number should read 141 inmates due for release

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: nutty
Date: 12 Jun 06 - 05:32 AM

Today ..... BBC NEWS

Apparently, one of the Saudi Arabians who committed suicide was due to be released but had not been informed of the fact.

He was one of 121 inmates that will be released from the camp in the near future.

A danger to the American State ..... obviously not

Perpetrating an 'act of war' ....... obviously not

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 09:55 PM

People often say things that sound strange when they are spouting 'The Party Line'.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: dianavan
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 09:46 PM

"it was hard to see why the men had not protested about their situation"

What planet does he live on?

When people go on hunger strikes and prisoners start rioting, what does he think it means?

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 09:29 PM

'Dr. Strangelove' AND '1984'...

Read any good 'Judge Dread' lately? :-)

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: number 6
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 08:58 PM

Serious ... this isn't funny ... but jeeezuz I'm starting to think Dr. Strangelove has become a reality.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 08:55 PM

Well, if you won't let their lwayers or family talk to them, then they just HAVE to be..

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: John O'L
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 08:50 PM

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, said...it was hard to see why the men had not protested about their situation.

"We thought they were perfectly happy..."

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: number 6
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 08:35 PM

Yup ... The lunatics are in the drivers seat, driving around looking for asymmetric wars to fight!

sIx

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 08:32 PM

"Surely this is all a hoax... "

No mate! The lunatics are truly in charge of the asylum...

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: nutty
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 07:27 PM

if only it were John

Link to BBC Report

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: John O'L
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 07:19 PM

'...a good PR move...'

'...an act of asymmetric warfare...'

Surely this is all a hoax...

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 06:52 PM

"They can be held, as combatants, until the war is over, without trial. "

Plagiarising from "Lord Of The Rings"...

'The War Goes Ever On'... :-)

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 06:28 PM

Beardedbruce, scream NO loud and often, and you may eventually begin to convince yourself. But it's not a tactic that will ever convince me. The whole Guantanamo thing is a cynical construct designed specifically to avoid any risk of the US admin needing to address the questions that your post begs.

WYSIWYG is not alone in believing the earth's axis tilted on 9/11. I saw a US law prof insisting on BBCTV a few nights ago that the world underwent a paradigm shift that day. How little he must know about the world. All that happened was that America discovered what many countries already knew: there can be no absolute defence against terrorism by people determined enough to lay down their lives. And in the subsequent years the US has been learning that such terrorism cannot be defeated by main force.

In all probability the Bush admin doesn't even aspire to victory in that so-called "war," but is simply taking the opportunity to manipulate an uneasy and, to some extent, gullible electorate into surrendering freedoms that have previously been taken for granted. In this respect, as in so many others, Tony Blair is dragging the UK along the same path.

Oh, and the language used by the camp commander and the state department, quoted here, is disgusting. And this so soon after Bush had to apologise for the tone of some of his earlier pronouncements about Iraq. It shames America.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: nutty
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 06:08 PM

I'm not sure that I follow that argument.

What opposition are you referring to ?

In the Iraq 'war' The US and Britain were the aggressors.

Sadam Hussein did not declare war but put up a defence against an illegal act. (no I am not defending Sadam)

There is no doubt that the 'war' was based on flawed intelligence on the part of both countries.

Perhaps, the fact that it was an invasion rather than a 'proper' war, has led people to believe that basic humanitarian principles do not have to be adhered to.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: GUEST,wordy
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 06:02 PM

Or is it that only the "civilized" West is supposed to have any moral standards? _ NOT MY VIEWPOINT!

maybe not yours Bruce, but it is the idea of those of us who are civilised and living in the West.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 05:51 PM

"But if they are "armed combatants" whether lawful or not, they are covered by the terms of the Geneva Convention."


Not unless they meet the GC definition of POW as I listed above, which they do not.


"Perhaps it's time for the Geneva Convention to be reconvened. "

THAT I can agree with. But I still detect a one-sided application of the GC here- Why is no-one concerned that the opposition is NOT following the GC, while the US is ( Re investigation and prosecution of those who violate the terms.)?

Or is it that only the "civilized" West is supposed to have any moral standards? _ NOT MY VIEWPOINT!

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: nutty
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 05:45 PM

But if they are "armed combatants" whether lawful or not, they are covered by the terms of the Geneva Convention.

They were also removed to Guantanamo Bay from Countries that the US considered itself to be 'at war' with.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Rapparee
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 05:32 PM

Yes, it probably is. In fact, it's probably overdue.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 05:11 PM

Look, the simple reason the prisoners at Guantanamo are considered "unlawful armed combatants" instead of "prisoners of war" is because the "enemy" in the "war on terror" is an idea, not a country. The terms of The Geneva Convention are based upon the conventional idea of war being a conflict between two or more geopolitical entities. If we accept the country-versus-country definition of "war", then the "war on terror" isn't technically a war at all. It is an armed attempt to neutralize adherents of a certain philosophy. Whether or not those adherents are uniformed members of the armed services of some country is totally irrelevent.

If the US is going to change the definition of "war" to mean armed action against an idea instead of a nation, then the definition of "prisoner of war" must be changed to afford those fighting on behalf of that idea the same rights as would be extended to those fighting on behalf of a nation in a more conventionally defined war.

Perhaps it's time for the Geneva Convention to be reconvened.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: nutty
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 04:43 PM

How do you know who/what they are?

There have been no charges against them. No evidence. No trial. No representation.

The British citizens who were being held were released without charge.

How do you know?

Do you really believe what your Government tells you?

Subject: B.S.: Elvis at Guantanamo
From: Peter T.
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 04:34 PM

You have to hand it to the Americans. It appears according to a spokeswoman that the suicide of the three captives at Guantanamo was "PR" -- and a good career move to boot!!

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 03:54 PM

"If these prisoners were 'Prisoners of War' as you assert,"

I did not assert that. They are UNLAWFUL ARMED COMBATANTS, by the rules of war, being held prisoner.


Not "prisoners of war" , armed combatants NOT in uniform, ie, spies that can be executed out of hand under the Conventions.




"1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces. "

NO.


"2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. "


NO


"3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power. "

NO


"4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model. "

NO


"5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law. "

NO


"6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war. "

NO


"B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention:

1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment. "

NO


"2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties. "

NO

"

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: nutty
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 03:30 PM

Beardedbruce - If these prisoners were 'Prisoners of War' as you assert, then they would be entitled to protection under the terms of the Geneva Convention.

For those who may have forgotten what the articles of the Geneva Convention state please read

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 03:19 PM

"Emma B - PM
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 11:33 AM

- and the 3 who took their own lives had no access to a lawyer either! "

Source? This is NOT what the radio has been saying about them.


"These prisoners need access to lawyers and have the right to a trial. They have not been found guilty of anything. "

They are prisoners under the laws of war, not criminal law. They can be held, as combatants, until the war is over, without trial.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: dianavan
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 03:07 PM

Its not an act of war, its an indictment of the Bush administration's human-rights record (according to Amnesty International).

There have been over 40 suicide attempts at Guantanamo.

Apparently these three had also been part of the hunger strike and had previously been force fed.

From Scotland on Sunday: "The military has at times used aggressive force-feeding methods, including a restraint chair. Force-feeding is performed through tubes inserted into the nose. Physicians for Human Rights has called on the US to halt the "brutal and inhumane force-feeding tactics".

Prisoners have been rioting and two prisoners tried to commit suicide by over-dosing on anti-depressants.

Two of the men who committed suicide were Saudis. The Saudi government is suggesting that these men may have been tortured.

Even Britain does not approve of Guantanamo.

These prisoners need access to lawyers and have the right to a trial. They have not been found guilty of anything.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: number 6
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 01:13 PM

Rear Adm. Harry Harris, commander of Joint Task Force-Guantanamo said .... "I believe this was not an act of desperation, rather an act of asymmetric warfare waged against us,"

In case you are wondering what an act od asymnetrical warfare is ... he went on to explain ....

"Asymmetrical warfare" is defined as "a conflict in which a much weaker opponent uses unorthodox or surprise tactics to attack the weak points of the much stronger opponent."

Bull shit .... the whole agenda of the Bush, military machine stinks.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Emma B
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 01:03 PM

"A good P R move" ? - just been described that way by a dept Secretary of State in an interview for the BBC

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 01:00 PM

a long-lasting hunger strike?

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Rapparee
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 12:55 PM

It might be an act of despair, or an act of protest, but it's not an act of war. At least not how it was done in this case.

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: Amos
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 12:55 PM

The only reason they were locked up there is because of Mister Bush's war, and it was very important to keep that notion alive; in any other context their treatment would be illegal and internationally condemned. Refusal of trial or representation, suspension of habeas corpus, indefinite detention without specific charges.... brutal stuff befitting a dictator.

It's defensive rhetoric.

A

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 12:51 PM

Yes, I'm just saying that I can see how the detainees there might want to escalate in whatever form they can, with the few options open to them.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS Suicide - an act of war?
From: nutty
Date: 11 Jun 06 - 12:26 PM

Surely the fact that Guantanamo exists in it's present form is enough to spread "anti-american" feeling around the world.

It puts American troops on a par with the Nazi SS or the Soviet's KGB.