Topic: A shocking view of Military Tribunals from a Liberal
Saltah'na
Chinese Canadian, or 75% Commie Bastard.
Member # 33
posted
As some of you may know, Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters are being flown to a base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba in order to conduct Military Tribunals there. U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says that these prisoners are considered "illegal combatants" and are thus exempt from the Geneva Prisoners of War Convention.
"Liberal" groups such as Human Rights Associations claim that the inmates are unfairly interrogated, and are kept in inhumane conditions. More of them demand that the inmates be designated as PoW's under Geneva.
But what's this? A known "Liberal" is actually thinking otherwise. And it is also in a known "Liberal" newspaper?
Will wonders ever cease? Or is this the apocalypse as we know it?
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I believe THIS Liberal is entirely correct.
Funny, he sounds like a conservative.
Wonder how much flack he'll get over that... watch the 'letters to the editor' page and tell us how many people demand his firing.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Saltah'na
Chinese Canadian, or 75% Commie Bastard.
Member # 33
posted
*SMACKS First of Two*
Does Rosie sound like a guy's name, dammit?
She goes through a lot of flack from both sides of the fence as she provides both liberal and conservative opinions. For example, in an issue regarding teacher testing and recertification (an idea hatched by the Conservative Government), Rosie defended the idea and wrote about the teachers who supported the idea. You wouldn't believe the number of letters that came through demanding her resignation. (As a side note, I am considered a liberal, and I also agree with the idea.)
Anyway, as I said before, I don't consider the Toronto Star entirely left wing, they seem to be more centre then left. But both Rosie and the Toronto Star are considered to be Liberal outlets.
[ January 22, 2002: Message edited by: Tahna Los ]
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
This case is a very hard one to come to terms with, Rosie just puts forth the argument that the ends justify the means. Is this the way laws work.,. I don’t think so. The US has stated that the detainees are illegal combatants, meaning that they are exempt from POW status. This in turn makes them civilians. Now the hard part comes, Terrorism is defined as” Systematic violence carried out against private citizens , public property and political enemies with the aim of enforcing demands.”. The US has stated that they have not declared war on Afghanistan, and there goal all along has been to demand that the Taliban turn over Osama bin laden and his cronies. Does not this make the whole attack in Afghanistan a terrorist act then. If on the other hand the detainees are solders then the US Coalition has attacked a government and its army and therefore the detainees are POW’s and should be afforded the rights.
The geneva convention states “Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal”. It is not a matter of whether the government thinks they are not POW’s or not, it is a matter that a tribunal decide, therefore Rumsfeld’s statements that they will mostly be afforded the rights under the GC is braking the treaty. They should be unequivocally be given those rights until the tribunals have ruled one way or another. That means no interrogations until after the tribunals.
It is not that I don’t think something should be done but at the beginning of all this after Sept 11, Bush was stating that this was an attack against democracy, and his way of life. Now the administration has decided that part of the fundamentals of that way of life, should be set aside and any means possible should be employed to fight this theat. The ends justify the means.
-------------------- "and none of your usual boobery." M. Burns
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Um.. Er.. Rosie Greer? I dunno. Musta read the wrong byline.
Anyway, if she holds some C and some L views, she's probably a Moderate, if they balance.
As for 'teacher testing,' does that mean testing teachers every so often to see if they're still competent in their fields? I agree with that... provided the schools/state provide convenient continuing ed programs for them.
If they mean testing the classes and making the teacher's evaluation contingent upon that... that's not necessarily a good thing. Even the best teacher in the world can't teach a potato to count to ten. You can't teach those who don't care to learn.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
They are members of a criminal (terrorist) organization, which happens to be primarily (but not entirely) located in Afghanistan. Thus they are not soldiers. Some of them may have the occupation 'soldier,' but having that occupation does not mean you can't have any others. They are arrested for the 'others.'
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The teacher testing involves testing their skills every so often. I am not sure of the method, perhaps tests. The interesting thing is, talking to my daughter, there are teachers who are for this. Most of these are the teachers she feels are the most competent. It seems that it is mostly the incompetent and the union, which tends to go to the lowest common denominator, which are against it.
-------------------- "and none of your usual boobery." M. Burns
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:If they mean testing the classes and making the teacher's evaluation contingent upon that...
Actually, the problem with that approach is that the teacher will teach the test, and not the curiculum. That's a bad thing.
And, I don't know how right he is, but Alan Keyes said last night that the issue of treating Taliban or Al Queda members as POWs has people on both sides of the aisle in conflict ... or, as he put it, ... "[e]ver since President Bush announced that he is going to be dealing with terrorists by sending them before military tribunals. Interestingly enough, that idea has gotten some criticism from all sides of the spectrum, conservative as well as liberal. And it has gotten strong support from both sides of the spectrum, conservative as well as liberal."
Saltah'na
Chinese Canadian, or 75% Commie Bastard.
Member # 33
posted
Anyway, if she holds some C and some L views, she's probably a Moderate, if they balance.
Well, so do I. But I am still called a Liberal. One hint of Liberal thought and it is stamped all over my face. Not to say I resent that assumption (I actually don't mind), but I believe that the definition of Liberal and Conservative isn't as black and white as one might think.
As for 'teacher testing,' does that mean testing teachers every so often to see if they're still competent in their fields? I agree with that... provided the schools/state provide convenient continuing ed programs for them.
Agreed. No mention though was made about this in any of the articles I read. I've heard that the majority of the public is behind the idea. The ones raising a lot of flak are the militant Union ones.
Snay: Interesting point. So far, the guys I spoke to all mention the Liberals as the ones who are trying to deliberately subvert justice. One even said that "if you're not with them, then you are against them".
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Actually, the problem with that approach is that the teacher will teach the test, and not the curiculum.
A) MAY teach the test. Not all teachers are that lazy. Most aren't.
B) Simple enough to solve: don't let them see the EXACT test(s) ahead of time. Just similar tests. That way, the teacher will have to teach general concepts, like long division, instead of specific facts, like 96/4=24.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:They are members of a criminal (terrorist) organization, which happens to be primarily (but not entirely) located in Afghanistan. Thus they are not soldiers.
I was wondering what you based this on FOT, my point was that the geneva convention states that a tribunal is to decide these things in order to protect people from baseless accusations such as this.
quote:Then again, your side is well-established as the best players in the 'guilt by accusation' game, when you use the accusation to 'prove' the guilt.
Like stating this without hearing from the other side of the argument or any kind of investigation that was done above board.
quote:Verify, then return. I never take the word of ONE man. (Or in this case, one team).
Like the president or the sec. of defence, and seeing this is the only source of info we have.
quote:Perhaps it's true, perhaps not. People can say other people said lots of things, without being truthful,
This is why the tribunals should be done to determine the status of these people not just listen to the government spin on it, because the US government is very biased in there assesment of these people.
[ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: Grokca ]
-------------------- "and none of your usual boobery." M. Burns
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Yes, I am saying that the geneva convention has to be applied until the status of a prisoner has been determined. This is how the convention is written and worded. It protects ( or is supposed to) people accused without proof. And you never answered my question as to how you determined they were terrorist and not soldiers. I can only assume you have no proof, that would pass your criteria anyway, but have chosen to condemn these people with none, blindly following GB. I think this has been said here before but I will say it again, The only thing worse than an unanswered question is an unquestioned answer.
-------------------- "and none of your usual boobery." M. Burns
Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
