Amnesty International

In the interest of brevity I will only post this link.
I can't say that I'm very familiar with the conditions in Guantanamo, but two things in this article strike me as pathetic.
First- The assertion that the prisoners are being treated humanely " recieving far better treatment than in the life they were living previously".
Does it strike anyone else as stupidly arrogant to think that being a prisoner of the US government is better than not?

Second- The official US responses seem suspiciously tepid, even offhand, as if they couldn't be bothered to put up even a half-hearted defense. At a time when much of the world is focused on our motives and future moves, would it really be so much to ask that we make the attempt to explain/justify/defend our actions?
Granted, I wouldn't expect Bush to be able to muster a coherent response, but surely somebody in our leader's cabal could whip up a spirited response?

Amnesty has no favorites.......they will expose human rights abuses anywhere.

And the USA has them, as do the UK.

Amnesty international are a great organisation - as my Rodent-Mod friend says, they expose abuse of Human rights around the world. That's what Amnesty International is about!

I am a member - I help set up an Amnesty school group! :)

no surprise the US didn't ratify the rome treaty and subject themselves to the international criminal court...

Amnesty international is a left wing org with a left wing agenda.
Time after time they've shown their true colors.
Yes they go after human rights abuses but seem to be far behind on those that don't fit into their far left wing their agenda.
I put them in the same exact catagory as LA Times "Repoter" Robert Scheer.
I truly tried to like them at one time......well you know.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@30 May 2003 - 02:13
Amnesty international is a left wing org with a left wing agenda.
Time after time they've shown their true colors.
Yes they go after human rights abuses but seem to be far behind on those that don't fit into their far left wing their agenda.
I put them in the same exact catagory as LA Times "Repoter" Robert Scheer.
I truly tried to like them at one time......well you know.

---

S&A, i'm all for contrarian positions, but surely your critique goes beyond describing AI as "far left wing", this is only an observation, and doesn't explain why AI's information shouldn't be trusted. Of course they have an agenda, like any other group by definition, but lets get to the heart of the matter: do you think the criticism of the US is unwarranted? If so, why? From what little i know on the subject, its not exagerating or resorting to hyperbole to describe guantanamo bay as a prima facie violation of the law. its not just AI that's talking like this.

Indeed S&A.
Shooting the messenger doesn't invalidate the message.
But I know you're a big Rush Limbaugh fan and that's one of his favorite devices.

I'm not attacking the messenger at all.
That really was a hit and run kinda statement.
The truth is I really haven't felt much like debating lately.
I come here every day and enjoy reading all the new posts,but feel like making a quick one,then bail.
I've really been too fatigued to muster up a good response to some of more provocative posts.
I take med's that make you very fatigued sometimes.
Playing with Xara3D and hanging out in softwareworld for few is easier on my brain
You'll have to forgive me for a couple of days or so.

Well I couldn't remember anything specific about AI,but I knew that I disagreed with them a lot over the years.
So I did a web search and just found to many things to mention.
That's why I compared AI to Robert Scheer.
When he speaks it is to be discounted due to his very obvious leftist leanings and downright anti American views.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@30 May 2003 - 01:13
Amnesty international is a left wing org with a left wing agenda.
Time after time they've shown their true colors.
Yes they go after human rights abuses but seem to be far behind on those that don't fit into their far left wing their agenda.
I put them in the same exact catagory as LA Times "Repoter" Robert Scheer.
I truly tried to like them at one time......well you know.

---

They arent a left wing organisation.

They will accuse the Left as readily as the Right.

By your definaition they would accuse USA and leave China alone (and USSR when it was around)......they didnt and dont.

Both of those countries got/get far more accusations from the Organisation than the USA does.......


They dont play favourites, and are willing to bite the hand that feeds them, just as the ILO does.

You dont have to be Left Wing to 'care' about the huge abuses in Human Rights around the world.

Im actually quite Right Wing about them. If abusing 1 persons human rights will save 100's of lives (and their 'Right' to live) I say go ahead.

However, to balance that, if Human Rights are abused for no reason (eg Holding people without charge in Cuba for over 18 months) then I swing the other way.

Quite frankly, if you cant find the evidence to convict someone in 18months, when you have them in custody....you arent going to find it. I dont know what the conditions are like in this place now (so i cant comment on the current treatment of these 'prisoners'), however i remember when they 1st went there.....and the way they were being treated then was also an Abuse of Human Rights, for no good reason.

Open Your Eye's!
Guantanamo aint shit.
Guantanamo is political.
This should be one of the last things on their leftist menu.
But it's not!
The Atrocities that are happening right now that AI is'nt saying a word about(or very little)make guantanamo look like Heaven.
And Don't ask me for some long winded psycobabble-ish responce to what these Atrocities are.
There are far much worse things than this and you know it!
But there not in the forefront...mmmmm wonder why?
Nope.. lets pay attention to the death camp qualitys of Guantanamo.
The scourge of humanity.
They never accuse anything leftist except when their forced by the fact the world has knowledge of it.
AI is as anti American as the UN.
Oh yeah their hard core anti-semetic too!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@31 May 2003 - 05:22
Open Your Eye's!
Guantanamo aint shit.
Guantanamo is political.
This should be one of the last things on their leftist menu.
But it's not!
The Atrocities that are happening right now that AI is'nt saying a word about(or very little)make guantanamo look like Heaven.
And Don't ask me for some long winded psycobabble-ish responce to what these Atrocities are.
There are far much worse things than this and you know it!
But there not in the forefront...mmmmm wonder why?
Nope.. lets pay attention to the death camp qualitys of Guantanamo.
The scourge of humanity.
They never accuse anything leftist except when their forced by the fact the world has knowledge of it.
AI is as anti American as the UN.
Oh yeah their hard core anti-semetic too!

---

s&a you be talking out your asss.

Talking out my ass?
Ok...This is proving my point.
The only people that love and trust this Org. are the same people with a left thinking head and those with an anti American agenda.
Note I seperated the two.
Is there anyone else that will defend this Org.besides those on the left and those with an axe to grind against the US?
Remember.... we know who you are! ;) :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@1 June 2003 - 17:42
Talking out my ass?
Ok...This is proving my point.
The only people that love and trust this Org. are the same people with a left thinking head and those with an anti American agenda.

---

Check your meds, S&A.

That is your opinion not proof.

http://www.pall.com/science/sls/gfx/pills.gif
hehehe :lol: :lol: :lol:
It's time for some!
Your right.

Btw clocker I'm felling much better today!
Check my meds :lol: Thats a good one.
I think you people know too much about me.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@1 June 2003 - 19:16



I think you people know too much about me.

---

Well if we do it's cause you told us, ya know. :P

I did!
I told you people too much.
I guess I wanted to let eveyone know a bit about me and where I was coming from and where I had been after those very first posts here.

Well.. time for another
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/scienceins...ttom-pills.jpg
But which one should I take?
"The Red one or the Blue one"?

How come they moved conspiracy theories?
It's a conspiracy I tell ya!

I think anybody who could peruse a comprehensive list of human rights violations around the world would note a rather large discrepancy between the chartered purpose (aim) of A.I. and it's actual focus.

It is fact that any potential violations by the U.S., perceived or actual, go automatically to the top of the A.I. charts.

It is also true that many heinous and barbaric acts receive no attention whatsoever from A.I.

In answer to those who accuse A.I. of left-wing bias, I would say a U.S. "transgression" occurring under a Democrat Chief Executive would surely be censured, albeit in slightly muted fashion.

The point is, as in all other endeavors supposedly humanitarian in nature, that it is still possible to "follow the money", or in this case, the profitability.

It helps to remember that A.I. is peopled largely by lawyers (sorry, tide :P ), who are guided by their basest instincts-"nature of the beast" and all that.

As to the situation at Guantanamo, the only complaints not of the "WE DON'T LIKE IT HERE" variety had to do with religious strictures on diet and worship, and the accomodation of same. These were addressed in rather short order by the camp administrators.

I found it ironic that, while this farce continues, A.I. demonstrates so little awareness of other things going on in Cuba.

Where was A.I. when Saddam was gigging in Iraq? Where were all the successful proscecutions in the "World Court"?

The CNN article suffers from the expected and typical lack of specificity as regards actual violations.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4@2 June 2003 - 15:58
Where was A.I. when Saddam was gigging in Iraq?

---

This link provides an answer...

I think the fact the &#39;news&#39; is full of reports about Guantanamo and we did&#39;nt hear much about other cases has more to do with the media then with AI&#39;s intentions. I&#39;m afraid crimes by some small unimportant country are&#39;nt very &#39;newsworthy&#39;..... <_<


was&#39;nt there a thread about biased media.... :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mivaro+2 June 2003 - 12:40--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mivaro @ 2 June 2003 - 12:40)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--j2k4@2 June 2003 - 15:58
Where was A.I. when Saddam was gigging in Iraq?

---

This link provides an answer...

I think the fact the &#39;news&#39; is full of reports about Guantanamo and we did&#39;nt hear much about other cases has more to do with the media then with AI&#39;s intentions. I&#39;m afraid crimes by some small unimportant country are&#39;nt very &#39;newsworthy&#39;..... <_<


was&#39;nt there a thread about biased media.... :rolleyes: [/b][/quote]
Yea, verily; I say unto thee:

"Mivaro, thou speaketh the truth". ;)

But:

Shouldn&#39;t A.I. assume some of the fact-finding burden, given their stated mission?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4@2 June 2003 - 08:58


The CNN article suffers from the expected and typical lack of specificity as regards actual violations.

---

Doesn&#39;t being detained for over a year with no charges being brought count?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4@2 June 2003 - 15:58
Where was A.I. when Saddam was gigging in Iraq? Where were all the successful proscecutions in the "World Court"?

---

There was no world court until last july, by which time it was already abundantly clear that any prosecution under the Rome Statute would be an exercise in futility.

And as the USA arent playing re: The World Court, I find it amusing that an American has brought the subject up......




:-"

Quote:

---

Originally posted by clocker+2 June 2003 - 13:17--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 2 June 2003 - 13:17)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--j2k4@2 June 2003 - 08:58


The CNN article suffers from the expected and typical lack of specificity as regards actual violations.

---

Doesn&#39;t being detained for over a year with no charges being brought count? [/b][/quote]
As I recall, when the press was making the big to-do about the prisoners, their criticism of the procedures of detainment had to do with the "enemy combatant" classification, which, you are right, allowed for a pretty much open-ended period of detention. As the circumstances were, in a sense, "extra-legal", as in, bearing more toward military than civilian, the way was paved for this extraordinary (in the sense only of being "other than ordinary") detainment.

From all indications, Military detentions would be looked upon by civilian entities (the media, Amnesty International, et.al.) as being inherently harsh and unfair, however, from a military point-of-view, fairness is much less an issue than humaneness, and that case could not be sufficiently made.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by myfiles3000@2 June 2003 - 13:52

There was no world court until last july, by which time it was already abundantly clear that any prosecution under the Rome Statute would be an exercise in futility.

---

Myfiles-

I fear I mis-spoke earlier; I think I meant "World Criminal Court"(?); Kofi Annan&#39;s baby?

Are we talking about the same thing?

Could you expand on your "futility" statement? Do you mean in the sense that the U.S. wouldn&#39;t cooperate/comply?

Sorry for all the questions; I seem to be having a "moment", here- :huh:

Quote:

---

I fear I mis-spoke earlier; I think I meant "World Criminal Court"(?); Kofi Annan&#39;s baby? Are we talking about the same thing?

---

Its the same thing. see:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/112664.stm
and
http://www.un.org/law/icc/

officially, its called the rome statute of the international criminal court. the war crime prosecutions of rwanda and yugoslavia were done by tribunals, a temporary creature.

Quote:

---

Could you expand on your "futility" statement? Do you mean in the sense that the U.S. wouldn&#39;t cooperate/comply?

---

partially non-participation of US in ICC, but more to the point the war.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by myfiles3000@3 June 2003 - 06:59

Quote:

---

I fear I mis-spoke earlier; I think I meant "World Criminal Court"(?); Kofi Annan&#39;s baby? Are we talking about the same thing?

---

Its the same thing. see:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/112664.stm
and
http://www.un.org/law/icc/

officially, its called the rome statute of the international criminal court. the war crime prosecutions of rwanda and yugoslavia were done by tribunals, a temporary creature.

Quote:

---

Could you expand on your "futility" statement? Do you mean in the sense that the U.S. wouldn&#39;t cooperate/comply?

---

partially non-participation of US in ICC, but more to the point the war.

---

Ah-

Thank you for the clarification. ;)

It appears that in articles published today that the Inspector General of the US Justice Department isn&#39;t too thrilled with the actions of the FBI post 9/11 re: the round up/detention of suspected terrorists. Apparently, little effort was made to differentiate between "terrorists" and "foriegn nationals". 760 people were rounded up, none of whom were ever charged with criminal offenses. Most have been deported for immigration violations. I&#39;d have liked to post a link but the NY Times website was acting wonky, perhaps someone else can do it.
At any rate, I think that this may, in part, validate and confirm AI allegations. The source (our own Justice Dept.) can hardly be faulted for their "agenda" now , can it?

How ya doin&#39; today Cloker?
It sounds like your talking more about civil rights than human rights.
The Prisoners Of War(that&#39;s what they are)do not have constitutional rights.
I&#39;m not 100% shure about this but I think that the Geneva Convention allows these POW&#39;s to be held for the duration of the war.
Charges?
"We don&#39;t need no stinking charges"
They can friggin rot there as far as I&#39;m concerned.
As for the rounding up the usaul suspects all I have to say is We were stupid enough to give the goverment too much power after 911 and now we&#39;re going to see some abuses.
I&#39;m not naive about this.
Man Is a fallen creature thus everything he touches gets corrupted.
Everything&#33;

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@3 June 2003 - 21:23
How ya doin&#39; today Cloker?

---

I am well, thank you.
And yourself?

Love the new sig, btw.

What war are the prisoners being held in Guantanamo participants in?
The War on Terror?

I don&#39;t think that falls under the Geneva Convention.

I thought that the main bulk were either Al Qaieda,talaban and some special Iraqi&#39; POW&#39;s.

The sig is cool ain&#39;t it?
I can&#39;t take all the credit.
I found that dorothy pic in a deep Floyd search.
So I blotted out some writing that was on it and slapped it on there.
I hope I don&#39;t get in trouble for using all this internet floyd artwork.
I&#39;m not selling it or anything.
Using the Floyd artwork makes it look good with ease.
I&#39;m gonna change it every week or so.

You and hobbes can have a storytelling party.
His av and sig change regularly also...

I believe we could benefit from inclusion here of some replication of the relevant military boiler-plate; I wouldn&#39;t even know how to effectively research this, though.... :huh:

It may also be a case of flexible response, which military doctrine may extend conditionally to matters of detention during outright war or police-type actions.

But mine are going to be a theme from now on.
This weeks theme, The Wall.
With Darkside making an appearance in all of them.
It&#39;s stealing the show I fear since I put Dorothy On there.
I found that pic and couldn&#39;t resist.
God I love that movie&#33;

Edit
you posted before I could read J2.
Yup... they are definitely using some "flexibility"
I&#39;m certain there are abuses but this is tiddlely winks.
AI should be concentrating on some hardcore human rights abuses and there are many happening "right now"
Van Halen&#39;s song put it quite well.
Hey.........I love Van Halen...gonna have to experiment with some of that artwork&#33;
Maybe I&#39;ll have to make a "Right Now "theme
http://www.chinkii.com/uploads/album/misc/iwojima.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4+3 June 2003 - 13:34--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 3 June 2003 - 13:34)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--myfiles3000@3 June 2003 - 06:59

Quote:

---

I fear I mis-spoke earlier; I think I meant "World Criminal Court"(?); Kofi Annan&#39;s baby? Are we talking about the same thing?

---

Its the same thing. see:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/112664.stm
and
http://www.un.org/law/icc/

officially, its called the rome statute of the international criminal court. the war crime prosecutions of rwanda and yugoslavia were done by tribunals, a temporary creature.

Quote:

---

Could you expand on your "futility" statement? Do you mean in the sense that the U.S. wouldn&#39;t cooperate/comply?

---

partially non-participation of US in ICC, but more to the point the war.

---

Ah-

Thank you for the clarification. ;) [/b][/quote]

Signatories and Ratification State

I note with interest that one country that isnt even a signatory to the original court has accepted it in full.


There are a number of countries that refuse to accept the world court though, some of them actually signatories of the original treaty.....

Lets see if these Countries have anything in common re: Human Rights

Israel
United Arab Emerates
Zimbabwe
Phillipines
Chile.....

well the list goes on......in general they all seem to have one thing in common....


Except, hang on........The USA refuses to ratify too?

...my what nice company your keeping these days ;)

:-"

EDITED to add a direct link to signatories page