Free Republic

Take your meds. Please.

I've seen what they did to Danny Pearl

My uncle saw what they did to a close friend of his who was working in Tower II on September 11. Considering that the only piece left of his friend was two molars and a section of jaw bone about the size of a pencil, they were extremely lucky to be able to identify him at all.

I agree that the pictures were a complete violation, my argument is that what I have seen so far is not torture.

I have not yet seen all of the pictures. But the old saying about there being fire where there's smoke comes to mind. A mind that could conceive of stripping these prisoners and forcing them into homoerotic poses is not that far from actually inflicting torture upon them.

I never said that 60 Minutes II was legally subject to the Geneva convention.

No, what you did is chime in on a discussion with an indeterminate statement that "The principles of the Geneva Convention still apply ..." Exactly what they "apply" to was left to the imagination of the reader, and my imagination said "60 Minutes II." A news organization is not part of the government and cannot be forced to follow rules that apply ONLY to the government. Hence, YOUR error.

And you still ignore my point.

You ignored mine first.

Now buzz off.

Thank you. But I won't be here long.

The principles of the Geneva Convention still apply, whether you are legally subject to them or not.

Thank you for your frank albeit tortured admission that 60 Minutes II is not legally subject to the Geneva Convention.

When a prisoner fails to do what he is told in an American prison, a five man team dressed in riot gear opens his cell door and thumps his ass but good, it's not considered punishment, it's considered maintaining order.

You've apparently been watching too much "Oz" on HBO. The cadre of prison officials you refer to is called a "SORT team". And no, they do not routinely "thump his ass but good" just for kicks and grins if they want to stay out of a disciplinary hearing and/or prison themselves.

Stripping prisoners and taking pictures of them in degrading poses grossly violates the rules of war, the rules of human decency, and the UCMJ. I have a feeling that each of these goon guards are going to feel the wrath of all three very soon in their military careers.

We do not know the rap sheet on the Iraqi prisoners, but one thing is for sure, they are not in the prison for writing a bad check, they're trained killers captured on the battle field while trying to kill our Soldiers or planning terrorist attacks on our troops.

They also fall under the protection of the Geneva Convention, which these US Army jailers violated in spades by abusing them. And the problem with our violating the Convention is that the enemy now has perfect justification to do the same thing to OUR prisoners. Just wait for the first photos of our POWs being abused to hit Al Jazeerah.

Nothing I have seen so far can be labeled torture, just humiliation.

You're joking, I hope. EVERYTHING I have seen in the photos so far falls under that description.

The Geneva Conventions were violated when 60 Minutes II broadcasted the photo's, until then, there was no humiliation shown to the public or the world

Uh, 60 Minutes II is not a governmental organization, and as such is not subject to the Convention.

You found at least two former Presidents to pure enough to be worthy of your service. Might I ask which ones?

My decision to serve my country was not predicated on who held the rank of Commander-in-Chief at the time. Sorry to disappoint you.

And oh yes, evasion noted. You obviously believe that torture is A-OK when its Our Boys that are doing it.

How could you make yourself more clear?

Jawohl, Obersturm­führer! Your diligence will be reported to the Leader Himself.

Make sure you recall all that are here on FR praising the illegal media release of files and evidenciary photos before and Court Martials and/or criminal trials.

Be sure and carefully note my probably-soon-to-be-deleted screen name as one of those who are praising these revelations, whatever their source. Sunlight is a good disinfectant, and there is NO excuse for prisoner abuse by US armed forces. Those involved (and even their leadership including the President himself if malfeasance can be proven) need to be tried fairly in this matter, then locked up immediately if it can be proven they had any knowledge about these atrocities.

There is some XHD money and power flowing behind the scenes on this "atrocity scamdal".

You use intentional misspelling and quotation marks in an ironic sense, but the scandal is very real and deserves every bit of the public attention it is receiving. Torture and humiliation of prisoners in violation of every rule of warfare is NEVER acceptable, even if the "good guys" are the ones doing it. And, as for the pathetic "but THEY flew planes into the WTC first" defense I've been reading here lately, that is simply blind partisan bunk. Two wrongs have never made a right.

If this incident brings down Bush's government, then so be it. I did not serve 12 years in the US Navy to stand idly by and just knowingly smirk and cluck my tongue when the armed forces of my country commit the selfsame acts for which we condemn our enemies.

Lots of beltway shysters with mega experience in manipulating the system.

Careful, the black helicopters are RIGHT OUTSIDE YOUR HOUSE! FLEE!

Judith Anne, be sure and add my screen name to your "subversives" list as well. Thanks ever so much.

My prayers and thoughts go out to Countrydummy and her family. May she heal quickly and completely.

I stand by my previous statements on this case, and have more profitable things to do today than to hang around here. Good day.

I argue that the government has no right to deny a person food and water if someone is willing to give it to them.

Again (and this is the last time I will bring this up), take it up with the Florida legislature if you disagree with the law in Florida.

I hate to break it to you, but you aren't going to find many here sympathetic to your "right-to-die" movement which is killing off people without giving them or the rest of their family any say in it.

Then you are morally responsible for the continued torture of those who cannot make their own decisions, and apparently believe that the government is responsible for providing food and water to every American citizen whether they want it or not. Live with it.

(and trying to insinuate that I am a communist isn't going to get you anywhere)

I have made no such insinuation.

Strawman, you are recommending death for others that you see as inconvenient or irrelevant.

I deny that.

Do you hold that the government has a duty to deprive food and water to every citizen?

No, I do not. UNLESS such withholding is written into the law, as it is in this case.

Now answer MY question - "Does the government have a duty to provide food and water to every citizen?"

YOU are the one that brought up the strawman of governmental responsibility for feeding all US citizens.

Which has nothing to do with your assertion that her family could use food stamps to get food and water for her (a questionable supposition fraught with its own illogic).

And, as for "strawmen", just answer the question: "Do you believe that the government must provide food and water for every citizen?"

What is your point exactly?

My point is that you chastized me for blaming the family for not coming forward 13 years ago and asking the Florida legislature to change the law if they disagreed with it. My point is that they have had 13 years to do so and could have done so at any time during those 13 years. To attempt to deflect blame to the legislature or the courts for their failure to have done so is unfair.

There was a substantial amount of money set aside to provide this particular US citizen's basic needs (f & w).

I don't care if Bill Gates steps forward and promises to pay the freight for the poor woman for the rest of her life. At what point do you finally say "enough" and grant her release from her hell on earth? The state of Florida has laws that answer that question, and as far as I can see, they have been applied as fairly and even-handedly as is possible under the circumstances.

Anyway, what on earth do you think food stamps are for?

Uhhh, "food stamps" are government benefits.

The court has forbidden everyone concerned with this woman to even feed her a spoonful of Jello. What the heck are they worried about? She might choke and die < /sarcasm>?

Being non-responsive, she could very well aspirate a spoonful of Jello and die of pneumonia. If you were the one attempting to feed her a spoonful of Jello, would you be willing to step forward and be brought up on charges if you killed her in such a way?

I'll ask again - at what point do you finally say "enough" and grant her release from her hell on earth?

Still, you are recommending death for someone else, not yourself.

That's the problem with having those nasty things called "opinions." Its a pity that some FreeRepublic posters take them further and presume to play God and want to attempt to force-feed the rest of us whether we want it or not.

And every advocate of abortion too is already born and therefore has a conflict of interest when he endorses abortion of the unborn.

Strawman and completely irrelevant to Schiavo's case.

WHY ARE YOU SILENT POPE JOHN PAUL II???

In case you haven't been keeping up on current events, he hasn't been feeling too well himself lately. Its instructive that somebody who apparently knows that Terri Schiavo is a Roman Catholic DOESN'T know about the Pope's recent physical troubles.