Gitmo Gulag? Serious bad guys at Guantanamo would love to kill you. Have a nice day.

[Sarge]

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2005/102005/10232005/139151

Date published: 10/23/2005

UANTANAMO BAY, CUBA--In the fall of 2001, the U.S. Naval Facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba ("Gitmo" to those who live here) was teetering on the edge of oblivion, with a skeleton crew of fewer than 2,000 service members on duty. Now a contingent of more than 10,000 resides here. Behind that surge: the need for secure confinement of a collection of human debris snatched from the battlefields of Afghanistan in early 2002.

These "detainees" are not innocent foot soldiers, or confused Afghan opium farmers drafted by the Taliban. They are Islamic fundamentalists from across the Middle East, rabid jihadists who have dedicated their lives to the destruction of America and Western civilization.

Among the residents are al-Qaida organizers, bomb makers, financial specialists, recruiters of suicide attackers, and just plain killers. Many of these men met frequently with Osama bin Laden. The terrorist Maad Al Qahtani--a Saudi who is a self-confessed collaborator with the Sept. 11 hijackers--is one of many infamous captives.

In the opening salvos of the global war on terror, our forces took a lot of prisoners from the battlefield. Estimates are that more than 70,000 Taliban and al-Qaida fighters were captured and screened. Of that number, approximately 800 were deemed of such high value for intelligence purposes, or such a severe threat in their own person, that they needed to be interrogated and confined in a secure locale from which they could not easily escape or be rescued.

Welcome to the new Gitmo.

I was able to observe conditions at the detention facility, firsthand, at the end of June, when I was invited to join a group of 10 former military and intelligence analysts on an inspection tour. Briefings commenced aboard our aircraft shortly after takeoff, and continued until landing.

We were met planeside by Brig. Gen. Jay Hood, the commanding officer of Joint Task Force Gitmo, whose soldiers are responsible for the security, interrogation, housing, and oversight of all the terrorists confined there. Gen. Hood and his staff fielded all questions and criticisms, and were very forthcoming.

Who are these men?

While we observed absolutely no evidence of torture of prisoners at Gitmo, it is clear that the daily atmosphere is rife with harsh abuse: The prisoners are constantly assaulting the guards.

Our young military men and women routinely endure the vilest invective imaginable, including death threats that spill over to guards' families. All soldiers and sailors working "inside the wire" have blacked out their name tags so that the detainees will not learn their identities. Before that step was taken the terrorists were threatening to tell their al-Qaida pals still at large who the guards were.

"We will look you up on the Internet," the prisoners said. "We will find you and slaughter you and your family in your homes at night. We will cut your throats like sheep. We will drink the blood of the infidel."

That is bad enough, but the terrorist prisoners throw more than words at the guards. On a daily basis, American soldiers carrying out their duties within the maximum-security camp are barraged with feces, urine, semen, and spit hurled by the detainees. Secretly fashioned weapons intended for use in attacking guards or fellow detainees are confiscated regularly.

When food or other items are passed through the "bean hole"--an opening approximately 4 inches by 24 inches in the cell doors--the detainees have grabbed at the wrists and arms of the Americans feeding them and tried to break their bones.

When guards enter the cells to remove detainees for interrogation sessions, medical visits, or any number of reasons, detainees sometimes climb on the metal bunks and leap on the guards. They have crammed themselves under the bunks, requiring several guards to extract them. Some have attacked unsuspecting soldiers with steel chairs.

Determined to inflict maximum damage, detainees have groped under the protective face masks of the guards, clawing their faces and trying to gouge eyes and tear mouths.

Keep in mind that our soldiers--young men and young women--are absolutely forbidden from responding in kind. They are constrained to maintain absolute discipline and follow humane operating procedures at all times, at risk of serious punishment.

Documents recently obtained by The Associated Press through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit show that one detainee punched a guard in the mouth, knocking out his tooth, then began to bite the MP. Several guards were required to repel the prisoner's attack; one soldier who came to the rescue delivered two blows to the inmate's head with a handheld radio.

For this he was dropped in rank to private.

In a different incident, an MP doused with toilet water responded by spraying the offending inmate with a hose. For this he was charged with assault.

Another American soldier was disciplined for cursing at inmates. One guard punched a detainee after being struck and spit on while placing the man in restraints in the prison hospital in October, 2004. ("My instincts took over after the hitting and spitting," the soldier wrote in his report.)

He was recommended for a reduction in rank to E-4, loss of a month's pay, and extra duty for 45 days.

How cooperative a detainee is determines where he is housed, how much free time he is given, whether he lives alone or in a group, and what color clothing he wears. The most dangerous wear an orange jump suit. Those who heed instructions earn a beige jumpsuit, and those who are deemed to be fully compliant wear white. The latter groups have daily recreation periods, live in groups of as many as 10, and receive extra privileges.

The compliance rating, by the way, has nothing to do with cooperation with interrogators. Indeed, many fully compliant detainees have maintained stoic silence, while some of the most notorious, dangerous prisoners speak freely with interrogators.

Nearly all of these hardened terrorists have been well-coached on how to be an American captive. Given any opportunity, they will all claim torture and human-rights violations. They have been schooled on counter-interrogation techniques, on how to construct and maintain a cover story, and other subterfuges to fool or deflect interrogators.

Some detainees, including one classified as a "high value intelligence source" that I was able to observe, take pride in discussing their activities and capabilities with interrogators. The man I saw brags about Americans he has killed, other Muslims he has terrorized, attacks he has planned and carried out, and what he will do to the Americans if he has a chance.

He is a leader, and affirms his high rank within the al-Qaida chain. He has started or ended riotous behavior by fellow prisoners on more than one occasion.

With twisted irony, this individual condemns prisoners who maintain silence for being "ashamed" of their past. "They ought to proclaim their feats as proof of their commitment to the cause of Islam," he tells interrogators, while munching continuously from a box of doughnuts provided by the interrogator. Why the doughnuts? "He throws his food at the guards," General Hood says, "so he loves to eat the doughnuts during the interrogation sessions."

Functional leniency?

We asked Hood if he was possibly being too lenient with these men. "This system of rapport-building works," Hood assures us. In support of the soft-handed approach, he cites an extraordinary amount of actionable intelligence that continues to flow out of the interrogation rooms of Gitmo.

His revelation was a surprise to me. During my own career in the U.S. Army Special Forces, I had been taught that intelligence, like bread, gets stale quickly. That may be true for tactical intelligence of the sort I used in the field. Strategic intelligence, however--the kind that we continue to collect at Gitmo--seems to have a much longer shelf life.

Today's interrogators are succeeding at mapping out the complex organizational and financial structure of al-Qaida in increasing detail, thereby uncovering networks that need to be attacked and dismantled. They are uncovering new "sleeper" cells. They are learning of temporarily shelved plans for new terrorist attacks, some of which have subsequently been thwarted by law enforcement authorities in America and Europe.

Another surprise for me was learning that many of the U.S. interrogators are women. We have all heard the salacious stories about using women to tease or embarrass the detainees. I saw a different reality. The camp behavioral expert, a female Ph.D. who has more than two years of experience at Gitmo, informed me that female interrogators have been very effective.

"We assume the role of sister or mother," she explained, "something that is quite acceptable and natural in their culture." She dresses demurely for her sessions. "I wear long sleeves, an ankle-length dress, and little makeup": The interrogation room she enters is sparsely furnished with leg cuffs to secure the prisoner, a one-way mirror, cameras, and a distress button to summon help if needed.

"We review what we know of their backgrounds, try lots of approaches, and work on them to find something that they can relate to."

It is a long, complex process requiring great patience, and more than a little human empathy. It categorically rejects the use of drugs, coercion, or duress.

Intelligence gleaned from Gitmo is blended with information from other sources to connect dots. We learned that one noncooperative detainee had his cover penetrated just last month by having his photo identified by a freshly captured fighter in Afghanistan. Once confronted with his real identity, he began to talk.

It is important to keep in mind that these men, while exceedingly dangerous and even pathological in their desire to kill Westerners, are generally well-educated and broadly traveled. Several detainees have advanced degrees in law, engineering, and medicine from American and European schools like the University of London.

Others are highly skilled technical experts with advanced training and knowledge of electronics and demolitions. (Some of these are contributing to our knowledge of al-Qaida bombs found in Iraq.) Many of these men occupied the top al-Qaida echelons, and met frequently with bin Laden.

A lot of these men came from middle-class or wealthy families. They come from 17 different countries, but a great many are Saudi Arabian. They are not driven by poverty, unemployment, or class deprivation. They are motivated by a virulent form of Islam that promotes jihad and death to Western civilization.

They will kill Americans--including women and children--without conscience, for they are convinced that restoration of the Islamic caliphate is their sole mission on this Earth.

Many readers will have heard stories about detainees sleeping in air-conditioned berths, while the American troops guarding them sweated in tents. You may have heard that American soldiers were eating MREs while the terrorists dined on three "hots" daily, providing about 2,600 calories of carefully varied food. Those stories were correct.

Conditions for camp guards have been improved dramatically, however. I ate heartily with the soldiers and sailors working the camps (the Navy supplies a large number of experienced Masters at Arms), and learned how they feel about their mission. Universally, they are proud of their work, although somewhat disappointed that the American public is not more aware of the difficulties they undergo to keep us safe.

One young woman at my table, an Army private first class, was asked what she thought about rhetoric in the American media, and from the mouths of elected officials like Sens. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), describing our service members at Guantanamo as "Nazis."

Frowning, she answered, "It hurts my feelings to hear that junk. We try to do as good a job as possible down here. These detainees are dangerous. They try to kill us every time we get close to them, and would certainly kill Americans if released."

I asked her if morale was affected by such political statements. "I'll tell you this," she replied, breaking into a grin. "Every time we get called those names we decide we're going to show 'em. We focus on our mission and work harder."

Guards pull several days of duty inside the wire, and are then rotated out. They need the relief from the intense pressure inside. But the time outside is not R&R; training continues on a constant basis. Gitmo has some of the most detailed and comprehensive procedural rules in the military. Supervision is constant, random inspections are common, all supervisors in the chain of command are held responsible for the actions of subordinates, and soldiers are schooled to report infractions.

The American service members at Guantanamo do not have the satisfaction of tossing a grenade or shooting back at the terrorists in their midst. They will not be recognized when awards for valor are bestowed.

In the face of vile abuse they must respond with supreme restraint, aware that even the slightest infraction will draw the fury and condemnation of hyperbolic politicians and reporters who loathe our military and want nothing more than to embarrass and damage American interests in this war.

For defense against irresponsible and slanderous charges, these men and women rely on ordinary Americans--those of us who rest at home in the shadow of safety they cast.

[Ignatius J.]

We never doubted that there were serious people at gitmo who need to be locked up. You will never hear anyone on the left - who should be taken seriously - debate that point.

I can't speak for everyone else who criticizes the situation, but I my biggest issue is with the lack of transparency.

Why can't US citizens know who is being locked up? Why can't US citizens know under what circumstances these people were captured? If they are so obviously guilty what is the harm in giving them a lawyer so that when we lock them up for good, everyone here can rest easy knowing that the people at gitmo are who the US government says they are? People make honest mistakes and trials would assure that every single person who we lock up forever did the things we think they did.

If every one of them is guilty, why do some get set free?

these are the important questions, and no amount of flag waving is going to distract from that. I value the work that the soldiers are doing. Most of them are making the best of the situation and are representing the country in a great way. Why hide that?

[chomerics]

Sarge, you are really stretching now. Your past 4 threads have all been propaganda to counter how us acting like the enemy is O.K., it is not!!!

Everyone knows who we are fighting, we all know how low on the totem pole these people are, but just because they are the scum on the earth doesn't mean we should act the same way.

[Destino]

It's good that the US sticks to a higher standard then those expressed by a more blood thirsty minority.

[jpillian]

Good find, Sarge.

In regards to the transparency issue -- I've wondered that myself.

I believe it has to do with the fact that, if AQ doesn't know who we have in custody, they really have no idea what intelligence we have accessible to us.

I also believe that the POLITICAL thing to do would have been to have created a very transparent prison system. Politically, this thing has always been a thorn in Bush's flesh -- it's all downside for the administration politically.

Therefore, I imagine there must be something else that's motivating the decision to keep this all a bit closed door.

Just a thought.

[Art Monk Fan]

Sarge, you are really stretching now. Your past 4 threads have all been propaganda to counter how us acting like the enemy is O.K., it is not!!!

Everyone knows who we are fighting, we all know how low on the totem pole these people are, but just because they are the scum on the earth doesn't mean we should act the same way.

You made me re-read the whole article with this post, Chom. This article shows that we treat the detainees respectfully and within accepted standards, NOT that we treat them as they treat us. Maybe you should re-read it yourself.

[Crazyhorse1]

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2005/102005/10232005/139151

Date published: 10/23/2005

UANTANAMO BAY, CUBA--In the fall of 2001, the U.S. Naval Facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba ("Gitmo" to those who live here) was teetering on the edge of oblivion, with a skeleton crew of fewer than 2,000 service members on duty. Now a contingent of more than 10,000 resides here. Behind that surge: the need for secure confinement of a collection of human debris snatched from the battlefields of Afghanistan in early 2002.

These "detainees" are not innocent foot soldiers, or confused Afghan opium farmers drafted by the Taliban. They are Islamic fundamentalists from across the Middle East, rabid jihadists who have dedicated their lives to the destruction of America and Western civilization.

Among the residents are al-Qaida organizers, bomb makers, financial specialists, recruiters of suicide attackers, and just plain killers. Many of these men met frequently with Osama bin Laden. The terrorist Maad Al Qahtani--a Saudi who is a self-confessed collaborator with the Sept. 11 hijackers--is one of many infamous captives.

In the opening salvos of the global war on terror, our forces took a lot of prisoners from the battlefield. Estimates are that more than 70,000 Taliban and al-Qaida fighters were captured and screened. Of that number, approximately 800 were deemed of such high value for intelligence purposes, or such a severe threat in their own person, that they needed to be interrogated and confined in a secure locale from which they could not easily escape or be rescued.

Welcome to the new Gitmo.

I was able to observe conditions at the detention facility, firsthand, at the end of June, when I was invited to join a group of 10 former military and intelligence analysts on an inspection tour. Briefings commenced aboard our aircraft shortly after takeoff, and continued until landing.

We were met planeside by Brig. Gen. Jay Hood, the commanding officer of Joint Task Force Gitmo, whose soldiers are responsible for the security, interrogation, housing, and oversight of all the terrorists confined there. Gen. Hood and his staff fielded all questions and criticisms, and were very forthcoming.

Who are these men?

While we observed absolutely no evidence of torture of prisoners at Gitmo, it is clear that the daily atmosphere is rife with harsh abuse: The prisoners are constantly assaulting the guards.

Our young military men and women routinely endure the vilest invective imaginable, including death threats that spill over to guards' families. All soldiers and sailors working "inside the wire" have blacked out their name tags so that the detainees will not learn their identities. Before that step was taken the terrorists were threatening to tell their al-Qaida pals still at large who the guards were.

"We will look you up on the Internet," the prisoners said. "We will find you and slaughter you and your family in your homes at night. We will cut your throats like sheep. We will drink the blood of the infidel."

That is bad enough, but the terrorist prisoners throw more than words at the guards. On a daily basis, American soldiers carrying out their duties within the maximum-security camp are barraged with feces, urine, semen, and spit hurled by the detainees. Secretly fashioned weapons intended for use in attacking guards or fellow detainees are confiscated regularly.

When food or other items are passed through the "bean hole"--an opening approximately 4 inches by 24 inches in the cell doors--the detainees have grabbed at the wrists and arms of the Americans feeding them and tried to break their bones.

When guards enter the cells to remove detainees for interrogation sessions, medical visits, or any number of reasons, detainees sometimes climb on the metal bunks and leap on the guards. They have crammed themselves under the bunks, requiring several guards to extract them. Some have attacked unsuspecting soldiers with steel chairs.

Determined to inflict maximum damage, detainees have groped under the protective face masks of the guards, clawing their faces and trying to gouge eyes and tear mouths.

Keep in mind that our soldiers--young men and young women--are absolutely forbidden from responding in kind. They are constrained to maintain absolute discipline and follow humane operating procedures at all times, at risk of serious punishment.

Documents recently obtained by The Associated Press through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit show that one detainee punched a guard in the mouth, knocking out his tooth, then began to bite the MP. Several guards were required to repel the prisoner's attack; one soldier who came to the rescue delivered two blows to the inmate's head with a handheld radio.

For this he was dropped in rank to private.

In a different incident, an MP doused with toilet water responded by spraying the offending inmate with a hose. For this he was charged with assault.

Another American soldier was disciplined for cursing at inmates. One guard punched a detainee after being struck and spit on while placing the man in restraints in the prison hospital in October, 2004. ("My instincts took over after the hitting and spitting," the soldier wrote in his report.)

He was recommended for a reduction in rank to E-4, loss of a month's pay, and extra duty for 45 days.

How cooperative a detainee is determines where he is housed, how much free time he is given, whether he lives alone or in a group, and what color clothing he wears. The most dangerous wear an orange jump suit. Those who heed instructions earn a beige jumpsuit, and those who are deemed to be fully compliant wear white. The latter groups have daily recreation periods, live in groups of as many as 10, and receive extra privileges.

The compliance rating, by the way, has nothing to do with cooperation with interrogators. Indeed, many fully compliant detainees have maintained stoic silence, while some of the most notorious, dangerous prisoners speak freely with interrogators.

Nearly all of these hardened terrorists have been well-coached on how to be an American captive. Given any opportunity, they will all claim torture and human-rights violations. They have been schooled on counter-interrogation techniques, on how to construct and maintain a cover story, and other subterfuges to fool or deflect interrogators.

Some detainees, including one classified as a "high value intelligence source" that I was able to observe, take pride in discussing their activities and capabilities with interrogators. The man I saw brags about Americans he has killed, other Muslims he has terrorized, attacks he has planned and carried out, and what he will do to the Americans if he has a chance.

He is a leader, and affirms his high rank within the al-Qaida chain. He has started or ended riotous behavior by fellow prisoners on more than one occasion.

With twisted irony, this individual condemns prisoners who maintain silence for being "ashamed" of their past. "They ought to proclaim their feats as proof of their commitment to the cause of Islam," he tells interrogators, while munching continuously from a box of doughnuts provided by the interrogator. Why the doughnuts? "He throws his food at the guards," General Hood says, "so he loves to eat the doughnuts during the interrogation sessions."

Functional leniency?

We asked Hood if he was possibly being too lenient with these men. "This system of rapport-building works," Hood assures us. In support of the soft-handed approach, he cites an extraordinary amount of actionable intelligence that continues to flow out of the interrogation rooms of Gitmo.

His revelation was a surprise to me. During my own career in the U.S. Army Special Forces, I had been taught that intelligence, like bread, gets stale quickly. That may be true for tactical intelligence of the sort I used in the field. Strategic intelligence, however--the kind that we continue to collect at Gitmo--seems to have a much longer shelf life.

Today's interrogators are succeeding at mapping out the complex organizational and financial structure of al-Qaida in increasing detail, thereby uncovering networks that need to be attacked and dismantled. They are uncovering new "sleeper" cells. They are learning of temporarily shelved plans for new terrorist attacks, some of which have subsequently been thwarted by law enforcement authorities in America and Europe.

Another surprise for me was learning that many of the U.S. interrogators are women. We have all heard the salacious stories about using women to tease or embarrass the detainees. I saw a different reality. The camp behavioral expert, a female Ph.D. who has more than two years of experience at Gitmo, informed me that female interrogators have been very effective.

"We assume the role of sister or mother," she explained, "something that is quite acceptable and natural in their culture." She dresses demurely for her sessions. "I wear long sleeves, an ankle-length dress, and little makeup": The interrogation room she enters is sparsely furnished with leg cuffs to secure the prisoner, a one-way mirror, cameras, and a distress button to summon help if needed.

"We review what we know of their backgrounds, try lots of approaches, and work on them to find something that they can relate to."

It is a long, complex process requiring great patience, and more than a little human empathy. It categorically rejects the use of drugs, coercion, or duress.

Intelligence gleaned from Gitmo is blended with information from other sources to connect dots. We learned that one noncooperative detainee had his cover penetrated just last month by having his photo identified by a freshly captured fighter in Afghanistan. Once confronted with his real identity, he began to talk.

It is important to keep in mind that these men, while exceedingly dangerous and even pathological in their desire to kill Westerners, are generally well-educated and broadly traveled. Several detainees have advanced degrees in law, engineering, and medicine from American and European schools like the University of London.

Others are highly skilled technical experts with advanced training and knowledge of electronics and demolitions. (Some of these are contributing to our knowledge of al-Qaida bombs found in Iraq.) Many of these men occupied the top al-Qaida echelons, and met frequently with bin Laden.

A lot of these men came from middle-class or wealthy families. They come from 17 different countries, but a great many are Saudi Arabian. They are not driven by poverty, unemployment, or class deprivation. They are motivated by a virulent form of Islam that promotes jihad and death to Western civilization.

They will kill Americans--including women and children--without conscience, for they are convinced that restoration of the Islamic caliphate is their sole mission on this Earth.

Many readers will have heard stories about detainees sleeping in air-conditioned berths, while the American troops guarding them sweated in tents. You may have heard that American soldiers were eating MREs while the terrorists dined on three "hots" daily, providing about 2,600 calories of carefully varied food. Those stories were correct.

Conditions for camp guards have been improved dramatically, however. I ate heartily with the soldiers and sailors working the camps (the Navy supplies a large number of experienced Masters at Arms), and learned how they feel about their mission. Universally, they are proud of their work, although somewhat disappointed that the American public is not more aware of the difficulties they undergo to keep us safe.

One young woman at my table, an Army private first class, was asked what she thought about rhetoric in the American media, and from the mouths of elected officials like Sens. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), describing our service members at Guantanamo as "Nazis."

Frowning, she answered, "It hurts my feelings to hear that junk. We try to do as good a job as possible down here. These detainees are dangerous. They try to kill us every time we get close to them, and would certainly kill Americans if released."

I asked her if morale was affected by such political statements. "I'll tell you this," she replied, breaking into a grin. "Every time we get called those names we decide we're going to show 'em. We focus on our mission and work harder."

Guards pull several days of duty inside the wire, and are then rotated out. They need the relief from the intense pressure inside. But the time outside is not R&R; training continues on a constant basis. Gitmo has some of the most detailed and comprehensive procedural rules in the military. Supervision is constant, random inspections are common, all supervisors in the chain of command are held responsible for the actions of subordinates, and soldiers are schooled to report infractions.

The American service members at Guantanamo do not have the satisfaction of tossing a grenade or shooting back at the terrorists in their midst. They will not be recognized when awards for valor are bestowed.

In the face of vile abuse they must respond with supreme restraint, aware that even the slightest infraction will draw the fury and condemnation of hyperbolic politicians and reporters who loathe our military and want nothing more than to embarrass and damage American interests in this war.

For defense against irresponsible and slanderous charges, these men and women rely on ordinary Americans--those of us who rest at home in the shadow of safety they cast.

Fine, Sarge. Let's charge, try, and convict these guys. If we don't do that, we're worse than they are. If you put me in a cage on an indefinate basis, I'll try to do a whole lot worse than throw feces at you.

[twist]

I still don't understand why giving these people due process then locking them away for life or executeing them is such a dangerious idea.

If they are so obviously guilty, and as dangerous as you say, it woulden't even be an issue would it?

[chomerics]

You made me re-read the whole article with this post, Chom. This article shows that we treat the detainees respectfully and within accepted standards, NOT that we treat them as they treat us. Maybe you should re-read it yourself.

My post had to do with the past 3 posts Sarge had, they were all slanted towards the "we are fighting a savage beast" mantra", and we should be allowed to stoop to their levels.

Four U.S. Contractors Killed in Iraq

Spanish Judge Issues Warrant for Three GIs

[GhostofAlvinWalton]

Why can't US citizens know who is being locked up?

Why can't US citizens know under what circumstances these people were captured?

If they are so obviously guilty what is the harm in giving them a lawyer so that when we lock them up for good, everyone here can rest easy knowing that the people at gitmo are who the US government says they are?

#1. If the bad guys don't know whom we have then they do not know what we know. They may think someone is dead but we really have them. They may think we have someone who we don't.

#2. I hope you are joking. US citizens have NO right to know anything about military operations outside of the US. That is how people/soldiers die. In this case, do you think it is a good idea to tell the bad guys how we tracked, gathered evidence, who gave us info, and where we caught their operatives? That would make sure that we didn't catch anyone else that way. :doh:

#3. See #1 & #2. Then everyone knows whom we have and how we caught them. Their "lawyers" would get that info to the bad guys immediately.

I don't mean to be harsh. I just don't understand why people think they need to be told of everything that goes on everywhere.

When I have done drug interdiction operations we didn't tell anybody what we were doing. That was because we wanted it to work and to go home at the end of the day. Oh yeah, and it was NOBODYS business!!

.

[Destino]

#2. I hope you are joking. US citizens have NO right to know anything about military operations outside of the US. That is how people/soldiers die. In this case, do you think it is a good idea to tell the bad guys how we tracked, gathered evidence, who gave us info, and where we caught their operatives? That would make sure that we didn't catch anyone else that way. :doh:

So then how do you know who not to vote for if we allow everyone to hide their mistakes?

[chomerics]

I don't mean to be harsh. I just don't understand why people think they need to be told of everything that goes on everywhere.

.

Normally, this is not a problem and I would agree with you. . . but. . . with what we've been caught on film doing, there is absolutely no way we can trust what we are told. We've been lied to wayyyy to much to let things continue to go on without oversight.

[GhostofAlvinWalton]

So then how do you know who not to vote for if we allow everyone to hide their mistakes?

When I said US citizens had no right to know about military ops outside of the US, I meant the actual details of the operations. Things that you need a security clearance to know about. I didn't explain that very well, I know. I hope you got my point other than that.

[GhostofAlvinWalton]

Normally, this is not a problem and I would agree with you. . . but. . . with what we've been caught on film doing, there is absolutely no way we can trust what we are told. We've been lied to wayyyy to much to let things continue to go on without oversight.

I assume you mean the "torture" stuff. I have a mixed reaction to this subject. I believe "torture" is wrong in general (almost always). I say almost always for only ONE reason. The definite saving of US or US allied lives as a direct result of using "torture". I know this is a very slippery slope. The chances that you would know that someone definitely had that kind of info makes this scenario very unlikely to ever take place.

That being said I do not consider being degraded as torture. If that is the case than millions of school children are tortured everyday. I consider physical abuse torture.

Also, I have no problem with video cameras in the facilities. Of course everyone’s (us & them) identity needs to be concealed.

I have to get back to work so I can't continue, sorry..

.

[chomerics]

I assume you mean the "torture" stuff. I have a mixed reaction to this subject. I believe "torture" is wrong in general (almost always). I say almost always for only ONE reason. The definite saving of US or US allied lives as a direct result of using "torture". I know this is a very slippery slope. The chances that you would know that someone definitely had that kind of info makes this scenario very unlikely to ever take place.

That being said I do not consider being degraded as torture. If that is the case than millions of school children are tortured everyday. I consider physical abuse torture.

Also, I have no problem with video cameras in the facilities. Of course everyone’s (us & them) identity needs to be concealed.

I have to get back to work so I can't continue, sorry..

.

My post was not about torture pre-se, but an inability to trust our military to run correctly with our current leadership. They have already shown me that they can not be trusted, and the entire "trust us" bit doesn't hold water any more in light of what has happened.

No Problem about not getting back, good luck at work

[GhostofAlvinWalton]

My post was not about torture pre-se, but an inability to trust our military to run correctly with our current leadership. They have already shown me that they can not be trusted, and the entire "trust us" bit doesn't hold water any more in light of what has happened.

No Problem about not getting back, good luck at work

I'm back. Disaster obverted once again! :laugh:

I feel the same why at times. I also felt that way during Bubba's terms.

.

[chomerics]

I'm back. Disaster obverted once again! :laugh:

I feel the same why at times. I also felt that way during Bubba's terms.

.

I understand why people disliked Clinton, hell my father was working at the Pentagon during those years, so I heard the stories. :laugh:

Personally, even with my bias against Bush removed, I can't stand how our military is being used. Not a partisan thing, just a personal preference on how to ustilize the troops, and what their responsibility should be.

[wskin44]

Sarge, thanks for posting this.

Although I have no reason to disbelieve this account, what is the "Free Lance Star" and why is the writer not credited or identified on the website?

My preference is to trust our military to use good judgement in these matters, because transparency usually defeats efforts to defend our country.

Unfortunately the past few years seem to point to a lack of judgement which starts with our political leaders and filters down to the Military. If the posted account is true then it begins to restore my faith that in Gitmo at least, the situation is now under control.

I don't know if anyone caught the article in the WP this morning, but it was reported that the Bush Administration proposed a modification to the McCain prisoner abuse initiative that would exempt the CIA from the rules that McCain is proposing. Apparently McCain rejected the modification, although no one is saying anything on the record.

The problem with abuse of power is that it destroys trust and inevitabley leads to reductions in power, and this is not always a good thing. The judgement of those elected/appointed to positions of power is critical, and many in this country believe that Bush/Cheney & Rumsfield have excercised poor judgement on many security issues. Rather than attack those who point this out, the Bush Administration needs to fix itself.

[NoCalMike]

WHy is the argument from the right, ALWAYS...."you want to let them all go free, traitor" Everyone wants the TERRORISTS locked up, but what we don't want is the random guys, whisked away in the middle of the night, that don't know anything, being locked up for two years without legal representation.

[chomerics]

WHy is the argument from the right, ALWAYS...."you want to let them all go free, traitor"

Because it is the only justification they can come up with for their OWN behavior. They have to focus on a LIE in order to hide the issues they FAIL to acknowledge.

[Sarge]

WHy is the argument from the right, ALWAYS...."you want to let them all go free, traitor" Everyone wants the TERRORISTS locked up, but what we don't want is the random guys, whisked away in the middle of the night, that don't know anything, being locked up for two years without legal representation.

My question always is, "Why does everyone on the left want to give them American rights?"

[flashback]

My question always is, "Why does everyone on the left want to give them American rights?"

Can you define "American rights"? How do they differ from "human" rights? Would you edit the Declaration of Independance to read "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all American men are created equal, that they endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..."

I don't think the right and the left are too far apart concerning the prisoners at Guantanamo. Everyone wants to see some sort of due process, but while the right is content to leave that completely in the hands of the administration, with no transparency at all, the left doesn't trust this administration to act within the bounds of treaties we've signed and generally American ideals of equal treatment, innocent until proven guilty, etc.

If you trust this government after all the crap they've pulled, I think that's your problem.

[Sarge]

Can you define "American rights"? How do they differ from "human" rights? Would you edit the Declaration of Independance to read "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all American men are created equal, that they endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..."

That's exactly what it means, Americans. And not black men at the time either, as slaves were not considered citizens.

All that is moot however, because the Declaration of Independance does not grant American citizens rights, the Constitution does. And it specifically gives rights to Americans, not a$$holes from other countries.

[flashback]

Sarge, if you hate this country and its ideals so much, why don't you leave?

[Sarge]

Sarge, if you hate this country and its ideals so much, why don't you leave?

Are you always this swift when you're wrong slick?