R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Ah. So flushing a Bible, or burning the Flag--for you, no problem at all.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
ginshun said:
Oh, Please ... And how are going to connect 'dropping a book in a toilet' to people dying?
The fact that the report of the first existed before the second?
Or that someone in the administration said so?
The same adminstration that said there were 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' in Iraq.
The same adminstration that told us we would be greeted as liberators?
The same adminstration that told us the reconstruction of Iraq could be paid for by Iraqi oil profits?
Wanna buy a bridge?
True, but there is a lot more going on then a book in the toilet.Tgace said:
I bet there would be stronger objections if there was a occupying muslim army imposing a islamic style of government and using prisoners Christian beliefs against them....
But to assume that the flushing of a book was responsible for the riots is a little... well... silly. More likely I'd guess that there is a little "See, look what they are doing over a book! They MUST be crazy and need to be 'civilized'!"
But who knows, none of us are muslims living in that region. We have a different set of morals, a different culture.
rutherford
Master Black Belt
You've said this a few times in this thread, and I have to say that I think you're misrepresenting our force in the region. Unlike Iraq, there's really nothing we want in Afghanistan and never commited anything like an army to the region.Andrew Green said:
We really have a very small force there. Many would say that it's an inadequate force for the tasks assigned them - they never did catch the bad guy.
To address Tgace's question, there was always an anti-war movement that decried a response against Afghanistan. However, for the most part it concentrated on how the war was fought: cluster bombs and mines dropped on urban areas, farmers blown off of hillsides. . . basically a whole lot of collateral damage, civilian casualties, and general disregard for the populace.
Current coverage mostly focuses on showing the false nature of the popular idea that we are improving the conditions of people (especially women) who live in that country. In some urban areas and the few places where we have continuing aid missions, this is true. In many places conditions worsened and we dropped pop tarts and peanut butter on people's houses - causing more collateral damage.
Eh. . . personally I'm not sure I would have done anything different.
Newsweek may have retracted their story, but they were on to something...
Posted on Fri, May. 20, 2005
Red Cross told U.S. of alleged acts against Koran
COMPLAINTS CEASED AFTER PENTAGON TOOK ACTION, GROUP SAYS
By Sam Cage
Associated Press
GENEVA - The international Red Cross told U.S. authorities about allegations that U.S. personnel at the Guantánamo Bay detention center showed disrespect to Islam's holy book, the Koran, a spokesman said Thursday.
Delegates from the International Committee of the Red Cross informed U.S. authorities, who took action to stop the alleged abuse, said spokesman Simon Schorno. He declined to specify the nature of the incidents.
``We're basically referring in general terms to disrespect of the Koran, and that's where we leave it,'' Schorno told the Associated Press. ``We believe that, since U.S. authorities have taken the corrective measures that we required in our interventions.''
About 15 people died in clashes with security forces in Afghanistan last week after Newsweek reported that U.S. interrogators had flushed a Koran down a toilet at the prison camp for terrorist suspects at the U.S. military base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. The magazine later retracted the story.
Red Cross delegates, who have visited Guantánamo regularly since the arrival in January 2002 of the first of about 600 detainees, did not personally witness any instances of disrespect toward the Koran. Instead, Schorno said, they received an unspecified number of reports from detainees that this had occurred. Schorno told the Chicago Tribune, which first reported the story Thursday, that the delegates gathered and corroborated enough similar, independent reports from detainees to raise the issue on numerous occasions with Guantánamo commanders and Pentagon officials. It was unclear what the Red Cross' corroboration process consisted of.
On Jan. 19, 2003, after the Geneva-based ICRC's reports, the Pentagon issued nearly three pages of guidelines for handling of the Koran. Since then, according to the Tribune, the Red Cross has not received any other complaints or documented similar incidents.
Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the ICRC's concerns about the handling of the Koran at Guantánamo were consistent with those the Pentagon has acknowledged, such as a Koran inadvertently dropping to the floor.
Whitman, however, declined to provide specifics on the ICRC's complaints. He refused to specifically say whether the ICRC had raised issues about a Koran being placed in a toilet. The Pentagon has said it has no evidence such an incident ever happened.
The basic instruction in the January 2003 guidelines, as described in the document, was to avoid touching a Koran whenever possible, and that when it is deemed a ``military necessity'' to do so, a chaplain or Muslim interpreter -- not a guard -- is to inspect the holy book.
``Handle the Koran as if it were a fragile piece of delicate art,'' the guidelines said.
Posted on Fri, May. 20, 2005
Red Cross told U.S. of alleged acts against Koran
COMPLAINTS CEASED AFTER PENTAGON TOOK ACTION, GROUP SAYS
By Sam Cage
Associated Press
GENEVA - The international Red Cross told U.S. authorities about allegations that U.S. personnel at the Guantánamo Bay detention center showed disrespect to Islam's holy book, the Koran, a spokesman said Thursday.
Delegates from the International Committee of the Red Cross informed U.S. authorities, who took action to stop the alleged abuse, said spokesman Simon Schorno. He declined to specify the nature of the incidents.
``We're basically referring in general terms to disrespect of the Koran, and that's where we leave it,'' Schorno told the Associated Press. ``We believe that, since U.S. authorities have taken the corrective measures that we required in our interventions.''
About 15 people died in clashes with security forces in Afghanistan last week after Newsweek reported that U.S. interrogators had flushed a Koran down a toilet at the prison camp for terrorist suspects at the U.S. military base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. The magazine later retracted the story.
Red Cross delegates, who have visited Guantánamo regularly since the arrival in January 2002 of the first of about 600 detainees, did not personally witness any instances of disrespect toward the Koran. Instead, Schorno said, they received an unspecified number of reports from detainees that this had occurred. Schorno told the Chicago Tribune, which first reported the story Thursday, that the delegates gathered and corroborated enough similar, independent reports from detainees to raise the issue on numerous occasions with Guantánamo commanders and Pentagon officials. It was unclear what the Red Cross' corroboration process consisted of.
On Jan. 19, 2003, after the Geneva-based ICRC's reports, the Pentagon issued nearly three pages of guidelines for handling of the Koran. Since then, according to the Tribune, the Red Cross has not received any other complaints or documented similar incidents.
Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the ICRC's concerns about the handling of the Koran at Guantánamo were consistent with those the Pentagon has acknowledged, such as a Koran inadvertently dropping to the floor.
Whitman, however, declined to provide specifics on the ICRC's complaints. He refused to specifically say whether the ICRC had raised issues about a Koran being placed in a toilet. The Pentagon has said it has no evidence such an incident ever happened.
The basic instruction in the January 2003 guidelines, as described in the document, was to avoid touching a Koran whenever possible, and that when it is deemed a ``military necessity'' to do so, a chaplain or Muslim interpreter -- not a guard -- is to inspect the holy book.
``Handle the Koran as if it were a fragile piece of delicate art,'' the guidelines said.
It looks like our guidelines go out of the way to respect the culture of the detainees...Tgace said:
Yet, they are just rules on paper.
It is important to note that the ICRC reported no further complaints after the ICRC's report and the subsequent issuing of the guidelines by the Pentagon.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
Yeah, who needs that pesky first amendment anyhow.Tgace said:
ginshun
2nd Black Belt
I am not a christian or a muslim, so I could really care less about either of those books. Just paper and words.rmcrobertson said:
Desicration of the flag offends me, but not enough to kill somebody over. Personally I am proud to be an American, not ashamed. I am a follower of the logic that one of the freedoms that the flag represents has to be the right to burn it if that is your choice. If I see somebody burning a flag, I will think they are an ***, but I am not going to do anything.
ginshun
2nd Black Belt
I am not really sure how:michaeledward said:
[qoute]The basic instruction in the January 2003 guidelines, as described in the document, was to avoid touching a Koran whenever possible, and that when it is deemed a ``military necessity'' to do so, a chaplain or Muslim interpreter -- not a guard -- is to inspect the holy book.
``Handle the Koran as if it were a fragile piece of delicate art,'' the guidelines said. [/quote]
is exactly an extension of the first amendment. Last time I checked all the first amendment said was that Congress can't make a law establishing a national religion or prohibiting anyone from following their chosen religion. I am not sure that equates with not being allowed to touch a Koran for fear it might offend a prisoner.
Are the same rules in plave for the Bible when the guards are dealing with Chrisian inmates?
One more "isolated incident"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4566159.stm
"One sergeant told investigators that detainees were considered terrorists until proven otherwise and that the Geneva Convention only applied to prisoners of war."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4566159.stm
"One sergeant told investigators that detainees were considered terrorists until proven otherwise and that the Geneva Convention only applied to prisoners of war."
michaeledward
Grandmaster
Have you heard any stories about the guards using the Bible, Torah, or the Book of Mormon as a coercion / interrogation tool?ginshun said:
I agree, let's flush them all down the toilet.
I wonder why we aren't hearing such reports.
rutherford
Master Black Belt
So, today the news is all about the pictures of the former Iraq dictator in his undershorts.
Of course, George has this to say: "I don't think a photo inspires murders . . . I think they are inspired by an ideology that is so barbaric and backwards that it's hard for many in the Western world to comprehend how they think."
It's a pretty small jump from photos don't inspire murders to news stories don't inspire murders.
However, I wonder if he's considered that maybe calling people barbaric and backwards like this DOES inspire murders.
Ugh. I tell you what, it's been a rough few years here. WTF???
http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story.jsp?sectionid=1274&storyid=3159557
Of course, George has this to say: "I don't think a photo inspires murders . . . I think they are inspired by an ideology that is so barbaric and backwards that it's hard for many in the Western world to comprehend how they think."
It's a pretty small jump from photos don't inspire murders to news stories don't inspire murders.
However, I wonder if he's considered that maybe calling people barbaric and backwards like this DOES inspire murders.
Ugh. I tell you what, it's been a rough few years here. WTF???
http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story.jsp?sectionid=1274&storyid=3159557
