Geneva Conference--Only when it suits us???

[ribbon]

:confused I don't get it. The Pentagon says that the :usa can't see the one thousand other pictures of the iraqi prisoners being abused by the :usa soldiers and civilian guards because the geneva convention doesn't allow pictures of prisoners being degraded :ohboy. I agree with this to a point.
I don't want to see any human being degraded any more than they already have in the pictures we've seen. The senators and other officials who have seen the pictures, both republican and democrat, say they are more gruesome than what is already out there.
My question is WHY do we go by the geneva convention only when it's convenient to the political agenda of the administration. The adminstration came up with a reason why we don't have to follow it in Guantanamo Bay :reallymad. The adminstration insists on punishing the soldiers (and hopefully the higher ups as well) themselves and not use an international tribunal as stated in the Geneva Conference :reallymad. Pictures that are even more brutal than the blurred ones we already saw?? Noooo, we can't show them, it's in violation of Geneva :reallymad. It's not that I want to see the pictures, I just don't like the hypocrisy.

[Marigold]

From AOL news:

A poll released Wednesday by the Pew Research enter found that seventy-six percent of Americans had seen the pictures.


The Pew poll indicates they've had an impact. After the pictures were released, a majority of Pew survey respondents - fifty-one percent - said for the first time that the war in Iraq was not going well.

Like many newspapers, the News-Sun in Springfield, Ohio wrote little about the charges until there were pictures, said editor Karla Garrett Harshaw.

"When you see those images, it just has a different feel,'' Harshaw said. "It evokes more emotion because you see it. (You think) my goodness, how could they do that?''

I think there's political reasons for why they want to suppress those additional photos, that have nothing to do w/the geneva convention. They know the photos help to turn even more people against this war --

Therefore, unlike the viewing of the video of Nick Berg's death -- I'm very much in favor of some showig of these new photos which contain even more gruesome and upsetting crimes committed against the Iraqi prisoners then we've seen yet.

Unlike the Berg video, I see these new photos as being able to serve a good purpose - upsetting as they most certainly will be.

-Marigold:sun

[shortstop]

I guess I felt the same way about the video that Marigold feels about the pics. I thought that the video would show people what this war is doing. The gov't paints this pretty picture about the war. War is war. It is not pretty. I unfortunately think that a lot of Americans were blind enough to think that this was a "different" war. :ugh
Anyway...the Geneva Convention obviously only applies to everyone else. :ohboy Could you imagine if any other country tried to pick and choose what parts of the Geneva Convention they wanted to use? We would have Bush up there FREAKING OUT to the UN.
Did you hear Rumsfeld say that if it were up to him he would distribute the photos the the public? He said that he would do it TO GET THIS OVER WITH. :reallymad
I can't believe that is how this travesty is viewed...as a thing to "get over with". And what a safe statment...he doesn't have any say in wether or not the pics were coming out.
If they were smart they'd just release them because they'll end up in the media somehow.

[ribbon]

If we can't see the photos I would like a description of what is in them. It's hard for me to even imagine what could be in these worse pictures.

:trigger description of a photo - not sexual

I heard that one picture was of a prisoner on a stretcher bound in saran type wrap being help under water.

end :trigger

I think at the very least the armed services needs to clean house from the top down.

[shortstop]

:trigger



From what I understand, there are many pictures of very graphic sexual abuse of both men and women. They are calling those pics pornograpic. There are also pics of the women being derobed, which is a horrible disgrace in their culture.

:trigger

Oh we definately need to clean house. I just don't think that it'll happen. The problem never gets fixed from the top down. Even though the old saying is "The fish stinks from the head down." That definately applies here. This makes me so :reallymad :sad :ugh :reallymad

[Vicks]

You know I had absoluately no clue that the US wasn't following the "Geneva Convention" it sickens me to think, that the US military has done what they have and that it has been allowed. Not just the abuse we saw, but in general, allowing and permitting:

:bullet Sleep Deprivation
:bullet exposure to harsh temperatures
:bullet forced sitting and/or standing in one position

These are things that I thought only "dictator" countries did. It appalls me even more, that people aren't outraged without doubt that this has been going on.

We are always, so quick to judge other countries, it is time we start judging ourselves (the US) and ask ourselves are we really doing the right thing?

Vicks

[ribbon]

Vicks said: We are always, so quick to judge other countries, it is time we start judging ourselves (the US) and ask ourselves are we really doing the right thing?

From your lips (or fingertips :winky) to GWB's ears!

I do NOT understand why the prison guards/abusers/photographers are being tried in a military tribunal (not open to the public) and not an international tribunal since the crimes they committed broke international laws. The military seems like this secret society and shouldn't be allowed to police itself any more than terrorists should be allowed to police themselves. :reallymad

[Amber_Heathen]

Yesterday one Randi Rhodes radio show, she said the torture (not abuse) pictures were almost no different than porn found on the 'net. The only difference is the people being tortured were definately NOT having fun.

What I really want to know is WHO gave the order to do this stuff. These people couldn't have gotten away with this on their own. And I really doubt all this happened on ONE night like they're saying. There are thousands of pictures! I also want to know why the hell our government is paying civilian contractors to interrogate prisoners. Shouldn't that be up to our military? The civilian contractors are getting paid a hell of a lot more than our troops are! Our tax dollars at work folks.

[Amsters]

one of the things that bothers me quite a bit is that groups have been pointing out the abuse, torture, and awful interrogation techniques for a while...and yet it didn't get heard. i've worked with amnesty for a little bit on this and you wouldn't believe the numbers of times we tried to get anything into the news or into the hands of the DoD or other "responsible" parties. i've put three of the articles below - the first one is from MARCH two-thousand-three.

hmm...can't find any better way to handle the numbers. if you put it directly into amnesty, it sends you into their library. so if you're curious, copy the link into another document (word, e-mail, etc) and then fix then numbers and put it back into your internet browser. sorry....but i thought people might be interested.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR************************************?open&of=ENG-USA (numbers: five-one-zero-four-five-two-zero-zero-three)
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR************************************?open&of=ENG-USA (numbers: five-one-one-six-four-two-zero-zero-three)
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR************************************?open&of=ENG-USA (numbers: five-one-zero-four-one-two-zero-zero-four)

and then it finally breaks and the government looks at it and goes "oops - maybe we should do something about this". that's such a travesty...

[ribbon]

Amber_Heathen said: Yesterday one Randi Rhodes radio show, she said the torture (not abuse) pictures were almost no different than porn found on the 'net. The only difference is the people being tortured were definately NOT having fun.

I'm no fan of porn, but if it's between two consenting (<---- key word) adults I don't have a problem with it.
Did Rhodes have a point with that statement? Does she think it's not so bad?

I can't believe the first person court martialed is unlikely to get any prison time and if he does it will be less than a year because he's telling on the others. I hope that the others do more time, particularly those above the ranks who gave the orders and/or looked the other way.