• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mos Def, a.k.a. Yasiin Bey, Submits to Gitmo-Style Force-Feeding

Gipper said:
Well, do you think that the feds have a thing about randomly locking up people with brown skin?
Click to expand...

Do you know how many of them were obtained?
 
Gipper said:
Well, I used to live about 45 minutes from Dearborn. They missed.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean but here's the info:

1. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the detainees are not determined to have committed any hostile acts against the United States or its coalition allies.
2. Only 8% of the detainees were characterized as al Qaeda fighters. Of the remaining detainees, 40% have no definitive connection with al Qaeda at all and 18% are have no definitive affiliation with either al Qaeda or the Taliban.

3. The Government has detained numerous persons based on mere affiliations with a large number of groups that in fact, are not on the Department of Homeland Security terrorist watchlist. Moreover, the nexus between such a detainee and such organizations varies considerably. Eight percent are detained because they are deemed "fighters for;" 30% considered "members of;" a large majority - 60% -- are detained merely because they are "associated with" a group or groups the Government asserts are terrorist organizations. For 2% of the prisoners their nexus to any terrorist group is unidentified.

4. Only 5% of the detainees were captured by United States forces. 86% of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and turned over to United States custody. This 86% of the detainees captured by Pakistan or the Northern Alliance were handed over to the United States at a time in which the United States offered large bounties for capture of suspected enemies.

5. Finally, the population of persons deemed not to be enemy combatants - mostly Uighers - are in fact accused of more serious allegations than a great many persons still deemed to be enemy combatants.
Report: More than Half of Gitmo Detainees Not Accused of Hostile Acts - TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime
http://law.shu.edu/publications/guantanamoReports/guantanamo_report_final_2_08_06.pdf
 
Geoist said:
While at this point the force feedings are unavoidable (damned if you do, damned if you don't), they shouldn't have been necessary for many of these people in the first place.
Click to expand...

And what about those that are there for a legitimate reason in the first place?

Should the US be force feeding them when they go on hunger strike? Or should they let them die from the hunger strike? And do you think that it's fair to condemn the US in either instance in such cases?
 
Geoist said:
What evidence do you have that they are all terrorists?
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have that they are not? Why would the US Government hold these people there indefinitely? What would be the motive for that.

Do you think Gitmo is a social club or something?

Tell me something. Are you Pro Choice?
 
Bronson said:
Let them starve themselves to death

*&^% em
Click to expand...

Yep, and Mr Def needs to be dropped off in the desert with an AK and told find his brothers and fight with them.
Kill a couple US troops and he will see what the bad side of the US can be.
People like him are attention whores, nothing more.
 
Bronson said:
What evidence do you have that they are not?
Click to expand...

Saying that 166 have been cleared to release and the vast majority of them have not been charged with anything....
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Saying that 166 have been cleared to release and the vast majority of them have not been charged with anything....
Click to expand...

How many have been released only to go back out and commit more acts of terrorism?

These Gitmo prisoners are not victims. Stop pretending like they are. If they want to starve themselves, *&^% em. Let them starve themselves to death.
 
Bronson said:
How many have been released only to go back out and commit more acts of terrorism?

These Gitmo prisoners are not victims. Stop pretending like they are.
Click to expand...

So if they are terrorists why cant anyone charge them? Why are they cleared to be released? And to answer your question none sense they have not been released even if they have been cleared to released.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
So if they are terrorists why cant anyone charge them? Why are they cleared to be released? And to answer your question none sense they have not been released even if they have been cleared to released.
Click to expand...

They are not criminals. They are terrorists. Enemy Combatants.

Ex-Gitmo prisoner commits suicide attack - World news - Terrorism - Guantanamo | NBC News

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/us/politics/07gitmo.html?_r=0

WASHINGTON — Administration officials said Wednesday that a classified Pentagon report concludes that of some 560 detainees transferred abroad from the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, about one in five has engaged in, or is suspected of engaging in, terrorism or militant activity.

The finding comes amid reports that one former Guantánamo detainee released in 2007 under the administration of President George W. Bush is now involved with a branch of Al Qaeda based in Yemen, a group that President Obama has said sponsored the attempt to bomb an American airliner on Christmas Day.
Click to expand...
 
soot said:
I wasn't drugged.

When I was in the Army our medics used to practice on us. Tubes and IVs.

So basiclly we're talking about 19-year-old kids with a few months of medical training and maybe 2 or 3 previous 'tubes under their belt intubating other 19-year-old kids in the muddy field behind the barracks for Wednesday's "Sergeants' Time" training.

We're not exactly talking about experts doing the administration under ideal clinical conditions.

And like I said, it wasn't comfortable by any means, and I probably wouldn't have done it unless I was voluntold to, but if you weren't ranting and raving and making some huge production about it and generally acting like an enormous ***** it wasn't exactly torture either.

In retrospect, I guess there was some small degree of "drugging". They'd jam a little bit of some kind of topical anesthetic up our nose, and then coat the tube in some kind of lubricant, which I guess must have helped some. Wouldn't have wanted to do it "raw dog" (as the kids say).

I assume the same procedure is used in Gitmo, though I haven't read the SOPs so I can't be sure.

Anyhow, I'm giving you my personal experience in having this done to me a number of times under similar, if not identical, conditions and my personal observations of personally sitting there and watching it done to a dozen other guys.

A few guys were kind of squeemish, one guy threw up, but nobody carried on like Mos Def in that video.

There is NO DOUBT in my mind that he was hamming it up for the camera.
Click to expand...

I would imagine the gitmo process is more ideal than a pimply field medic intubing you behind the bunkhouse
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Saying that 166 have been cleared to release and the vast majority of them have not been charged with anything....
Click to expand...


while I think there are plenty of valid questions concerning Gitmo, leaving out the fact that 16% of those released have been confirmed as returning to terrorist activities is a bit, well, dishonest. The same with ignoring the list of "highly suspected" individuals is even higher
 
Geoist said:
While at this point the force feedings are unavoidable (damned if you do, damned if you don't), they shouldn't have been necessary for many of these people in the first place. There is little to no evidence against many of these men. Most of them were captured by other tribes seeking reward from our govt. And out of the hundreds that have been held, only 10 have been charged with a crime. Either bring up charges or release the men.
Click to expand...

Okay, fine, let's take what you say as a given. So UNTIL that happens what do you propose we do in the event of hunger strikes? On a parallel note, isn't the hunger strike just a variation of "I'm going to hold my breath until I'm blue in the face unless you give me what I want"? Doesn't work for the countless number of children who have threatened their parents with it, why would any adult think it will work here?
 
specklebang said:
I just watched ZERO DARK THIRTY and while this is a fictionalized account, it does show just how uncivilized torture is and while I'm glad the long term result was the execution of UBL, I'm sorry my country egregiously violated the basic laws of decency.

Did UBL need to die? Yes. Was it worth dismissing the Geneva Convention for? I don't know. I can easily understand torture on the battlefield but long term? It's troubling.

Looks like GITMO will be forever. Billions of dollars and loss of respect is the price we pay to keep just a very few people off the battlefield.
Click to expand...
Is torturing bad? Yes, of course? Is it effective? Yes, of course. Are we the only country that tortures? No, of course not. Can you name any country that has used torturing? Russia, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, India, Cuba, Germany, U.K, etc. You are right torture is troubling.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
while I think there are plenty of valid questions concerning Gitmo, leaving out the fact that 16% of those released have been confirmed as returning to terrorist activities is a bit, well, dishonest. The same with ignoring the list of "highly suspected" individuals is even higher
Click to expand...

I'm going to object to the "returning" to anything accusation.

Since there was no evidence of these folks having been involved in terrorisim (or even militant Islam or plain ol' anti-American "freedom fighting") which ultimately resulted in their release from custody or detainee-isim or whatever it was with the determination having been made that they were never actually "enemy combatants" in the first place I think it's a real stretch to say that they "returned" to anything.

I think it's probably very likely that a great many of them were like, "You wanna treat me like a terrorist? Well then **** you, I'ma go be a terrorist".

I know that's what I would do if some foreign government took me prisoner, held me captive in a cage for a couple years, treated me like ****, maybe subjected me to "enhanced interogation" during the process of establishing that I was never a threat in the first place, and in the end was like, "Opps, our bad, hahaha, you're free to go. No hard feelings, amiritebro?".

Let Canada do that to me and you bet your ass I'm gonna be blowing up Canadian school busses.
 
soot said:
I'm going to object to the "returning" to anything accusation.

Since there was no evidence of these folks having been involved in terrorisim
Click to expand...

Not releasing such evidence, or prosecuting based on it, is not the same as such evidence not existing. And while I agree how the suspect collection has been handled is extremely troublesome on a number of levels, I do not have doubts that some do belong there.

I think it's probably very likely that a great many of them were like, "You wanna treat me like a terrorist? Well then **** you, I'ma go be a terrorist".
Click to expand...

Indeed, likely the case in some situations, as well
 
As long as we are sure we are discussing the same thing, lets pursue this. I am negative toward the use of long term torture as opposed to on-the-spot torture.

Why? Because with as many soldiers as we send out around the world, if one is captured, I don't want them tortured. I want to be outraged a nuke the mother****ers that tortured my countryman.

But if my country uses torture, it's hard for me to be outraged.

I'm not aware of any of our soldiers being tortured in the last decade or so. Am I wrong? Bergdahl is not reputed to have been tortured. The Taliban offered an exchange and we declined.


Darrell said:
Is torturing bad? Yes, of course? Is it effective? Yes, of course. Are we the only country that tortures? No, of course not. Can you name any country that has used torturing? Russia, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, India, Cuba, Germany, U.K, etc. You are right torture is troubling.
Click to expand...
 
specklebang said:
I'm not aware of any of our soldiers being tortured in the last decade or so. Am I wrong? Bergdahl is not reputed to have been tortured. The Taliban offered an exchange and we declined.
Click to expand...

It very well could also be a by-product of low expectations: people might not be talking about POW treatment by the Taliban because no one expects them to be anything but brutal
 
Zyphlin said:
Okay...so? It's an uncomfortable and possibly painful experience.

What are peoples preferences exactly?

Shall we let those who go on hunger strike perish from lack of food? Is that preferred? If they do that, will the U.S. be called heartless and violators of human rights by letting these people starve to death?

Shall we instead let anyone who goes "I'm going on a hunger strike" go? Simply free anyone who says "hunger strike"?

Exactly what are you suggesting is done instead, because frankly this looks like nothing but a "I don't like GITMO, so I don't care what they do, I'm going to find a way to criticize them and demonize them for it".
Click to expand...

The only reason why I side with force feeding is because I'd be scared of guards selectively "forgetting" to feed certain people and claiming they died from hunger strike. The real answer is this place shouldn't even exist. But seeing as it does i rather them side with force fed so they cant let people die from hunger and claim it was a strike. I feel sorry for anyone who legitimately wants to strike for whatever reason (wrongly detained forever and wanting it to end comes to mind). But I'd feel worse for someone that was starved to death against their will and labeled a "crazy".
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
while I think there are plenty of valid questions concerning Gitmo, leaving out the fact that 16% of those released have been confirmed as returning to terrorist activities is a bit, well, dishonest. The same with ignoring the list of "highly suspected" individuals is even higher
Click to expand...

Source? The number i found was 4%...
"If one accepts that all 18 on the "confirmed" list have returned to the battlefield, that would be 4 percent of the detainees who have been released, Bergen said."
Security experts skeptical on Gitmo detainee report - CNN.com

Does this somehow also justify us denying them their basic rights and us giving old lady justice a big ol slap in the face?
 
Bronson said:
They are not criminals. They are terrorists. Enemy Combatants.

Ex-Gitmo prisoner commits suicide attack - World news - Terrorism - Guantanamo | NBC News

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/us/politics/07gitmo.html?_r=0
Click to expand...

"If one accepts that all 18 on the "confirmed" list have returned to the battlefield, that would be 4 percent of the detainees who have been released, Bergen said.

Bergen also noted Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics data that show the recidivism rate for U.S. state prisoners who have been released is more than 65 percent. Those same numbers show that about half of the released prisoners are returned to prison.

Bergen said that some of the prisoners at Guantanamo may not have been terrorists at all but were singled out by vengeful villagers who told U.S. authorities they were al Qaeda.

"We know that a lot of people who were in Guantanamo don't qualify as being the 'worst of the worst,'" he said, quoting former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's assessment.

Bergen said some of those "suspected" to have returned to terrorism are so categorized because they publicly made anti-American statements, "something that's not surprising if you've been locked up in a U.S. prison camp for several years."
Security experts skeptical on Gitmo detainee report - CNN.com

So this is what we are going to do.. We are going to hold some indefinitely because we cant prove they partook in terrorist activities, but we got a "hunch"? Talk about a bitch slap in the face of "justice".
You also never answered my questions; So if they are terrorists why cant anyone charge them? Why are they cleared to be released?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
"If one accepts that all 18 on the "confirmed" list have returned to the battlefield, that would be 4 percent of the detainees who have been released, Bergen said.

Bergen also noted Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics data that show the recidivism rate for U.S. state prisoners who have been released is more than 65 percent. Those same numbers show that about half of the released prisoners are returned to prison.

Bergen said that some of the prisoners at Guantanamo may not have been terrorists at all but were singled out by vengeful villagers who told U.S. authorities they were al Qaeda.

"We know that a lot of people who were in Guantanamo don't qualify as being the 'worst of the worst,'" he said, quoting former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's assessment.

Bergen said some of those "suspected" to have returned to terrorism are so categorized because they publicly made anti-American statements, "something that's not surprising if you've been locked up in a U.S. prison camp for several years."
Security experts skeptical on Gitmo detainee report - CNN.com

So this is what we are going to do.. We are going to hold some indefinitely because we cant prove they partook in terrorist activities, but we got a "hunch"? Talk about a bitch slap in the face of "justice".
You also never answered my questions; So if they are terrorists why cant anyone charge them? Why are they cleared to be released?
Click to expand...

I already answered your question in the initial post. You chose to ignore. Terrorism isn't a crime. They are enemy combatants. You're acting like they were in their mud hut minding their own business and some Pakistanis just happened to pick them up and hand them over or something.

Comparing terrorism to street crime is a fallacy. One terrorist who detonates a bomb in a shopping mall can kill dozens if not hundreds of people. Comparing that to some schmuck who gets released on drug charges and goes and gets doped up again or something, or commits a burglary is ridiculous.

You want to believe that these people in Gitmo are innocent victims. I don't share that view. If they want to starve themselves to death, fine, *&^% em. Let them kill themselves with a slow painful death. Besides, why aren't you blaming Obama was not fulfilling his promise to close Gitmo? He get a pass on that too like everything else?
 
Bronson said:
I already answered your question in the initial post.
Click to expand...
No you didnt.

You chose to ignore. Terrorism isn't a crime.
Click to expand...
Uhhh.. Terrorism is a crime. Terrorism by definition is always a crime. If it isnt a crime why are we criminal prosecuting several terrorists?

They are enemy combatants. You're acting like they were in their mud hut minding their own business and some Pakistanis just happened to pick them up and hand them over or something.
Click to expand...
Where is the proof? Why if they are "terrorists" why are they cleared to be released?


Comparing terrorism to street crime is a fallacy. One terrorist who detonates a bomb in a shopping mall can kill dozens if not hundreds of people. Comparing that to some schmuck who gets released on drug charges and goes and gets doped up again or something, or commits a burglary is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I never compared it to street crime.


You want to believe that these people in Gitmo are innocent victims.
Click to expand...
No i want justice and proof.

I don't share that view. If they want to starve themselves to death, fine, *&^% em. Let them kill themselves with a slow painful death. Besides, why aren't you blaming Obama was not fulfilling his promise to close Gitmo? He get a pass on that too like everything else?
Click to expand...
I do blame Obama.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom