Oh, and everyone needs to acknowledge that Gitmo is clearly a country club for the “detainees” since it was visited by, what, a whole 4 congressmen on a scheduled visit under military supervision. Do I need to bring up the military press release where they made it clear that they thoroughly investigated claims of abuse and found themselves innocent? How much more ironclad can you get?

Doh!

Shorter PhilE: From George Bush’s rear end to my lips

Ok, so what you re saying here is that all these detainees are just a bunch of Afghan farmers that were rounded just for kicks, by the evil team of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld? Seriously.

Seriously.

Read it and weep

Among the data revealed by this Report:
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.

And you know this how? Certainly not from the Red Cross they ve been denied access.

I find it rather interesting that you imply that I “opt to make up things”.

It seems a horror to many Americans that anyone especially the Red Cross would be interested in the welfare of the Afghan war detainees being held by the U.S. military in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. However, it is our very own government that requested the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to visit with the detainees.

http://www.redcross.org/news/in/intllaw/guantanamo1.html

Seriously, why should anyone trust that anything you have to say isn’t what you wish to be fact, as opposed what is actually fact?

But the neutral agency, which is the only independent monitor allowed to visit the facility, refused  to publicly confirm or deny a New York Times report that the ICRC determined the U.S. military used psychological and physical coercion  tantamount to torture at the prison. The allegation was contained in an ICRC report to U.S. officials after visits to Guantanamo, the Times said.

That one is from an article on msnbc.msn.com.

All that being said, the International Red Cross has become so politicized, that they can no longer be thought of as “neutral”. This same IRC were the willing dupes of Hitler, during the infamous, and orchestrated visit to a concentration camp, where reality was sanitized for their viewing pleasure.

In other words: I don’t give a rat’s ass what the IRC thinks, or has to say.

Why on Earth would we release folks who have been illegal combatants? Out of the goodness of Rummy s heart?

Ok, so what you’re saying here is that all these detainees are just a bunch of Afghan farmers that were rounded just for kicks, by the evil team of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld? Seriously.

-phil

And you know this how? Certainly not from the Red Cross–they’ve been denied access.

Furthermore, hundreds of them have been released, several of which have been recaptured on the battlefield.

When confronted with the truth, you opt to make up things.

Why on Earth would we release folks who have been illegal combatants? Out of the goodness of Rummy’s heart?

By the way, it’s pretty outrageous to claim,

The vast majority of those detained at Gitmo were not captured in combat.

and then,

They have no access to the outside world and the US Govt won t even confirm who is being held and who isn t.

I suppose you came by this information from an anonymous informant, code-named Mohammed?

-phil

Google, try it some time.

Try:
“Abu Ghraib +cover up”
or
“Gitmo +abuse”
I’d say there’s plenty worth investigating.

The number of results, many with photos, and even video, makes your assertions of a good hearted, responsible military look ridiculous. Sure the majority of personnel are good eggs. No sh*t. It’s clowns like Rumsfeld that are enabling the “bad apples” and trashing our reputation around the world.

As for the Red Cross, the American Red Cross has a bad rep, but the International Red Cross is pretty damn well respected, unless they cross the U.S. of course, then, like Amnesty International, they’re just political tools and terrorist enablers.

Yeah, it really is hard to believe that a muslim prisoner being held for years without trial might lose hope and resort to violence. That, or suicide, real suicide, as there have been 41 known attempts since the camp opened in 2002. That’s what happens when you are treated to sumptuous meals and free Qurans. I’m not excusing those prisoners that attacked the guards. For all I know they may actually be dangerous terrorists. That’s the problem, though, isn’t it? I don’t know. Nobody does. Fair trials and adequate representation are so pre-9-11 thinking.

B..bu..bu…but the DOD issued a press release that said they looked into abuse!

Christ.

They were POWs.

And they were treated as POWs–with rights under the Geneva Conventions such as notifying their families and Governments where they were, medical attention, correspondence with their families, etc.

The vast majority of those detained at Gitmo were not captured in combat. They have no access to the outside world and the US Govt won’t even confirm who is being held and who isn’t.

Perhaps, you’d like to enlighten me as to how many of the several hundred thousand German prisoners of war, brought to the US and forced to work in labor camps for years, were charged with anything.

This is war, not a police raid on a crackhouse.

-phil

Perhaps Phil would enlighten us: how many Gitmo prisoners have been convicted of anything?

Roughly a thousand (’roughly’ because the US Govt refuses to account for those in detention) have been detained at Gitmo. Of this number, about half have been released after years of detention with no charges filed or any semblance of due process.

There have been detainees as young as 12 and as old as 92.

Yet, the Govt has yet to convict anyone at Gitmo of anything.

Makes you proud, huh, Phil?

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Ten Guantanamo prisoners lured U.S. guards into a cell with a staged suicide attempt, then attacked them with light fixtures, fan blades and other improvised weapons while guards fired rubber balls and used a grenade launcher to subdue them, U.S. officials said on Friday.

…

“The detainees had slickened the floor of their block with feces, urine and soapy water in an attempt to trip the guards. They then assaulted the guards with broken light fixtures, fan blades and bits of metal,” said Navy Rear Adm. Harry Harris, who commands the Guantanamo facility.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060519/ts_nm/security_guantanamo_dc

But, of course, the “progressives” see these detainees as innocent victims, and will no-doubt consider this behavior acceptable civil disobedience. Meanwhile, the reality is that these animals would slit all your throats in a heartbeat, despite the fact that your tax dollars pay for their “culturally sensitive” meals, standard issue prayer rugs, and personal copies of the Koran – the text that THEY remind us is their inspiration.

Bless the souls of those guards, they’re better people than all of us.

-phil

No, “Dr”P—you weren’t.

OTOH, I was.

First, there was no “loyalty oath.” It was a declaration that you weren’t a participant at TailHook and it was voluntary. This arose from the NCIS charging some poor shnook with some offense at TailHook when he wasn’t even there.

What you continue to ignore is the fact the Navy–under a GOP admin, a GOP SecNav, and a GOP SecDef ran this investigation.

The Navy admitted TailHook was a bad thing and that they botched the investigation from the get-go. But blaming Dems is just ludicrous.

Ya and about those veterans administration cut backs …

“Republicans voted down a Democratic alternative that contained more funding for popular domestic programs such as education, veterans health care and health research while balancing the budget by 2012 — but only by allowing hundreds of billions of dollars in GOP-passed tax cuts to expire.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/18/AR2006051800012.html

I remember Tailhook also. It was a royal crock and agree with you 100%. And who was out in front ruining the careers of these young officers? Patsy Schroeder and feminists. Sometimes ably abetted weak kneed Repubs.

Phile,

Good round of posts.

Murtha is rapidly transitioning into a congressional Ramsey Clark .

Dugger

You always invoke military matters on Oliver’s comment boards just to justify your pathological, irrational hatred of left of center people, or “lefties” as you so orignally call us.

In truth you probably support lots of politicans who boast of supporting the troops and then refuse to let them have decent body armor, and who cut back veterans health benefits all the time.

Total opportunist, that is what you are.

-phil

In truth you probably support lots of politicans who boast of supporting the troops and then refuse to let them have decent body armor, and who cut back veterans health benefits all the time.

Based on what do you assert that soldiers have been refused anything they might need, that is readily available? As for body/humvee armor: soldiers often opt-out of such protection because it reduces mobility. Not to mention, this armor in question is not very effective against the IEDs being used in Iraq, which are responsible for the overwhelming number of casualties. If these soldiers are, and have been, so neglected, why would they vote in overwhelming numbers to re-elect the President that put them there?

-phil

Civil discourse, I presume?