1
   

Sodomizing children, in the name of freedom.

 
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Jul, 2005 01:28 pm
I'd also like to add that Samuel Provance is on recordsaying that "he had no first-hand knowledge of prisoner abuse".
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Jul, 2005 01:29 pm
Or then, you have Samuel Provance, US-Sergeant, in the original report, saying

Quote:
"He was terribly afraid. He had the skinniest arms I've ever seen. He was trembling all over. His wrists were so thin that we couldn't even put handcuffs on him. Right when I saw him for the first time, and took him for interrogation, I felt sorry for him. The interrogation specialists poured water over him and put him into a car. Then they drove with him through the night, and at that time it was very, very cold. Then they smeared him with mud and showed him to his father who was also in custody. They had tried out other interrogation methods on him. But he wasn't to be brought to talk. The interrogation specialists told me, after the father had then seen his son in this state, his heart broke. He wept and promised to tell them everything they wanted to know."


And you have UNICEF issuing an official statement saying

Quote:
UNICEF Statement on Iraq

GENEVA / NEW YORK, 11 May 2004 - UNICEF is profoundly disturbed by news reports alleging that children may have been among those abused in detention centres and prisons in Iraq. Although the news reports have not been independently substantiated, they are alarming nonetheless.

Any mistreatment, sexual abuse, exploitation or torture of children in detention is a violation of international law - including the Convention on the Rights of the Child; the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; and the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols.

The detention or imprisonment of a child must be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time. For their safety and protection, children should never be incarcerated with adults, and should have prompt access to legal, medical, emotional and other appropriate assistance. These standards apply in all cases involving children, including those who are considered to be child combatants.

All persons in detention must be treated with humanity and with respect for their inherent dignity as human beings. In particular, States have an obligation to protect children and to ensure that their officials are aware of, trained in, and comply with the relevant international standards.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Jul, 2005 01:29 pm
So, that leaves the ICRC report.

Yep. There were children detained in Iraq. Their are children detained in the US as well. I bet even the Netherlands have children being detained even as we speak.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Jul, 2005 01:32 pm
Yeah, but I bet the Netherlands doesn't have pictures of Women and Children being Sodomized, abused, raped and tortured, that they won't release.

Pathetic McG

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Jul, 2005 01:33 pm
You understand the difference between "detained" and "imprisoned", don't you?

And it doesn't leave the ICRC report. Just because you choose to disbelieve somebody named Suhaib Badr-Addin Al-Baz doesn't mean he doesn't exist. And just because you don't care what a US Sergeant says doesn't mean it's irrelevant.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jul, 2005 05:11 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Where are the prisoners that were abused? Why haven't they been interviewed?

Here they are - once again - they were RIGHT above your post, in fact. Now what?

nimh wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Another report, by another reporter, from the UK:

Iraq's Child Prisoners

Note: more witnesses to torture of children in jails like Abu Ghraib:

Quote:
Kasim Mehaddi Hilas says he witnessed the rape of a boy prisoner aged about 15 in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. "The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets," he said in a statement given to investigators probing prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib. "Then, when I heard the screaming I climbed the door … and I saw [the soldier's name is deleted] who was wearing a military uniform." Hilas, who was himself threatened with being sexually assaulted in Abu Graib, then describes in horrific detail how the soldier raped "the little kid".

In another witness statement, passed to the Sunday Herald, former prisoner Thaar Salman Dawod said: "[I saw] two boys naked and they were cuffed together face to face and [a US soldier] was beating them and a group of guards were watching and taking pictures and there was three female soldiers laughing at the prisoners. The prisoners, two of them, were young."
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jul, 2005 05:27 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Yep. There were children detained in Iraq. Their are children detained in the US as well. I bet even the Netherlands have children being detained even as we speak.


Not in prison they're not.

Not in "an indefinite period of custody, without contact with their families, expectation of proceedings or a trial" (see UNICEF report), either.

Not without any independent observers at all allowed in to visit them (see ICRC), either.

Neither do sixteen-year olds here get water poured over them, then put into a car and driven through the very, very cold night, then smeared with mud - all just to pressure their father, mind you, without apparently having actually done anything themselves (see testimony by Sergeant Provance).

Doesnt happen in Britain or Spain either - terror attacks or no terror attacks.

The British troops dont do it in Iraq, either, as the MoD stated (while the Pentagon declined to answer).

So, that leaves your point being ...?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 06:27 am
My point being you are grasping at straws due to your hatred of the US administration. The article you have chosen to support has more holes in it than swiss cheese yet you grasp it like a life preserver.

Unreliable witnesses, unreleased reports, witnesses who witnessed nothing... Sad really.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 07:02 am
IMO It is just loyalty to partisan politics that blinds you to the possibility that the prison abuses were more widespread and more vile than we were lead to believe. That is what is sad.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 07:26 am
So, McGentrix, you obviously seem at least to be okay with the fact that children are being held as "detainees" - i.e. being held for an indefinite time, without legal assistance, incarcerated in the same facility as adults. And that neither UNICEF nor the Red Cross are allowed to inspect the facilities, like Abu Ghraib or Um Qasr or any of the 6 different places of detention the Red Cross was allowed to inspect for some time before being banned.

That's the only position I can see you might possibly have: deny the accusations of abuse and torture and accept whatever else might happen to the children.

So here's a question for you: why are neither the ICRC nor UNICEF allowed to visit the detention facilities? Shouldn't they be allowed to do that?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 07:45 am
What would lead you to believe I am okay with the fact that children are being held as "detainees" ?

You've obviously made no attempt to understand what I have written on these threads as I have never denied the fact that abuse has happened. I have countered false allegations and requested evidence of a nature a bit more firm than unverified witness statements, unreleased reports and biased news sources.

Can you produce current documentation that those organizations have been denied their due? Past experience will no longer be acceptable as the administration has learned from past mistakes. I want to see that they are still being denied access.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jul, 2005 08:03 am
McGentrix wrote:
Past experience will no longer be acceptable as the administration has learned from past mistakes. I want to see that they are still being denied access.



Old news that's new to you now is new news. This is what the Amnesty International Report 2005 says:

Quote:
Detentions in Afghanistan and Iraq

In August, the Independent Panel to Review Department of Defense Detention Operations, appointed by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld following the publication of photographs of torture and ill-treatment committed by US personnel in Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, reported that since the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, about 50,000 people had been detained during US military and security operations.

US forces operated some 25 detention facilities in Afghanistan and 17 in Iraq. Detainees were routinely denied access to lawyers and families. In Afghanistan, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) had access only to some detainees in Bagram and Kandahar air bases.



Only 2 out of 25 facilities? Why?

I want to understand your position, McGentrix, and I'm trying to understand it. I have noticed that you haven't denied that abuse has happened. But you seem to be unaware to the point of denying the very possibility that a lot more has happened that has not been made public yet.

Let's talk about now. Let's talk about how the administration has learned from past mistakes and is no longer going to cover up possible abuses:

What about the material from Abu Ghraib that hasn't been made public yet? Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said "The American public needs to understand, we're talking about rape and murder here."

Are those false allegations, too? Are those biased news sources? Unreleased reports, yes, but unreleased by the US government. Do you think this is okay?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 04/18/2024 at 03:23:46