Complete Labor Law Poster for $24.95
from www.LaborLawCenter.com, includes
State, Federal, & OSHA posting requirements

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OT: When Bad Things Happen...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • OT: When Bad Things Happen...

    When Bad Things Happen (To ''Bad People'')

    Are we becoming hardened to reports of illegality (up to and including torture)
    on the part of our government?

    - Onnesha Roychoudhuri


    December 03 , 2004


    We’re not torturing people. (And even if we were ... they’re bad people.)

    This, essentially, is the logic of the Bush administration's defense against the
    charge (by now conclusively documented) that the treatment of detainees in the
    war on terror has been, and continues to be, illegal. It's a defense that was
    pressed into service once again this week, when a confidential International
    Committee of the Red Cross report was leaked to the press citing treatment of
    detainees at Guantanamo as “tantamount to torture.” The report states that the
    U.S. government and American military are intentionally using psychological and
    physical coercion such as exposure to loud, persistent noise and music as well
    as extended exposure to cold. (This, by the way, is in addition to plain old
    beatings.) It also cites the use of extended forced positions. Even more
    troubling, the report makes clear that doctors and psychologists at Guantanamo
    are participating in the planning of interrogations, the better to exploit the
    physical and mental weaknesses of individual detainees.

    Alarmingly, news of the report's findings didn't create much of a ripple in
    the media, or stir much outrage in the public at large. Granted, the New York
    Times ran a significant story, but the Washington Post online relegated the news
    to a fewer than 400-word brief under the somewhat restrained headline, “Red
    Cross Has Concerns About Treatment at Guantanamo.” (This despite the fact that
    the report specifically uses the word “torture”.) A day after the news first
    broke, the Los Angeles Times ran a story on page 23.

    The subdued reaction is testament, in part, to the Bush administration's skill
    at spinning this kind of news. (God knows, they've had practice.) Officials from
    the Pentagon and Defense Department flat-out denied the allegations. And General
    Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff made this stirring defense:
    “We certainly don’t think it’s torture.... Let’s not forget the kind of people
    we have down there. These are the people that don’t know any moral values.”

    Maybe it doesn’t seem like torture because we don’t have pictures like we did
    at Abu Ghraib. Maybe it doesn’t seem like torture because it’s not as bad as the
    video-taped beheadings that have begun to dominate our news in recent months.
    And anyway, they had it coming, right? Better their discomfort than our
    destruction. A brief reality check: out of the 550 detainees in Guantanamo, only
    4 have been charged. That’s 3 years, 4 charges, 550 people, and no protection
    under the Geneva Conventions, which call for the detainees to be treated as
    prisoners of war until a competent tribunal determines that they do not merit
    this protection.

    The Bush administration has claimed it doesn’t need to abide by these
    conventions because the detainees are “enemy combatants.” But we’ve already been
    through this. U.S. District Court Judge James Robertson recently ruled that a
    formal court martial, rather than a military commission must be legally utilized
    in order to verify that a detainee is not a prisoner of war. In other words,
    this is a fight to uphold the law.

    (War is hell, they say; bad things happen (especially to "bad people".) But
    the international laws in question here were, in fact, designed precisely for
    times like these.)

    Why aren't reporters asking hard-hitting questions about all this? One of the
    few articles touching on the ICRC report offered up only one quote from the Bush
    administration: Lawrence Di Rita, spokesman for Rumsfeld, said that the Red
    Cross allegations were “their point of view.” White House spokesmen are no
    longer even extending themselves to put together a convincing lie.

    The demand that someone answer for what is going on in Guantanamo seems to
    have fallen, by default, to a few legal specialists. Do Americans think justice
    is prevailing? Or are they just tired of fighting what looks to be a losing
    battle? The danger is that we become inured to the doings of an administration
    that flouts the law as a matter of routine: Guantanamo becomes just another
    incident. We first heard about it three years ago, but here it is again. The
    media has dubbed Iraq the new Vietnam. Here we are again. But just because we’ve
    seen these things before, or think we’ve seen these things before doesn’t mean
    they don’t require as emphatic and vigilant a response.

    Our response needs to reflect that we aren’t pushing these new developments
    into the past, or measuring them against an ever- lowering bar. This struggle
    for demand accountability and legality deserves our unswerving commitment. And
    the media should demand answers every step of the way.


    © 2004 The Foundation for National Progress
    ____________________________________________
    Reprinted for educational purposes only.


  • #2
    When Bad Things Happen...


    "pb..." <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    When Bad Things Happen (To ''Bad People'') Are we becoming hardened to reports of illegality (up to and including
    torture)
    on the part of our government? - Onnesha Roychoudhuri
    A little research of this organization shows they are rater one-sided and
    prone to exaggeration. So that begs the question, how much of this story is
    exaggerated in order to press their prejudiced point of view?

    --
    Mike D.

    www.stopassaultnow.net

    Remove .spamnot to respond by email

    December 03 , 2004 We’re not torturing people. (And even if we were ... they’re bad people.) This, essentially, is the logic of the Bush administration's defense
    against the
    charge (by now conclusively documented) that the treatment of detainees in
    the
    war on terror has been, and continues to be, illegal. It's a defense that
    was
    pressed into service once again this week, when a confidential
    International
    Committee of the Red Cross report was leaked to the press citing treatment
    of
    detainees at Guantanamo as “tantamount to torture.” The report states that
    the
    U.S. government and American military are intentionally using
    psychological and
    physical coercion such as exposure to loud, persistent noise and music as
    well
    as extended exposure to cold. (This, by the way, is in addition to plain
    old
    beatings.) It also cites the use of extended forced positions. Even more troubling, the report makes clear that doctors and psychologists at
    Guantanamo
    are participating in the planning of interrogations, the better to exploit
    the
    physical and mental weaknesses of individual detainees. Alarmingly, news of the report's findings didn't create much of a ripple
    in
    the media, or stir much outrage in the public at large. Granted, the New
    York
    Times ran a significant story, but the Washington Post online relegated
    the news
    to a fewer than 400-word brief under the somewhat restrained headline,
    “Red
    Cross Has Concerns About Treatment at Guantanamo.” (This despite the fact
    that
    the report specifically uses the word “torture”.) A day after the news
    first
    broke, the Los Angeles Times ran a story on page 23. The subdued reaction is testament, in part, to the Bush administration's
    skill
    at spinning this kind of news. (God knows, they've had practice.)
    Officials from
    the Pentagon and Defense Department flat-out denied the allegations. And
    General
    Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff made this stirring
    defense:
    “We certainly don’t think it’s torture.... Let’s not forget the kind of
    people
    we have down there. These are the people that don’t know any moral
    values.”
    Maybe it doesn’t seem like torture because we don’t have pictures like
    we did
    at Abu Ghraib. Maybe it doesn’t seem like torture because it’s not as bad
    as the
    video-taped beheadings that have begun to dominate our news in recent
    months.
    And anyway, they had it coming, right? Better their discomfort than our destruction. A brief reality check: out of the 550 detainees in
    Guantanamo, only
    4 have been charged. That’s 3 years, 4 charges, 550 people, and no
    protection
    under the Geneva Conventions, which call for the detainees to be treated
    as
    prisoners of war until a competent tribunal determines that they do not
    merit
    this protection. The Bush administration has claimed it doesn’t need to abide by these conventions because the detainees are “enemy combatants.” But we’ve
    already been
    through this. U.S. District Court Judge James Robertson recently ruled
    that a
    formal court martial, rather than a military commission must be legally
    utilized
    in order to verify that a detainee is not a prisoner of war. In other
    words,
    this is a fight to uphold the law. (War is hell, they say; bad things happen (especially to "bad people".)
    But
    the international laws in question here were, in fact, designed precisely
    for
    times like these.) Why aren't reporters asking hard-hitting questions about all this? One
    of the
    few articles touching on the ICRC report offered up only one quote from
    the Bush
    administration: Lawrence Di Rita, spokesman for Rumsfeld, said that the
    Red
    Cross allegations were “their point of view.” White House spokesmen are no longer even extending themselves to put together a convincing lie. The demand that someone answer for what is going on in Guantanamo seems
    to
    have fallen, by default, to a few legal specialists. Do Americans think
    justice
    is prevailing? Or are they just tired of fighting what looks to be a
    losing
    battle? The danger is that we become inured to the doings of an
    administration
    that flouts the law as a matter of routine: Guantanamo becomes just
    another
    incident. We first heard about it three years ago, but here it is again.
    The
    media has dubbed Iraq the new Vietnam. Here we are again. But just because
    we’ve
    seen these things before, or think we’ve seen these things before doesn’t
    mean
    they don’t require as emphatic and vigilant a response. Our response needs to reflect that we aren’t pushing these new
    developments
    into the past, or measuring them against an ever- lowering bar. This
    struggle
    for demand accountability and legality deserves our unswerving commitment.
    And
    the media should demand answers every step of the way. © 2004 The Foundation for National Progress ____________________________________________ Reprinted for educational purposes only.

    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.804 / Virus Database: 546 - Release Date: 12/1/2004


    Comment


    • #3
      When Bad Things Happen...

      In article <[email protected]>,
      Mike Dobony <[email protected]> wrote:
      A little research of this organization shows they are rater one-sided andprone to exaggeration. So that begs the question, how much of this story isexaggerated in order to press their prejudiced point of view?--Mike D.

      The RED CROSS reported this torture. You know, the Red Cross, the ones
      who help hurricane victims, soldiers, refugees and the like. They may
      not have covered themselves with glory a few times--the 9/11 victims mess
      and protecting the blood supply, but on the whole they are a trustworthy
      organization.


      I have written repeatedly to my representatives in Washington urging that
      the United States respect the Geneva Conventions. What kind of a crazy
      world is this when an American has to urge her country to protect its own
      soldiers by following the Geneva Convention?

      I suppose the original prison torture photographs from Abu Gareb were some
      kind of fakes made up by those liberals who supposedly hate America.
      BTW, the notion that liberals hate America is a bare faced lie made up by
      that crazy woman Ann Coulter.


      Or, I suppose the sadists who tortured these people were, in Rush's terms
      "letting off steam."

      I can't think of a better recruiting agent for Bin Laden than these
      reports.

      Linda

      Comment


      • #4
        When Bad Things Happen...

        Mike Dobony wrote:
        "pb..." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
        When Bad Things Happen (To ''Bad People'')Are we becoming hardened to reports of illegality (up to and including
        torture)
        on the part of our government? - Onnesha Roychoudhuri
        A little research of this organization shows they are rater one-sided and prone to exaggeration. So that begs the question, how much of this story is exaggerated in order to press their prejudiced point of view? -- Mike D. www.stopassaultnow.net Remove .spamnot to respond by email

        As noted at the bottom of this quoted article - "Reprinted for educational
        purposes only." The article is presented for your own edification. It's
        up to you to determine the validity of the author's interest and/or
        accuracy.

        pb...




        December 03 , 2004We’re not torturing people. (And even if we were ... they’re bad people.)This, essentially, is the logic of the Bush administration's defense
        against the
        charge (by now conclusively documented) that the treatment of detainees in
        the
        war on terror has been, and continues to be, illegal. It's a defense that
        was
        pressed into service once again this week, when a confidential
        International
        Committee of the Red Cross report was leaked to the press citing treatment
        of
        detainees at Guantanamo as “tantamount to torture.” The report states that
        the
        U.S. government and American military are intentionally using
        psychological and
        physical coercion such as exposure to loud, persistent noise and music as
        well
        as extended exposure to cold. (This, by the way, is in addition to plain
        old
        beatings.) It also cites the use of extended forced positions. Even moretroubling, the report makes clear that doctors and psychologists at
        Guantanamo
        are participating in the planning of interrogations, the better to exploit
        the
        physical and mental weaknesses of individual detainees. Alarmingly, news of the report's findings didn't create much of a ripple
        in
        the media, or stir much outrage in the public at large. Granted, the New
        York
        Times ran a significant story, but the Washington Post online relegated
        the news
        to a fewer than 400-word brief under the somewhat restrained headline,
        “Red
        Cross Has Concerns About Treatment at Guantanamo.” (This despite the fact
        that
        the report specifically uses the word “torture”.) A day after the news
        first
        broke, the Los Angeles Times ran a story on page 23. The subdued reaction is testament, in part, to the Bush administration's
        skill
        at spinning this kind of news. (God knows, they've had practice.)
        Officials from
        the Pentagon and Defense Department flat-out denied the allegations. And
        General
        Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff made this stirring
        defense:
        “We certainly don’t think it’s torture.... Let’s not forget the kind of
        people
        we have down there. These are the people that don’t know any moral
        values.”
        Maybe it doesn’t seem like torture because we don’t have pictures like
        we did
        at Abu Ghraib. Maybe it doesn’t seem like torture because it’s not as bad
        as the
        video-taped beheadings that have begun to dominate our news in recent
        months.
        And anyway, they had it coming, right? Better their discomfort than ourdestruction. A brief reality check: out of the 550 detainees in
        Guantanamo, only
        4 have been charged. That’s 3 years, 4 charges, 550 people, and no
        protection
        under the Geneva Conventions, which call for the detainees to be treated
        as
        prisoners of war until a competent tribunal determines that they do not
        merit
        this protection. The Bush administration has claimed it doesn’t need to abide by theseconventions because the detainees are “enemy combatants.” But we’ve
        already been
        through this. U.S. District Court Judge James Robertson recently ruled
        that a
        formal court martial, rather than a military commission must be legally
        utilized
        in order to verify that a detainee is not a prisoner of war. In other
        words,
        this is a fight to uphold the law. (War is hell, they say; bad things happen (especially to "bad people".)
        But
        the international laws in question here were, in fact, designed precisely
        for
        times like these.) Why aren't reporters asking hard-hitting questions about all this? One
        of the
        few articles touching on the ICRC report offered up only one quote from
        the Bush
        administration: Lawrence Di Rita, spokesman for Rumsfeld, said that the
        Red
        Cross allegations were “their point of view.” White House spokesmen are nolonger even extending themselves to put together a convincing lie. The demand that someone answer for what is going on in Guantanamo seems
        to
        have fallen, by default, to a few legal specialists. Do Americans think
        justice
        is prevailing? Or are they just tired of fighting what looks to be a
        losing
        battle? The danger is that we become inured to the doings of an
        administration
        that flouts the law as a matter of routine: Guantanamo becomes just
        another
        incident. We first heard about it three years ago, but here it is again.
        The
        media has dubbed Iraq the new Vietnam. Here we are again. But just because
        we’ve
        seen these things before, or think we’ve seen these things before doesn’t
        mean
        they don’t require as emphatic and vigilant a response. Our response needs to reflect that we aren’t pushing these new
        developments
        into the past, or measuring them against an ever- lowering bar. This
        struggle
        for demand accountability and legality deserves our unswerving commitment.
        And
        the media should demand answers every step of the way. © 2004 The Foundation for National Progress__________________________________________ __Reprinted for educational purposes only.
        --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.804 / Virus Database: 546 - Release Date: 12/1/2004

        Comment

        The LaborLawTalk.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for legal advice. The information contained on LaborLawTalk.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of LaborLawTalk.com. LaborLawTalk.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a legal expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation.
        Working...
        X