Rob W 0 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Judge rules on Guantanamo strike Lawyers for scores of terror suspects on hunger strike at the Guantanamo Bay jail must be told before detainees are force-fed, says a US federal judge. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler also ordered the US government to give medical records going back a week before such feedings take place. She said the US "can hardly be proud" of its conduct if it was true that the jail had been using brutal methods. The US denies using inhuman treatment of foreign suspects in its Cuba prison. The Pentagon says 26 out of some 500 prisoners are on hunger strike that started in August, but one human rights group puts the figure at more than 200. Most of prisoners at the US naval base in southern Cuba have been held for more than three years without being charged. 'Deeply troubling' Judge Kessler said the US must notify the lawyers at least 24 hours before force feedings begin and also provide information at least weekly until suspects are no longer being fed by force. CONFLICTING CLAIMS US says 26 detainees on hunger strike; pressure group Reprieve says about 150 US says hunger strikers are "clinically stable"; Reprieve says some are in "grave peril" US denies Reprieve's claims force-feeding is being used deliberately to harm detainees US says only doctors and qualified nurses carry out the procedure; Reprieve says guards do too US says detainees are being treated in accordance with Geneva Conventions; Reprieve says there are beatings and incidents of the Koran being disrespected She acted after the lawyers representing about a dozen of Guantanamo detainees made an emergency petition, expressing concerns over the health of their clients The judge spoke of "deeply troubling" allegations of forced feedings in which US jail personnel were accused of inserting thick tubes through the detainees' noses and into their stomachs without anaesthesia or sedatives. "If the allegations are true - and they are all explicitly, specifically and vigorously denied by the government - they describe the conduct of which the United States can hardly be proud," the judge wrote. However, she denied the lawyers' request for immediate telephone access to their clients. The ruling affected a group of detainees from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Afghanistan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocChip 0 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 All this in the 'Civilised West.' A guilty system recognises no innocents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 (edited) The Road to Guantanamo More4 9pm created huge international impact and won the prestigious Silver Bear for Direction for Winterbottom and Mat Whitecross in competition at The 56th Berlin International Film Festival. In this compelling docudrama by Michael Winterbottom and Mat Whitecross, the 'Tipton Three' narrate their own experiences in America's controversial offshore detention camp The Road To Guantánamo opens with archive footage of George W Bush, flanked by a stern-faced Tony Blair, declaring his certain knowledge that all the detainees held in Guantánamo are "bad people". Everything that follows is designed to turn these words inside out, as three young British Muslims tell the story of how they came to be in US custody at Guantánamo for over two years, and discuss the Kafkaesque horrors that awaited them there, until finally they were released without charge or apology. The title may evoke the Bing Crosby and Bob Hope 'Road' movies of the 1940s, travel-themed musical comedies with a vaguely racist depiction of non-Americans, but the exotic journey embarked upon by the so-called 'Tipton Three' was to take them into areas that were politically incorrect in an altogether different way. About to get married in Pakistan, Birmingham lad Asif Iqbal (Usman) invites his friends Ruhal Ahmed (Harun) and Shafiq Rasul (Ahmed) to join him there for a holiday. Accompanied by another friend called Monir (Siddiqui) and Shafiq's cousin Zahid (Iqbal), they head into Afghanistan, hoping to offer humanitarian aid to their fellow Muslims and to see the place for themselves. After several weeks, they realise they've made a terrible mistake and try to head back to Pakistan, instead ending up under heavy bombardment near Kundun. Separated from Monir (who is never seen again), they become captives of the Northern Alliance in the notorious Sheberghan Prison. Once it is discovered that the three friends are English, they are at first relieved to find themselves handed over to American custody; but in fact their nightmare is only just beginning, as they are passed from Kandahar Airbase to Camp X-Ray, from Camp Delta to solitary confinement, facing mistreatment, injustice and endless, pointless interrogations. In The Road To Guantánamo, the misadventures of Asif, Ruhel and Shafiq are vividly reconstructed by actors, while at the same time anchored to reality by the intercutting of extensive interviews with the real trio, as well as occasional barrages of archival news footage. The result is an utterly devastating, gripping portrayal of innocents abroad falling foul of both large-scale international events and a US policy that seems cruel, inhuman and willfully blind, with the three men's testimonies a stark reminder that the awful, often darkly surreal events unfolding on screen actually took place. 'Intelligence' comes out of this film looking almost comically stupid. The interrogators are entirely convinced of their captives' guilt, but seem less sure of (and indeed less interested in) easily verifiable details like who the detainees are, what language they speak, and whether they were actually in England (under well-documented police probation) at the time that the interrogators insist they were meeting Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. What the three actually have to say is rarely heeded, while manipulative lies, brutalisation, beatings, stress positions, and months of solitary confinement are regularly employed to persuade them of the interrogators' point of view. Of course such abuses will come as little surprise to anyone reading the newspapers, but to see them re-enacted (albeit with a certain restraint), and to hear the victims' personal accounts, has a much greater impact than the written word, putting paid to America's claims that the treatment of so-called 'enemy combatants' is, as Donald Rumsfeld puts it, "humane and appropriate and consistent with the Geneva Convention for the most part." It would be easy to criticise The Road to Guantánamo for being one-sided (it is), and for failing to contextualise the conduct of the US (there is not even a passing mention of 9/11), but such objections miss the point. Many times Bush, Blair and other politicians have used their considerable public platforms to present a similarly partisan, at times even subsequently discredited justification for different aspects of their 'War on Terror', including the unlimited detention without trial of men like the Tipton Three. The trio, and the more than 800 prisoners who remain at America's Cuban base, were not able to communicate their version of events to a lawyer or judge, let alone to the outside world. The Road To Guantánamo gives them their day in court, and the story these "bad people" tell is one that well deserves a hearing. Verdict Gripping, nightmarish, and at times bleakly funny, The Road To Guantánamo is far too important a personal testimony to go unheard. 9.81/10 Edited March 13, 2006 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radgina 1 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 The Road to Guantanamo More4 9pm created huge international impact and won the prestigious Silver Bear for Direction for Winterbottom and Mat Whitecross in competition at The 56th Berlin International Film Festival. In this compelling docudrama by Michael Winterbottom and Mat Whitecross, the 'Tipton Three' narrate their own experiences in America's controversial offshore detention camp The Road To Guantánamo opens with archive footage of George W Bush, flanked by a stern-faced Tony Blair, declaring his certain knowledge that all the detainees held in Guantánamo are "bad people". Everything that follows is designed to turn these words inside out, as three young British Muslims tell the story of how they came to be in US custody at Guantánamo for over two years, and discuss the Kafkaesque horrors that awaited them there, until finally they were released without charge or apology. The title may evoke the Bing Crosby and Bob Hope 'Road' movies of the 1940s, travel-themed musical comedies with a vaguely racist depiction of non-Americans, but the exotic journey embarked upon by the so-called 'Tipton Three' was to take them into areas that were politically incorrect in an altogether different way. About to get married in Pakistan, Birmingham lad Asif Iqbal (Usman) invites his friends Ruhal Ahmed (Harun) and Shafiq Rasul (Ahmed) to join him there for a holiday. Accompanied by another friend called Monir (Siddiqui) and Shafiq's cousin Zahid (Iqbal), they head into Afghanistan, hoping to offer humanitarian aid to their fellow Muslims and to see the place for themselves. After several weeks, they realise they've made a terrible mistake and try to head back to Pakistan, instead ending up under heavy bombardment near Kundun. Separated from Monir (who is never seen again), they become captives of the Northern Alliance in the notorious Sheberghan Prison. Once it is discovered that the three friends are English, they are at first relieved to find themselves handed over to American custody; but in fact their nightmare is only just beginning, as they are passed from Kandahar Airbase to Camp X-Ray, from Camp Delta to solitary confinement, facing mistreatment, injustice and endless, pointless interrogations. In The Road To Guantánamo, the misadventures of Asif, Ruhel and Shafiq are vividly reconstructed by actors, while at the same time anchored to reality by the intercutting of extensive interviews with the real trio, as well as occasional barrages of archival news footage. The result is an utterly devastating, gripping portrayal of innocents abroad falling foul of both large-scale international events and a US policy that seems cruel, inhuman and willfully blind, with the three men's testimonies a stark reminder that the awful, often darkly surreal events unfolding on screen actually took place. 'Intelligence' comes out of this film looking almost comically stupid. The interrogators are entirely convinced of their captives' guilt, but seem less sure of (and indeed less interested in) easily verifiable details like who the detainees are, what language they speak, and whether they were actually in England (under well-documented police probation) at the time that the interrogators insist they were meeting Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. What the three actually have to say is rarely heeded, while manipulative lies, brutalisation, beatings, stress positions, and months of solitary confinement are regularly employed to persuade them of the interrogators' point of view. Of course such abuses will come as little surprise to anyone reading the newspapers, but to see them re-enacted (albeit with a certain restraint), and to hear the victims' personal accounts, has a much greater impact than the written word, putting paid to America's claims that the treatment of so-called 'enemy combatants' is, as Donald Rumsfeld puts it, "humane and appropriate and consistent with the Geneva Convention for the most part." It would be easy to criticise The Road to Guantánamo for being one-sided (it is), and for failing to contextualise the conduct of the US (there is not even a passing mention of 9/11), but such objections miss the point. Many times Bush, Blair and other politicians have used their considerable public platforms to present a similarly partisan, at times even subsequently discredited justification for different aspects of their 'War on Terror', including the unlimited detention without trial of men like the Tipton Three. The trio, and the more than 800 prisoners who remain at America's Cuban base, were not able to communicate their version of events to a lawyer or judge, let alone to the outside world. The Road To Guantánamo gives them their day in court, and the story these "bad people" tell is one that well deserves a hearing. Verdict Gripping, nightmarish, and at times bleakly funny, The Road To Guantánamo is far too important a personal testimony to go unheard. 9.81/10 106370[/snapback] watched it last week...would be interesting to see if anybody shares my views on it after they have seen it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads 0 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 44843 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] Wow, the man that never gets abusive....errrr.....gets abusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radgina 1 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] is there any need...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sima Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] *bookmarks thread* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] On the brandy again? Are you suggesting that we should all just stop taking an interest in politics because we don't have all the facts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] To be fair you're right. I do enjoy masturbating. And I don't have a clue what's going on. My agenda for posting it was that other people might have been interested in watching it. What's your agenda for acting like a prick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads 0 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] is there any need...... 106396[/snapback] Aye, there is. I'm sick of reading all this anti-West stuff. If I posted this kind of stuff about Middle Eastern leaders I'd be branded a racist, would I not?? If stupid bastards like Rob W think the West is so bad they should fuck off and live somewhere else like the Middle East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads 0 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] *bookmarks thread* 106398[/snapback] Bookmark it all you like, son. Ask me if I give a shit about what you might bookmark. You'd impress me if you stood up for what the West believes in, instead of having an empty head as you no doubt have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads 0 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] To be fair you're right. I do enjoy masturbating. And I don't have a clue what's going on. My agenda for posting it was that other people might have been interested in watching it. What's your agenda for acting like a prick? 106418[/snapback] Eh? Are you Rob W, like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads 0 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] Wow, the man that never gets abusive....errrr.....gets abusive. 106384[/snapback] Er so? Couldn't give a shit tbh. I've seen people die standing up for what we believe in the West. Fuckers like you don't have a clue. Oh my, abusive again. Will Gemma stand it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sima Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Just don't start bleating like an old maid when someone has the gall to call you a name tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9771 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 (edited) What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] Wow, the man that never gets abusive....errrr.....gets abusive. 106384[/snapback] Er so? Couldn't give a shit tbh. I've seen people die standing up for what we believe in the West. Fuckers like you don't have a clue. Oh my, abusive again. Will Gemma stand it? 106439[/snapback] Ah, so people have died for our right to have places like Guantanamo where we can lock away people for dubious reasons in dubious circumstances? Sorry, I always believed the West stood for its civil rights like fair trials and all this nonsense... Edited March 14, 2006 by Isegrim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads 0 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] Wow, the man that never gets abusive....errrr.....gets abusive. 106384[/snapback] Er so? Couldn't give a shit tbh. I've seen people die standing up for what we believe in the West. Fuckers like you don't have a clue. Oh my, abusive again. Will Gemma stand it? 106439[/snapback] Ah, so people have died for our right to have places like Guantanamo where we can lock away people for dubious reasons in dubious circumstances? Sorry, I always believed the West stood for its civil rights like fair trials and all this nonsense... 106456[/snapback] And you know this FOR A FACT? How about you define a DUBIOUS CIRCUMSTANCE? Please take into account that when these suspected terrorists are nabbed, the people doing the nabbing are under extreme pressure. Pressure of having their head cut off with a rusty blade. I would never claim we get it right all the time and I would never claim we have no bad apples. No doubt you believe we should be expected to get it right all the time and that we will never have any bad apples. Wake up and become a part of the real world, mate. This is no joking matter and shouldn't be taken lightly. Idealists passing judgement on people living in dangerous circumstances, doing something they have no understanding of, would make me laugh if it wasn't so serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads 0 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Just don't start bleating like an old maid when someone has the gall to call you a name tbh. 106447[/snapback] It's ironic that it was you slagging off the board admin' the other day. You didn't call them wankers, but the accusation you made toward them, if true, would be the same as calling them wankers. But then that's ok, isn't it? You didn't actually come out with a bit of name-calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 People have been released from Guantanamo without any charges after years of incarceration. That much is a fact. And if you don't mind me saying so, the so-called 'idealists' who have issues with this know as much about what went on as you do HTL and just as much right to pass comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 (edited) And you know this FOR A FACT? How about you define a DUBIOUS CIRCUMSTANCE? Please take into account that when these suspected terrorists are nabbed, the people doing the nabbing are under extreme pressure. Pressure of having their head cut off with a rusty blade. I would never claim we get it right all the time and I would never claim we have no bad apples. No doubt you believe we should be expected to get it right all the time and that we will never have any bad apples. Wake up and become a part of the real world, mate. This is no joking matter and shouldn't be taken lightly. Idealists passing judgement on people living in dangerous circumstances, doing something they have no understanding of, would make me laugh if it wasn't so serious. 106581[/snapback] The only fact reported in the documentary was that Guantanamo has housed 750 suspects over 5 years, 500 are still there, 10 have been charged, none have been convicted. Everything else was pesonal testimony and presented as such. That one fact tells a story though. a cumulative 2500 years served on the strength of zero convictions. EDIT: And no-one expects perfection. What you'd hope is that the bad apples are exposed and lessons are learnt. Not that anyone expressing an interest in finding out about it is shouted down as a wanker. Edited March 14, 2006 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9771 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 (edited) What's your agenda for posting this? Do you think you actually know what's going on? Wanker. 106382[/snapback] Wow, the man that never gets abusive....errrr.....gets abusive. 106384[/snapback] Er so? Couldn't give a shit tbh. I've seen people die standing up for what we believe in the West. Fuckers like you don't have a clue. Oh my, abusive again. Will Gemma stand it? 106439[/snapback] Ah, so people have died for our right to have places like Guantanamo where we can lock away people for dubious reasons in dubious circumstances? Sorry, I always believed the West stood for its civil rights like fair trials and all this nonsense... 106456[/snapback] And you know this FOR A FACT? How about you define a DUBIOUS CIRCUMSTANCE? Please take into account that when these suspected terrorists are nabbed, the people doing the nabbing are under extreme pressure. Pressure of having their head cut off with a rusty blade. I would never claim we get it right all the time and I would never claim we have no bad apples. No doubt you believe we should be expected to get it right all the time and that we will never have any bad apples. Wake up and become a part of the real world, mate. This is no joking matter and shouldn't be taken lightly. Idealists passing judgement on people living in dangerous circumstances, doing something they have no understanding of, would make me laugh if it wasn't so serious. 106581[/snapback] Why I know it for a fact? Well, there have been people released from Guantanamo because they had to be found not guilty. Those people are now free to tell their versions about their treatment at Guantanamo and how they were kidnapped. Even when taking into account the possbility of lies and exaggerations they still give a sorry verdict about the state at Guantanamo bay. Also after a judgement of an American court the department of defense had to release the protocols of the testimonies of the detainees. Those are official documents who sometimes have more resemblance to a surreal comedy than to a court hearing (http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/detainees/csrt/index.html). And make no mistake, it isn't just about the 'nabbing' of the people as suspected terrorists. You are totally right that the ordinary soldiers who are doing their job are under extreme pressure and having a difficult job to do. But that doesn't excuse the process that started in the aftermaths, because that is the time were our western values come to place. You might know better what the job of a soldier is about, but I consider myself competent enough to pass judgement about the standard of legal proceedings. And in my eyes even suspected terrorists have the right of a trial in accordance with the rule of law. It is not about letting those people free but it is about locking them up when they have been found guilty. If there is evidence that those people detained at Guantanmo are terrorists or did help terrorists then maybe imprison them for several years, decades or for the rest of their lives. But if you can't come up with the evidence then you can't keep someone locked up just because he was found at the wrong place in Afghanistan when an American combat unit drove by. The other things is that an imprisonment on remand should neither take place at a part of an island where American law doesn't apply nor should it take four years to charge or clear the suspects. And if you charge them give them a fair trial, not just a hearing in front of a military tribunal without sufficient legal aid, competent translators etc. You can gladly call me an idealist, though I repeat I thought these were the ideals that separates us from the terrorists and muslim fundamentalists... Edited March 14, 2006 by Isegrim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads 0 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 (edited) Why I know it for a fact? Well, there have been people released from Guantanamo because they had to be found not guilty. Those people are now free to tell their versions about their treatment at Guantanamo and how they were kidnapped. Even when taking into account the possbility of lies and exaggerations they still give a sorry verdict about the state at Guantanamo bay. Also after a judgement of an American court the department of defense had to release the protocols of the testimonies of the detainees. Those are official documents who sometimes have more resemblance to a surreal comedy than to a court hearing (http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/detainees/csrt/index.html). And make no mistake, it isn't just about the 'nabbing' of the people as suspected terrorists. You are totally right that the ordinary soldiers who are doing their job are under extreme pressure and having a difficult job to do. But that doesn't excuse the process that started in the aftermaths, because that is the time were our western values come to place. You might know better what the job of a soldier is about, but I consider myself competent enough to pass judgement about the standard of legal proceedings. And in my eyes even suspected terrorists have the right of a trial in accordance with the rule of law. It is not about letting those people free but it is about locking them up when they have been found guilty. If there is evidence that those people detained at Guantanmo are terrorists or did help terrorists then maybe imprison them for several years, decades or for the rest of their lives. But if you can't come up with the evidence then you can't keep someone locked up just because he was found at the wrong place in Afghanistan when an American combat unit drove by. The other things is that an imprisonment on remand should neither take place at a part of an island where American law doesn't apply nor should it take four years to charge or clear the suspects. And if you charge them give them a fair trial, not just a hearing in front of a military tribunal without sufficient legal aid, competent translators etc. You can gladly call me an idealist, though I repeat I thought these were the ideals that separates us from the terrorists and muslim fundamentalists... 106598[/snapback] Yes, in an ideal world. And you're right, these ideals do separate us from the muslims and terrorists but I'm afraid sometimes you have to adopt different methods. This is what we have to do, otherwise we will see more bombs and more innocent people blown to pieces by these 'people'. The fact is, terrorists have no respect for the law, in fact the desire of people in the West to uphold the law and maintain certain standards helps these cowards. These are difficult times and people are working under very difficult circumstances that can by considered in no way to be normal. It's true that some innocent people will suffer and that's bad, but this is the way of it when the battle is against terrorists who hide behind innocent people. What annoys me are arsewipes who post the kind of anti-West drivel I see in this thread, they're too stupid to realise that the very principles they're undermining are those that allow them to post their shite. If they really think we're so bad my advice to them is that they piss off and join those they clearly support. Hunting around to find any snippet of information that can be used to undermine the role of our people in this battle is showing support for the terrorists in my eyes. It increases their strength against the West and they know it too. Edited March 14, 2006 by Howaythelads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Separates us from the Muslim Extremists you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads 0 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Separates us from the Muslim Extremists you mean? 106608[/snapback] Whatever. Got anything else to contribute? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Separates us from the Muslim Extremists you mean? 106608[/snapback] Whatever. Got anything else to contribute? 106609[/snapback] Ok then, I'll contribute this, you're the fucking wanker rambo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now