US torturing terror suspects?

chewie_nz

Banned
A US jet registered to a ghost company whisks terror suspects to countries that use torture, The Washington Post has reported, based on its own investigation.

The Gulfstream V turbojet has been seen at US military bases around the world, often loading up hooded and shackled suspects and delivering them to countries known to use torture, a process the CIA calls "rendition", the Washington daily said.

The Post investigated the ownership of the jet, which has been spotted in Afghanistan, Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Morocco, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan and which carries the tail number N379P, according to the newspaper.

The officers of the plane's corporate owner, Premier Executive Transport Services, are all listed with dates of birth in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s, but with social security numbers issued since 1998, found the Post, which was unable to locate any further business or credit information on them or on the company.

The CIA refused comment, but such "proprietary" or front corporations are standard procedure for the agency, former operatives told the Post.

The "rendering" of suspects to countries that employ interrogation techniques banned in the United States is worrisome and could violate the UN Convention on Torture, World Organisation for Human Rights USA executive director Morton Sklar told the daily.

The Post article confirmed much of a November 14 article published in the Sunday Times, of London, which obtained flight plans for the plane, which, the Times said, always departs from Washington, DC and has visited the US Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where about 550 terror suspects are held.

A Swedish television program, Cold Facts, reported that in December 2001, the jet took hooded terror suspects to Egypt, according to the Post, which confirmed the Swedish report independently.

The Post said the plane, with hooded crew members speaking with US accents, loaded two Egyptian nationals and took off at 4.30am for Cairo.

It said airport officials and amateur plane spotters, some using binoculars, have logged multiple sightings of N379P at several US military airports and fueling station


http://tvnz.co.nz/view/news_world_story_skin/466398?format=html
 
If it will save other lifes regardless of nationality I say they can send them straight to hell as far as Iam concernd. I would like to help the C.I.A to bring those soulless psychopaths back to the reality if you ask me. You have my IP-adress and I am sure you can find my phone number - just call me up and we can discuss terms and a small fee and I will help you out without a doubt. Maby all my sences could come to some use, instead for rutting away when people die on a daily basis because of incompetent fools with a huge lack of reality understanding. I can smell BS a distance of 10 kilometres - and if you see me running.... You better catch up! 8)

Cheers:
Doc.S
:viking:
 
The Washington Post does not have what one could call an unbiased journalistic view. They have made a jump without evidence what this aircraft is being used for. Why yes if its being used for by the CIA. The use must be niefrious.

I agree with DOC S. the people we are fighting do not play fair why should we. IMHO if one good guys life is saved by the death of 20 terrorists it's a fair price.

Besides if they are being transported to their home countries or countries where they are wanted for crimes. Well then thats justice.
 
Who cares? We didn't pick them up for stealing cars and selling drugs...they're terrorists and should be....punished. :?
 
devils advocate time;

these people think that they're fighting against crusaders in their homeland. defending the isalmic faith etc.

in WW2 they would've been called partisans or the risistance. but here they are called insurgents or terrorists. is this right?

i think terrorists are the ones that bomb civilian aircraft, public places etc. when it come to fighting the US occupation forces they seem to be using what little weapons the have and engaging police or military targets (for the most part)
 
03USMC said:
I agree with DOC S. the people we are fighting do not play fair why should we.

Because we're not them. We're soldier and warriors; not barbarians, rules apply, and they have to apply, otherwise we're not better then they are.
 
r031Button said:
03USMC said:
I agree with DOC S. the people we are fighting do not play fair why should we.quote]


Thanks for the ethics lesson. They are terrorists they don't rate protection under the geneva convention. Nor do they rate protection under normal rules of criminal justice. If another nation can deal with them more effectively under their laws than the US can. Good I'll pay the frieght.

Because we're not them. We're soldier and warriors; not barbarians, rules apply, and they have to apply, otherwise we're not better then they are.
 
I don't think every taliban soldier captured in Afganistan can be considered a terrorist. Now as for the actual, honest to god terrorists; they do warrant treatment under the Geneva convention; I was taught to act under the spirit of all Laws of Armed Conflict; not simply the letter.

However, I do realised I'm talking to people who have been there and done that; so my opinion isn't quite as valid as theirs are, for obvious reasons.
 
I will agree that those taken during combat with a military force should be treated as EPW's.

However if it is found that they planned or carried out attacks against Civilian targets. Then all bets should be off.

Soliders do not make war on civilians. Terrorists do. So IMO terrorists should not reap the benefits accorded to legitimate combatants.
 
I'll have to agree with you on that. However, I would think that these terrorist would be treated in the same way as the Oklahoma state bomber (did I get that right?). From my understanding he was sentenced to death, through a criminal court; not through some other means.
 
Okay I can go with that. But is it allowable for the US to return a terrorist to a country who's laws have stiffer penalties for such crimes. As most Islamic States do?
I think it is. Just as Canada will not extridite persons facing death penelty cases, maybe we should it allow it.
 
The Canadian immigration board has no idea of what it's own policies are. We just sent a women back to Iran where she's facing jail time for a student protest. She had been meaningfully employed and invovled int he community. This is also after the Iranian killed a Canadian reporter and have refused to send us the body or do an autopsy :x . Meanwhile American deserters, soldier having volunteered for their posts, are allowed to stay...

Personally, I don't have a problem with them being shipped back home, hopefully it can show their countrymen that it's not worth it. I do have a problem with places like Guantonamo Bay were people are held with out charge for years.
 
chewie_nz said:
devils advocate time;

these people think that they're fighting against crusaders in their homeland. defending the isalmic faith etc.

in WW2 they would've been called partisans or the risistance. but here they are called insurgents or terrorists. is this right?

i think terrorists are the ones that bomb civilian aircraft, public places etc. when it come to fighting the US occupation forces they seem to be using what little weapons the have and engaging police or military targets (for the most part)

They aren't even terrorists, that's way too noble. Because they have no regard for Human life, including their own innocent countrymen, the very least they can be called are murderers. When you trigger a car bomb in your own neighborhood you know a lot of innocents are going to die. They have appointed themselves as judge, jury, and executioner. In America, that will get you a long drop at the end of a short rope.
 
oh boo hoo, someone MAY have tortured a few terrorists, hmm i bet the terrorists would never do that to anyone(saracasm and a whole lot of it).

those people(i use "people" lightly) deserve every thing that they get and the damn ACLU needs to quit whining because i don't think they would get a hug from osama if he met them.
 
once again i feel that someone needs to say.

why do we need to go down to that level. i don't hear anyone owning up to torturing nazi party members?

aren't you just giving them a reason to continue their struggle. you win these struggles by building hospitals and school. not by torturing people. and esp not by setting the wrong example for this middle eastern experiment in democracy
 
chewie_nz said:
once again i feel that someone needs to say.

why do we need to go down to that level. i don't hear anyone owning up to torturing nazi party members?

aren't you just giving them a reason to continue their struggle. you win these struggles by building hospitals and school. not by torturing people. and esp not by setting the wrong example for this middle eastern experiment in democracy

The Allied in WWII did own the touturing of Germans, however the answer I believe is in two quotes.

"America has no friends , only interests" (Clinton)

Example, (IMO) invade and conquer for Oil, stand by do nothing during mass killings in Africa

"Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." (B. Franklin)

Example, The Patriot Act, if you read the text you would understand.

The days of getting down to their level has not been around since the high days of the Peace Corp.

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.


Pastor Martin Niemöller

I think is happening again, just replace some of the names.


Also Read
Crimes and Mercies: The Fate Of German Civilians Under Allied Occupation, 1944-1950 by James Bacque

A Terrible Revenge : The Ethnic Cleansing of the East European Germans
by Alfred-Maurice de Zayas

Other Losses
by James Bacque
 
Torture seems a fitting punishment but does that mean we must lower ourselves to thier level?

No! No i say , we should rise above that and no matter what they may do we must show we are better and we will not be brought back down to that kind of fighting.
 
Back
Top