NewCelica.org Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,125 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I post this for two reasons:
  • To show how CRUEL warfare is [and some of the people involved in it - especiall so-called Special Forces soldiers (on all sides of ANY conflict)].
  • The dangers of the World Court which can prosecute US citizens.
I find the concept of a World Court that supercedes the US Constitution quite frightening, actually, as I'm not a citizen of the United Nations, but of the Republic of Michigan which is one of the Confederates joined together called the United States for America.

Many of you may not understand what it is I'm trying to say, but some of you will. At any rate here ya go.

Afghan Prisoners Beaten To Death At US Base
Investigation 'Blunt Force Injuries' Cited In Murder Ruling
By Duncan Campbell in Los Angeles
The Guardian - UK
3-6-03


Two prisoners who died while being held for interrogation at the US military base in Afghanistan had apparently been beaten, according to a military pathologist's report. A criminal investigation is now under way into the deaths which have both been classified as homicides.

The deaths have led to calls for an inquiry into what interrogation techniques are being used at the base where it is believed the al-Qaida leader, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, is now also being held. Former prisoners at the base claim that detainees are chained to the ceiling, shackled so tightly that the blood flow stops, kept naked and hooded and kicked to keep them awake for days on end.

The two men, both Afghans, died last December at the US forces base in Bagram, north of Kabul, where prisoners have been held for questioning. The autopsies found they had suffered "blunt force injuries" and classified both deaths as homicides.

A spokesman for the Pentagon said yesterday it was not possible to discuss the details of the case because of the proceeding investigation. If the investigation finds that the prisoners had been unlawfully killed during interrogation, it could lead to both civil and military prosecutions. He added that it was not clear whether only US personnel had had access to the men.

One of the dead prisoners, known only as Dilawar, died as a result of "blunt force injuries to lower extremities complicating coronary artery disease", according to the death certificate signed by Major Elizabeth Rouse, a pathologist with the Washington-based Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, which operates under the auspices of the defence department. The dead man was aged 22 and was a farmer and part-time taxi-driver. He was said to have had an advanced heart condition and blocked arteries.

Chris Kelly, a spokesman for the institute, said yesterday that their pathologists were involved in all cases on military bases where there were unusual or suspicious deaths. He was not aware of any other homicides of prisoners held since September 11. He said that the definition of homicide was "death resulting from the intentional or grossly reckless behaviour of another person or persons" but could also encompass "self-defence or justifiable killings".

The death certificates for the men have four boxes on them giving choices of "natural, accident, suicide, homicide". The Pentagon said yesterday that the choice of "homicide" did not necessarily mean that the dead person had been unlawfully killed. There was no box which would indicate that a pathologist was uncertain how a person had died.

It is believed that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, described as the number three in al-Qaida, is being interrogated at Bagram. He is said to have started providing information about the possible whereabouts of Osama bin Laden whom he is said to have met in Pakistan last month. Most al-Qaida suspects are being held outside the US which means that they are not entitled to access to the US judicial system.

Two former prisoners at the base, Abdul Jabar and Hakkim Shah, told the New York Times this week that they recalled seeing Dilawar at Bagram. They said that they had been kept naked, hooded and shackled and were deprived of sleep for days on end. Mr Shah said that American guards kicked him to stop him falling asleep and that on one occasion he had been kicked by a woman interrogator, while her male colleague held him in a kneeling position.

The commander of the coalition forces in Afghanistan, General Daniel McNeill, said that prisoners were made to stand for long periods but he denied that they were chained to the ceiling. "Our interrogation techniques are adapted," he said.

"They are in accordance with what is generally accepted as interrogation techniques, and if incidental to the due course of this investigation, we find things that need to be changed, we will certainly change them."

In January, in his state of the union address, President George Bush announced that "3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries" and "many others have met a different fate" and "are no longer a problem to the United States".

The other death being investigated is that of Mullah Habibullah, the brother of a former Taliban commander. His death certificate indicates that he died of a pulmonary embolism, or a blood clot in the lung.

Guardian Unlimited
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
606 Posts
So you condone the Hague Tribunal, is that correct? Then what is your stand on the trials of Serbs there? Just curious. . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,125 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I don't care for those international tribunals at all because there is no justice there; not like there is justice anywhere, either.

The West wanted the Treblinka mines. Period. Well, there were other reasons I imagine, but they are rather vague at the moment.

The Serbs were defending the integrity of their borders. The KLA [ A Communist organization] simply "invaded". The conflict was portrayed as a Muslim vs. Orthodox Christian affair when only on the surface did it APPEAR to be that way. It's as if Mexico were to invade the US [Oh, wait, they are... :mad:]. If I were Pres I'd send in troops and militia to squash it. Yes, there will be "racism"/"bigotry" as you'd be fighting someone racially different than yourself, but that would not be the reason that I'd send you there.

Milosovic is handling himself quite well in the trials, btw.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,125 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
The Nuremburg trials were a fiasco. There are reports of tortured testimony of the defendants in what's considered "revisionist literature", but was reported in at least some of the contemporary press at the time. Also, known Nazis like Werner von Braun were brought into the US under Operation Paperclip. And "Scarface" Skorzeny went onto Israel to train it's "crack troops" at instilling terror by "winning the hearts and minds" of the Palestinian population at that time.

Yes, I'm rambling a bit, but I wish to lay out a few items that "color my perception" of the trials. A good study of some of the older books concerning the Nuremburg Trials are HIGHLY recommended. You may find documentation that you've not been aware of.

One of the "issues" I have with Nuremburg compared to current US legislation and rulings is that officers of the present-day US gov't are NOT held accountable for their actions against civilians while in the commission of gov't duties. Look at Ron Horiuchi, the FBI sniper who killed Vickie Weaver; he is still a free man and he, like his superiors have been promoted... This is an affront to "justice" if one believes fully [well, what has been promulgated as fact in the public's mind, at any rate] in what was established at Nuremburg.

I fully disagree that any on this website be tried by anything other than a court in the state in which you reside or the state in which you are accused of a capital crime. In that way you still have the Constitution and Bill of Rights as a foundation for due rights and procedures as well as a course of appeal procedures, if necessary. The laws of the US are the highest laws that we should be required to observe. If not, the American Revolution was in vain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,125 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
US Admits Afghan Suspects
Died During 'Interrogation'
By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles
The Independent - UK
3-8-03


American military officials acknowledged yesterday that two prisoners captured in Afghanistan in December had been killed while under interrogation at Bagram air base north of Kabul - reviving concerns that the US is resorting to torture in its treatment of Taliban fighters and suspected al-Qa'ida operatives.

A spokesman for the air base confirmed that the official cause of death of the two men was "homicide", contradicting earlier accounts that one had died of a heart attack and the other from a pulmonary embolism.

The men's death certificates, made public earlier this week, showed that one captive, known only as Dilawar, 22, from the Khost region, died from "blunt force injuries to lower extremities complicating coronary artery disease" while another captive, Mullah Habibullah, 30, suffered from blood clot in the lung that was exacerbated by a "blunt force injury".

US officials previously admitted using "stress and duress" on prisoners including sleep deprivation, denial of medication for battle injuries, forcing them to stand or kneel for hours on end with hoods on, subjecting them to loud noises and sudden flashes of light and engaging in culturally humiliating practices such as having them kicked by female officers.

While the US claims this still constitutes "humane" treatment, human rights groups including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have denounced it as torture as defined by international treaty. The US has also come under heavy criticism for its reported policy of handing suspects over to countries such as Jordan, Egypt or Morocco, where torture techniques are an established part of the security apparatus. Legally, Human Rights Watch says, there is no distinction between using torture directly and subcontracting it out.

Some American politicians have argued that torture could be justified in this case if it helped prevent terror attacks on US citizens. Jonathan Turley, a prominent law professor at George Washington University, countered that embracing torture would be "suicide for a nation once viewed as the very embodiment of human rights". [Chui: Exactly!! How far we've fallen...]

Torture is part of a long list of concerns about the Bush administration's respect for international law, after the extrajudicial killing of al-Qa'ida suspects by an unmanned drone in Yemen and the the indefinite detention of "enemy combatants" at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a number of whom have "committed or attempted to commit suicide".

President Bush appeared to encourage extra-judicial solutions in his State of the Union address in January when he talked of al-Qa'ida members being arrested or meeting "a different fate". "Let's put it this way," he said in a tone that appalled many, "they are no longer a problem to the United States and our friends and allies."


http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=384604
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top