Welcome to PatsFans.com

Red Cross Chief 'Deplores' White House

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Patters, May 12, 2006.

  1. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,778
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +170 / 4 / -4

    This is unbelievable. Even the Nazi's honored the Geneva convention.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-5816970,00.html

    The head of the international Red Cross on Friday deplored the Bush administration's refusal to allow its delegates to visit detainees in secret detention.

    In an unusually strongly worded statement, the neutral agency known for its discretion expressed disappointment that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and other officials refused to yield to its demand.

    "No matter how legitimate the grounds for detention, there exists no right to conceal a person's whereabouts or to deny that he or she is being detained,'' said Jakob Kellenberger, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross, following a series of top-level meetings in Washington.
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 21, 2005
  2. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,704
    Likes Received:
    157
    Ratings:
    +497 / 2 / -9

    Are the prisoners Soldiers?

    Is it true that the prisoners are, Terroroists, Gangsters, Murderers, Savages, does the Geneva Convention cover Gangsters?

    The Red Cross CEO's are Bigger Crooks and Liars than the Oil Company's.

    If the Red Cross is complaining, they must be losing money on it somewhere.
  3. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,778
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +170 / 4 / -4

    That's what a lot of liberals say; it's conservatives who usually defend the Red Cross. When liberals started attacking the Red Cross for not making public what they knew about Abu Ghraib, many of the conservatives here defended them. When conservatives here suggested giving money to Red Cross to help Katrina victims, some of the liberals proposed alternative groups, and came under attack by some of the conservatives. (I myself think the Red Cross is a flawed, but basically good organization.)
  4. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,704
    Likes Received:
    157
    Ratings:
    +497 / 2 / -9

    Jesus God help me,
    Am I turning into a Liberal, I believe all drugs should be legal and I don't support the Red Cross (crooks).
  5. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,520
    Likes Received:
    172
    Ratings:
    +401 / 10 / -11

    #24 Jersey

    Just to slow down your generalizations again, Patters, the RC deplores a specific action of the White House, not the White House in general.
  6. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,778
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +170 / 4 / -4

    What was my generalization? Oh, I see, perhaps you're talking about the title of the thread, but that's the title of the story, which is what I often lift when I'm posting a news article.
  7. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,520
    Likes Received:
    172
    Ratings:
    +401 / 10 / -11

    #24 Jersey

    I guess if that was the title it's another example of media BS. The Guardian is always doing that, they're worse than most US papers. The RC may deplore this White House but that's a gross generalization.
    Last edited: May 12, 2006
  8. mgcolby

    mgcolby Woohoo, I'm a VIP!!! PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,606
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    Another zinger, :rolleyes:

    Have you ever read the Geneva convention articles? Here is article IV the one that defines the term POW. Please tell me how the terrorists fall under this:

    A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces. [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions: [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](c) That of carrying arms openly; [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power. [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model. [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law. [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war. [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention: [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment. [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties. [/FONT]
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]C. This Article shall in no way affect the status of medical personnel and chaplains as provided for in Article 33 of the present Convention.[/FONT]
  9. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,778
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +170 / 4 / -4

    Thanks for posting that, mgcolby, but in general I'm aware the White House has its arguments, but I don't think it's too much to treat people at least as well as we treat Prisoners of War or even criminals. If we sink to the level of terrorist nations, then some people may find it hard to distinguish between the two.
  10. mgcolby

    mgcolby Woohoo, I'm a VIP!!! PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,606
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    Me personally I think we should treat the terrorists the way they treat everybody else, subhuman because that is what they are. They are a waste of oxygen and they steal everytime they breath it. They are true oxygen thiefs. But either way they do not fall under the Geneva convention for many reasons but that is the primary. For example they are not to use Ambulances for anything other then transporting the injured (which they have done) and the enemy should not specifically target any medical personnel or equipment (which they have done as well). Plus the whole place of worship issue. Just read through the articles you will find many things that they do in direct violation of the Geneva convention and the Red Cross knows this, which makes this whole article laughable.
    Last edited: May 12, 2006
  11. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,778
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +170 / 4 / -4

    I'm not defending the terrorists. We're a civilized nation, and that may be a burden sometimes, but this burden helps prevent mistakes, lies, corruption, personal prejudices, etc. from entering the equation. I don't want our nation to be more like them, and if we don't have some rules and transparency then we risk a repeat of the sort of crimes committed in Vietnam by American soldiers (such as Mai Lai).
  12. mgcolby

    mgcolby Woohoo, I'm a VIP!!! PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,606
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    I know what you meant. They make me sick and then to have the Red Cross essentially say that deserve to be treated as POW is worse. The only thing they should get is shelter, food and water. Anything other then that they should consider a bonus!
  13. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,778
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +170 / 4 / -4

    It depends on their crimes. If we catch someone who's we know blew up a bus of kids, put him in isolation with minimum rights, but let the Red Cross in to see that we're not torturing, starving, or otherwise abusing him. On the other hand, if we catch someone we suspect of blowing up a bus, talked about blowing up a bus, associated with people who committed crimes, perhaps a different standard is needed.
  14. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,704
    Likes Received:
    157
    Ratings:
    +497 / 2 / -9

    What would happen to an American Christian if he were to go to IRAN, put a bomb on a bus and then got caught.

    Would Iran let the Red Cross visit him and bring him Pizza?
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 22, 2005
  15. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,778
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +170 / 4 / -4

    If you like Iran's approach to human rights, become a Muslim and move there. I for one do not like their approach, and certainly don't want to mimic it here.
  16. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,704
    Likes Received:
    157
    Ratings:
    +497 / 2 / -9

    When you get into a fight you fight to win, you kick him when he is down if you don't then he will get you down, then he will kick you, then you are dead.

    Sad, but thats the way things are today.
    Last edited: May 13, 2006
  17. Turk

    Turk Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,072
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0


    You do realize that these people are there based upon accusations, and some of them may be and have been proven to be innocent, some are kids.

    Do we support a police force that uses the same methods as criminals? Isn't there a reason for that?

    The fact that we are on the right side, that we are better than cutting people's heads off, that we are the civilized ones, etc should count for something shouldn't it?

    Otherwise, what is the difference between us and them,
    why bother have a system? Why bother with laws and treaties and being just?
    Last edited: May 13, 2006
  18. mgcolby

    mgcolby Woohoo, I'm a VIP!!! PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,606
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    Yeah none of them are criminals!
  19. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,675
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    I got an idea. Why don't we get thafuc out of foreign countries and stop using the military as a police force for socially engineering sh-thole parts of the world?
    All fixed.
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 22, 2005
  20. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,778
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +170 / 4 / -4

    I agree. I think if the west left the Middle East alone for a generation, the region would start to grow up. Each time the west "rescues" a region, it sets them back at least a generation. Even Germany, despite the massive influx of western aid, took over a generation to recover from WWII.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>