Amnesty International Report

[Campy]

Whichever fool came up with the "gulag of our time" line in that report needs to read this book.

346889[/snapback]

Hot-Pocket Disclaimer: I'm by no means discounting the terrible conditions of the gulags operated by the Soviet Union or the suffering that those who were held there endured. Nor am I attempting to draw any comparison to them and Gitmo.

 

Anyone who has read The Gulag Archipelago (myself included) will forever have very strong reactions whenever we hear the word "gulag." But I do think it's important to remember that the definition of the word gulag is "a labor camp or prison for political prisoners" and should not be defined by the atrocities that occured in the Soviet Union's.

 

The results of Amnesty's findings aside, by using an objective and non-connotation laden definition, Gitmo is a gulag. Therefore, the writer was accurate in his use of the word from my understanding of the context in which it was used, ie, "the prison for politcal prisoners of our time." I say that, because I hope that any person who is learned enough to use the word "gulag" in a sentence must know the difference between Gitmo and the Soviet's infamous gulags.

 

As an aside, if anyone hasn't read The Gulag Archipelago, it's well worth your time. It is a powerful read that will change your perspective on a great many issues. I know that it did mine.

 

As another aside, I understand that after the Soviet Union fell Solzhenitsyn returned to Russia. What a homecoming that must have been, eh?

[Ghost of BiB]

Hot-Pocket Disclaimer:  I'm by no means discounting the terrible conditions of the gulags operated by the Soviet Union or the suffering that those who were held there endured.  Nor am I attempting to draw any comparison to them and Gitmo. 

 

Anyone who has read The Gulag Archipelago (myself included) will forever have very strong reactions whenever we hear the word "gulag."  But I do think it's important to remember that the definition of the word gulag is "a labor camp or prison for political prisoners" and should not be defined by the atrocities that occured in the Soviet Union's.   

 

The results of Amnesty's findings aside, by using an objective and non-connotation laden definition, Gitmo is a gulag.  Therefore, the writer was accurate in his use of the word from my understanding of the context in which it was used, ie, "the prison for politcal prisoners of our time."  I say that, because I hope that any person who is learned enough to use the word "gulag" in a sentence must know the difference between Gitmo and the Soviet's infamous gulags.

 

As an aside, if anyone hasn't read The Gulag Archipelago, it's well worth your time.  It is a powerful read that will change your perspective on a great many issues.  I know that it did mine.

 

As another aside, I understand that after the Soviet Union fell Solzhenitsyn returned to Russia.  What a homecoming that must have been, eh?

346994[/snapback]

 

Political Prisoners?

 

Campy, why don't you just get some black coveralls, sneak in and let them all free like PETA does with the mink farms? Then you'll be able to sleep better at night.

 

That wasn't the connotation meant to be delivered by use of the word anyway, and everyone knows it. Literal translations aside, it's meant as an anti-American statement designed to flame opinion.

[Chilly]

Political Prisoners? 

 

Campy, why don't you just get some black coveralls, sneak in and let them all free like PETA does with the mink farms? Then you'll be able to sleep better at night.

 

That wasn't the connotation meant to be delivered by use of the word anyway, and everyone knows it. Literal translations aside, it's meant as an anti-American statement designed to flame opinion.

347016[/snapback]

 

Designed to flame opinion? Of course it is, its trying to point out human rights abuses and get people more aware of them in order to change them (which, like AD saisd, they don't have a clue how to do). An anti-american statement? I'm gonna have to disagree with you there.

 

How exactly is it anti-American? I fail to see, even with a bit of hyperbole, how pointing out that there are abuses at an American camp in Guantanamo Bay is anti-American. It seems like anyone that disagrees with anything America does these days is "anti-American". Sad really.

[Ghost of BiB]

Designed to flame opinion?  Of course it is, its trying to point out human rights abuses and get people more aware of them in order to change them (which, like AD saisd, they don't have a clue how to do). An anti-american statement?  I'm gonna have to disagree with you there.

 

How exactly is it anti-American?  I fail to see, even with a bit of hyperbole, how pointing out that there are abuses at an American camp in Guantanamo Bay is anti-American.  It seems like anyone that disagrees with anything America does these days is "anti-American".  Sad really.

347067[/snapback]

 

No, not the point. The flavoring is to make America look a little worse in the eyes of the world. I disagree with a lot of what America does. I'm also able to spot an agenda. There is a tremendous amount of abuse within our own domestic prison systems-but it's not all over the front page daily.

[Chilly]

No, not the point. The flavoring is to make America look a little worse in the eyes of the world. I disagree with a lot of what America does. I'm also able to spot an agenda. There is a tremendous amount of abuse within our own domestic prison systems-but it's not all over the front page daily.

347080[/snapback]

 

The abuse in our prison systems isn't also fueling people to become terrorists. And its nowhere near as bad as whats going on in Gitmoa nd throught he rest of the world.

 

Tell me, why would Amnesty International have an anti-American agenda? Sure they did knock America in their report, but they also did many other countries who also had abuse in their prison systems.

[Ghost of BiB]

The abuse in our prison systems isn't also fueling people to become terrorists.  And its nowhere near as bad as whats going on in Gitmoa nd throught he rest of the world.

 

Tell me, why would Amnesty International have an anti-American agenda?  Sure they did knock America in their report, but they also did many other countries who also had abuse in their prison systems.

347098[/snapback]

 

And, once again - why all this attention to "abuse fueling terrorists"? Just what is/was so abusive? For most people in the world, Gitmo would be a walk in the park, compared to their own system. Don't think they don't understand that. The Newsweek fiasco will create a lot more terrorists than this - but, that's a "press thing" thus, automatically excused. No big deal, no problem.

 

And, how do you know what is actually going on? Amnesty International hasn't actually seen anything. "At least 10 documented cases of abuse or mistreatment". 10? 10?. Out of how many? So this is a systemic erosion of rights and priveledge? And, how many of these are legitimate cases of abuse - rather than a B word?

[Chilly]

And, once again - why all this attention to "abuse fueling terrorists"? Just what is/was so abusive? For most people in the world, Gitmo would be a walk in the park, compared to their own system. Don't think they don't understand that. The Newsweek fiasco will create a lot more terrorists than this - but, that's a "press thing" thus, automatically excused. No big deal, no problem.

 

And, how do you know what is actually going on? Amnesty International hasn't actually seen anything. "At least 10 documented cases of abuse or mistreatment". 10? 10?. Out of how many? So this is a systemic erosion of rights and priveledge? And, how many of these are legitimate cases of abuse - rather than a B word?

347102[/snapback]

 

You didn't answer my question, let me ask it again:

Tell me, why would Amnesty International have an anti-American agenda?

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

The results of Amnesty's findings aside, by using an objective and non-connotation laden definition, Gitmo is a gulag.  Therefore, the writer was accurate in his use of the word from my understanding of the context in which it was used, ie, "the prison for politcal prisoners of our time."  I say that, because I hope that any person who is learned enough to use the word "gulag" in a sentence must know the difference between Gitmo and the Soviet's infamous gulags.

346994[/snapback]

 

Actually, I disagree. I think the complete phrase "gulag of our times" indicates precisely what the author meant by it...and it's not the objective definition. The entire phrase is intended to carry the specific connotation of the brutality of the Stalinist Russian system.

[Ghost of BiB]

You didn't answer my question, let me ask it again:

Tell me, why would Amnesty International have an anti-American agenda?

347108[/snapback]

 

CTM just answered for me. Word choices vs. evidence. "Gulag" implies a certain picture. I would have had much less trouble with it had it been worded objectively. Like i said, 10 cases - and we don't know the severity. That is hardly the draconian conditions implied by "Gulag".

 

The wording is what makes it appear as though there is an Agenda.

 

Not to mention, it's "flavor of the month" to hate America, so why not? How affiliated is AI with the UN? the UN can't STAND us.

[Chilly]

CTM just answered for me. Word choices vs. evidence. "Gulag" implies a certain picture. I would have had much less trouble with it had it been worded objectively. Like i said, 10 cases - and we don't know the severity. That is hardly the draconian conditions implied by "Gulag".

 

The wording is what makes it appear as though there is an Agenda.

 

Not to mention, it's "flavor of the month" to hate America, so why not? How affiliated is AI with the UN? the UN can't STAND us.

347111[/snapback]

 

I didn't ask what made you think they had an agenda. I asked what their motive was for having an anti-American agenda.

 

why ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hw, w)

adv.

For what purpose, reason, or cause; with what intention, justification, or motive: Why is the door shut? Why do birds sing?

[Ghost of BiB]

I didn't ask what made you think they had an agenda.  I asked what their motive was for having an anti-American agenda.

 

why    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (hw, w)

adv.

For what purpose, reason, or cause; with what intention, justification, or motive: Why is the door shut? Why do birds sing?

347112[/snapback]

 

AI prides itself on being apolitical. That said, it's membership is largely second and third world-many basing themselves in countries not friendly to American interests. Whenever faced with a situation where they do not have first hand knowledge of allegations or facts, they rely on third party sources of information - most notably press reports and interviews with family members and the such. As with anything else, one can be selective when reviewing these. The results are then passed to an executive committe for review, before being published. Based on the above - most notably membership who are not wearing the red-white and blue...including many from within our own nation (AI people tend to be against most conflicts where someone invades another nation) and the lack of actual evidence to support their allegations - I see incentive to not so subtley word things in such a manner as to affect world opinion that much more against the US and it's allies, to assist even in a small way what may be perceived as a better potential outcome for people they deem oppressed. Do not think for a moment that there aren't AI members who also view this as a war against Islam. Once again, also from within our own borders.

[Ghost of BiB]

Here, read their current "In the America's page". with all the countries in the americas, and all the crap that goes on daily...who gets star billing?

 

AI No undue emphasis on the United States page

[Chilly]

Theres the response I was looking for. =)

 

Admittedly, I was not aware that AI operated in this way. I hadn't seen information about it before, which is why I wanted to talk about their motives.

 

Thanks, I'll look into it.

[Alaska Darin]

Here, read their current "In the America's page". with all the countries in the americas, and all the crap that goes on daily...who gets star billing?

 

AI No undue emphasis on the United States page

347128[/snapback]

Not to mention the number of "apolitical" pleadings.

[Ghost of BiB]

Not to mention the number of "apolitical" pleadings. 

347152[/snapback]

 

Touching, is it not? Odd, when you look at the middle east page - seems like every there is doing pretty good. Place must be a lot calmer than I thought. Oh, they DID say beheading the one guy was bad.

[Thurman's Helmet]

The abuse in our prison systems isn't also fueling people to become terrorists.  And its nowhere near as bad as whats going on in Gitmoa nd throught he rest of the world.

 

Tell me, why would Amnesty International have an anti-American agenda?  Sure they did knock America in their report, but they also did many other countries who also had abuse in their prison systems.

347098[/snapback]

 

 

How about we then examine the culture that breeds individuals to "become terrorists" at the slightest misdeed or indignation?

[Ghost of BiB]

Calm down, Thurman.

[Campy]

There is a tremendous amount of abuse within our own domestic prison systems-but it's not all over the front page daily.

347080[/snapback]

If you can spot an agenda from a mile away, I can spot a slippery slope from either further. Domestic prisons are full of people who were proven guilty. Gitmo is filled with people who have not been found guilty. By the law of the land, they are innocent, although I believe a great many of them would be found guilty if they were ever charged and tried.

 

And yes, Gitmo has political prisoners. There is a world of difference between an Iraqi saying something like "Down with Bush" or "Down with America" and actually being a terrorist, yet anti-American rhetoric can land Ahmed the Iraqi in Gitmo.

 

Not really all that different than the reasons the Soviets threw people in their gulags, is it? Sure, many deserved to be there. Many did not.

[Ghost of BiB]

If you can spot an agenda from a mile away, I can spot a slippery slope from either further.  Domestic prisons are full of people who were proven guilty.  Gitmo is filled with people who have not been found guilty.  By the law of the land, they are innocent, although I believe a great many of them would be found guilty if they were ever charged and tried.

 

And yes, Gitmo has political prisoners.  There is a world of difference between an Iraqi saying something like "Down with Bush" or "Down with America" and actually being a terrorist, yet anti-American rhetoric can land Ahmed the Iraqi in Gitmo. 

 

Not really all that different than the reasons the Soviets threw people in their gulags, is it?  Sure, many deserved to be there.  Many did not.

347332[/snapback]

 

ARGH! you're friggen impossible, Chris. You think people have been tossed into airplanes and flown to Cuba for saying "Down With Bush?" We'd be better off putting up a fence from the Pacific rim to merry old England-with satellite facilities in Massachusetts and California, if that were the case. I also thought that this whole thing started off on prisoner abuse? I realize that your "fair trial" concepts to you are abuse...but...I would consider someone running an AQ/Taliban operational cell, actively plotting to blow things up or covering it in a fine film of anthrax as slightly more than a "Political Prisoner". You want to apply those standards, hell, Ted Kasinsky is a political prisoner.

[Thurman's Helmet]

Calm down, Thurman.

347272[/snapback]

 

 

I'm heated!