Important, if true.

http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,405...255E401,00.html

This is just too extreme for words, our own Dachau, on Cuba's shores. No, this paper is really making this up. It has to be....

In your opinion, fantomas, if this does get closer to realization - what recourse might you suggest we have?

Would an e-petition suffice?

Your suggestions and guidance would be appreciated in this matter.

An e-petition, calls and faxes and e-mails to our elected representatives, perhaps even petitions to the UN and World Court in the Hague, marches on Washington, local public rallies, you name it. Anything and everything to stop this from happening. Remember that Dachau, near Munich, was originally established by Hitler to deal with "political prisoners," traitors, and other enemies of the German regime. WE all know what it and the other concentration and work camps turned into: death camps. This is OUTRAGEOUS. That's why I said, I hope it's not true. I hope.

[ May 29, 2003, 06:46 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

Reaction to this would certainly be influenced by attitudes toward the death penalty more generally. As noted in the article the British have apparently made their feelings known. Most European governments have abolished the death penalty and will likely express outrage. European public attitudes are more ambivalent.

I am a cautious supporter of the death penalty. There are certain situations where it is warranted (treason, terrorism, mass or serial murder) and when supported by reliable evidence (physical evidence, DNA) it is the appropriate penalty.

I have always assumed that some of the Guantanamo detainees would ultimately be executed. Al Quaeda members should certainly be executed after we've gotten whatever useful information we can get from them. There may be other specific non-Al Quaeda individuals obtained in Afghanistan who would also merit execution.

The fact that some may be British or Australian citizens doesn't matter to me. I've seen references made to the nationalities of the datainees that seem to imply it would be wrong to execute, let's say, an Australian member of Al Quaeda, but OK to execute an Arab member. If punishment is to be dealt, it seems to me it should be based on the detainee's status as a member of Al Quaeda, the activities they engaged in, evidence against them - not nationality or ethnicity.

The use of the term "death camp" in the article and references to Dachau are unfortunate. The execution of some detainees who may be guilty of truly heinous crimes is in no way comparable, morally or tactically to the race-based genocide carried out in death camps like Dachau. Nuremburg would be a more appropriate comparison in this context. This is part of a disturbing trend that belittles the horrors of the Nazi and other genocidal regimes by making casual comparisons to quite ordinary contemporary events to generate sensational reaction. It's the beginning of an historical whitewash that may enable future generations to say the Nazis really weren't that bad. There are valid comparisons that can be made to the mass murders committed in Cambodia, Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Iraq. Last week PETA passed through town and erected a photo display in front of City Hall that photographically compared the horror of Auschwitz to that of a Purdue chicken farm. It was utterly offensive and did little service for their cause.

Looking toward the future, presumably there will also be many individuals who participated in the Baath Party administration of Iraq who will be tried for crimes against the Iraqi people and likewise executed. Even now armed bands of former regime loyalists are roving the country stirring up trouble and attacking American forces. Baath Party members (and these would number in the many thousands) should be rounded up and interned. Lower level members (who were required to join to obtain or keep jobs) could be excused. Senior and mid-level members should be tried and executed or imprisoned according to their crimes.

Just as the Nazis continued to be hunted many years after their crimes were committed, the criminals of Al Quaeda, Yugoslavia, Iraq and others of their ilk must be pursued until brought to justice. They richly deserve the harshest possible penalty.

[ May 29, 2003, 07:43 AM: Message edited by: Torgauer ]

Torgauer, I think you're missing the point. The question is not whether the death penalty is appropriate. We're not talking about Nuremberg-style war-crimes trials. We're talking about executing people who haven't been publicly charged with anything, with no public access to the trial records, no jury, no appeals.

The key word here is MAY. What if they're not guilty? Death camps may be an inappropriate term, but it sounds very comparable to the desparecidos in Argentina in the '70s. Remember, they were supposed to be terrorists, too.

JC - you are on point -- the Bush administration has absolutely no respect for the due process -- scary!

Queensland's top weekend reading

I know that our Administration has argued the Al Queda prisoners are not prisoners of war, because Al Queda and the Taliban were never recognized as legitimately in control of Afghanistan (except with Cheney & co. wanted a gas pipeline), but aren't there Geneva Convention rules about secret trials and executions? Just because someone is a member of the Baath party or a member of Al Queda does not justify execution - at least not under the law as I understand it. It is repulsive to think this Administration will get away with, quite literally, murdering people who may be innocent of any real crime (just training to be an Al Queda member is not a crime). We cannot summarily execute members of an enemy's army during a "legitimate" war, why is it justified now?

Torgauer, would you please note that I did not say AUSCHWITZ or TREBLINKA, or death camps that were based solely on the Nazi race principle, but I did mention DACHAU, which was originally established to hold *political* prisoners, social "degenarates," people suspected of treasonous crimes or attacks against the German government. This is not something I'm making up, it's the truth. Dachau evolved into a different thing altogether. The people being held in Guantanamo have not been charged with a crime, many of them constitute prisoners of war (as they were seized in a war zone), and should be dealt with under open and fair systems of military law, not the secret, possibly lethal mechanisms that have been proposed. Moreover, any members of AL QAEDA--that is, who are proved to have assisted in the planning or execution of Al Qaeda-related crimes--if they are to be executed, should come to THESE shores rather than in some camp to which the US public or our elected officials have little to no access. Dachau operated outside the sphere either of the elected parliament in Berlin or the German court system, which eventually ceded their powers to the dictatorship. Perhaps this transgression of both our national and international laws does not bother you, but it sure in the hell bothers me, because who is to say that US nationals who are wrongly and SECRETLY convicted of aiding and abetting terrorism might not suffer the same fate. Does that not trouble you? I'm with Dietrich Bonhoeffer on this.

History of Dachau



[ May 29, 2003, 09:47 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, arent there only like 30 people still being held down there?

Arent Military Tribunals the way to handle these? It would be great to see a grand standing trial that takes 3 years for all of the guys down there... wonderful for all of us, and the lawyers trying to get them off on some technicality...

What is your connection with Germany... last i saw.. hillary, tommy dash-shell, and their likes were all walking and speaking freely....

Did they put the dixi chics in prison when i wasnt looking?

Um, hello??? 30 people--where have you been? There are over 300-400 people still down there, as well as folks possibly coming over from Iraq.

Also, if the camp were solely for prisoners of war, it would be one thing, but the fact that these people are not even being afforded legal status, and could possibly be EXECUTED based on secret extra-military trials, is the link to Germany.

In Patriot II, some of the language would allow for the extension of jailing and detention, without due process, of American citizens and resident non-nationals, leading to trials that could result in the stripping away of their rights and possibly lives. Are you not aware of any of this? Where have you been? There are more news sources that Faux, you know.

[ May 29, 2003, 10:11 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

BBC News: US denies 'prisoners tortured'

From the article: "The plans were revealed by Major-General Geoffrey Miller, who is in charge of 680 suspects from 43 countries, including two Australians."

Next question: what is the number of prisoners being held in a death camp with secret trials and executions at which such matters become important? Less than thirty? More than 100?

My vote: one, if I'm the prisoner.

[ May 29, 2003, 10:14 AM: Message edited by: twin58 ]

http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?...ID=6619&TagID=2

HMMMMMMM, which was better, the us camp or the one controlled by the afgans?

680 people are currently held. When you are in a war, military tribunals are the way to go. Anyway, with all the judicial nominees being held up... how could they get a trial?

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?p...28-5-2003_pg4_6

China may soon have precedent to try and execute them in secret. We would be in no position to object. After all, in the war on terror, you're either with us, or you're against us.

If I understand the point of starting this thread, I think the author is trying to point out that the U.S. government may potentially act in Gitmo with a similiar level of respect for human rights as is currently recognized by Fidel Castro on the rest of the Island of Cuba.

Given how much the Hollywood left still loves Castro even after his recent summary executions of dissidents (within Hollywood's anti-Bush, anti-Iraqi liberation leftist elite, only Janeane Garofalo has had the decency to protest Castro's human rights abuses), I would assume that this is President Bush's attempt to craft a policy that will win him support in the Entertainment Industry.

[ May 29, 2003, 01:43 PM: Message edited by: Charlie in the Trees ]

Well, I'm no longer speaking to my cousin who's so in love with Castro that he can't admit that damage that dictator has done, so I'm with Janeane Garofalo (sp?) on this one.

Oliver Stone did agree to re-edit his recent lovesong to Castro after meeting with and hearing from dissidents who spelled out for what a horrorfest it has been to live under our own hemisphere's longest reigning caudillo.

And the war was for what purpose, William? Seems like the Oil Ministry and the oilfields are the only thing W. hasn't let slide into utter chaos. But you know that....

Intellectual integrity? Thy name is fantomas.

Even though I rarely agree with you on matters politic, I do have to concede this point.