Site Search:
 
TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

US military admits Koran mishandled
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Nowhere Man



Joined: 08 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2005 7:56 am    Post subject: ... Reply with quote

The Nazis were a hate group, but we followed the Geneva convention.

Our morals ARE NOT to be dictated by our foes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2005 8:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

was there a Geneva convention then?

I don't think the US does anything different now then then, but then things were covered up better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Bobster



Joined: 15 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2005 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:
was there a Geneva convention then?.

Yes, there was ... wierd thing is - most of the time, the Germans honored it ... funny, huh?

In the present case, our pResident just decided it didn't apply,

And tnat's the funnirst thing.

Did you notice that we are all laughing>


Last edited by The Bobster on Wed Jun 01, 2005 2:16 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2005 8:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Bobster wrote:
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:
was there a Geneva convention then?.

Yes, there was ... wierd thiung is = most of the time, the Germans honored it ... funny, huh?



Quote:
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
Adopted on 12 August 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of
International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Geneva
from 21 April to 12 August, 1949
entry into force 21 October 1950
PART I


sure about that?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Bobster



Joined: 15 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2005 8:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:
Quote:
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
Adopted on 12 August 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of
International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Geneva
from 21 April to 12 August, 1949
entry into force 21 October 1950
PART I


sure about that?


You forgot to provide a link. Excuse me for asking, you have made up stuff once or twice before, and other times tried to assert a link proved the opposite of what it actually did ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2005 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2005 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm


Quote:
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
Adopted on 12 August 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of
International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Geneva
from 21 April to 12 August, 1949
entry into force 21 October 1950

...



Quote:
You forgot to provide a link. Excuse me for asking, you have made up stuff once or twice before, and other times tried to assert a link proved the opposite of what it actually did ...


I never made up anything , and the link backed up the point I was going to make. Just cause you didn't like it doesn't mean anything.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nowhere Man



Joined: 08 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2005 6:49 pm    Post subject: ... Reply with quote

Those conventions were an update of these conventions:

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/geneva02.htm

Convention between the United States of America and other powers, relating to prisoners of war. Signed at Geneva, July 27, 1929; ratification advised by the Senate, January 7, 1932; ratified by the President, January 16, 1932, ratification of the United States of America deposited with the Government of Switzerland, February 4, 1932; proclaimed, August 4, 1932.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2005 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Yes, there was ... wierd thiung is - most of the time, the Germans honored it ... funny, huh?


No, most Germans were on the Russian front, where the Genevan convention was just a piece of paper.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2005 8:19 pm    Post subject: Re: ... Reply with quote

Nowhere Man wrote:
Those conventions were an update of these conventions:

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/geneva02.htm

Convention between the United States of America and other powers, relating to prisoners of war. Signed at Geneva, July 27, 1929; ratification advised by the Senate, January 7, 1932; ratified by the President, January 16, 1932, ratification of the United States of America deposited with the Government of Switzerland, February 4, 1932; proclaimed, August 4, 1932.



well then I stand corrected
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gwangjuboy



Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England

PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2005 10:19 pm    Post subject: re. Reply with quote

The Bobster wrote:
You lied about what I actually said, and I showed that you lied. You have done so before. You are not an honest voice here.


Right of the bat you are resorting to the "lie, label opponents liars, and call them names for pointing out my lies" tactic. You unequivocally stated that the inmates at Gitmo were not being charged with decapitating anyone, but you also admitted that you don't know what they are being charged with. Don't get angry with me merely because I pointd out that your position was self-contradictory. Here is what eminated from your keyboard,

Quote:
How many of the Gitmo detainees are accused of beheadings? Oh, I remember now. None.


and later,

Quote:
part of the problem at Gitmo is that no one, including the people being held there, know what they are actually accused of.


Word for word this is the sum of what you said. Contrary to your outlandish claims that I have lied about what you said, I have accurately quoted what you said.


Quote:
You did. You really really did. And you did it again here, right in front of us.


In light of the above paragraphs that is a laughable claim.

Not so long ago, you were also lying to the board with claims that Stalin didn't ever back Kim Il Sung's war plans......


Quote:
Not what I said. More misrepresentation. Provide a link and quote - and try not to succumb to the urge to alter what I really did say inside the quotes - or just admit your dishonesty ...


No problem, here it is. Word for word,

Quote:
that in fact Kim Il Sung was counseled not to move forward and he did it anyway.


The only misrepresentation here is your suggestion that I was misrepresenting what you said.





Quote:
Christ, this happens eveny damn time we come in contact in these forums, GB, and I don't know why I bother any more.


Just abandon your "tell lies, call those who point out my fibs liars, and then lie some more" tactic and our exchanges might become more reasonable.




Quote:
The thread was removed shortly after you perpetrated the fraud, and shortly after I mentioned it to a couple of mods. It's a natural empirical deduction.


Threads around here dissapear for a bazillion different reasons. It might have been pulled because it got heated, or it might be one of those mysterious dissapearances that even the mods on occasion cannot explain. The speculation, and flimsy anecdotal evidence you coughed up doesn't even come remotely close to satisfying the necessary crosschecks.


Quote:
Do you have any such evidence, GB? No , you do not.



I asked you a question which offered little room for an answer other than "yes" or "no." You have still failed to answer it.





Quote:
I already did, in the previous post. You said "Are we muslims?" and proceeded to disparage the entre religion by claiming that every muslim disrespects Christianity as much as you disrespect Islam.



You have spent many paragraphs speaking about misrepresentation, and here your are engaging in the act yourself. I cannot trust you to engage me without lying about what I said, and calling me a liar when expose your fibs. Just to let everyone know, this single sentence is what Bob thinks constitutes "the disparaging of an entire religion,"


Should we be expected to treat the "holy" book with as much reverence as a muslim? Would muslims treat the bible with as much respect in their own countries?




Quote:
It reflects an intense disregard for the very real devotion that millions of human being have for the words in this book. Have you read it? Then why do you have the arrogance to place it on par with Sidney Sheldon or John Grisham or whatever else you keep in the house?


The Koran is paper, based on the belief of millions people who amoungst there many can't find even one man who can offer any scientific evidence that these bits of paper represent the word of God. Their claims are scientifically baseless. Do you really expect me to treat the Koran with as much reverence as any other books made from paper on my book shelf?


Quote:
Why not try to make a case to convice the world that, simply because YOU don't believe in something you have likely never held in your hands and taken a good look at, then it is just the same as any other old thing sitting around in a library somewhere. Go ahead and try. (You won't, though, I'm confident of that.)



There is a difference between blatant disregard for the Koran, and the handling of a book in the local library. I don't get thrills flushing my books down the toilet. I wouldn't wrap any of my books in cloth though, and I am not about to wrap a book in cloth that makes a huge claim without any scientific evidence to substantiate it. Any muslim who expects this level of defferential treatment from a non muslim when handling the Koran is disrespectful of that person's beliefs, just as much as I would be of his if I flushed it down the Thomas Crapper.


Quote:
Gwanngjuboy, quoting his own wonderfal ass
Quote:
Quote:
The Bobster Who is "we",? GB Your question wants us to see an essential diffenerence between ourselves and some other part of the human race.
We are different. They believe in Alla and the prophet, and I don't. Don't throw your worthless rat urine drenched PC nonsense in my face.


That is a description of political correctness. I don't think any one would be foolish enough to construe that in such a way as to think that I intended as a slant against Islam.


Quote:
Once again, I have to go into the back posts and deliver the line you were responding to in order to show the correct context ...


Just where did you show that I was refering to islam when I spoke of rat urine? It was clearly a shot at your attempts to tell me that all people are the same.

Quote:
It is not "PC nonsense," but more along the lines of scientific fact, that most humans have far more in common than what you will assert makes us "different."


Yes, on a superficial level. We usually have two arms, legs, hands, and eyes. We eat, we cry, we laugh, and we fall in love. However, arguing that humans have a lot in common completely discounts one extremely important variable; the mind. The depths of the human mind are something beyond the reach of even the greatest scientists. The depths of the mind have led to deep divisions between man for centuries. Your claim that the weight of scientific fact is in your corner is nonsensical.

Quote:
Your insistence that "We are different" because we don't believe in Allah is a small-minded view. You are welcome to it.


The dichotomy that exists between muslims and non muslims is not my invention. I'll quote the Koran,

Fight unbelievers until no other religion except Islam remains. (3:85)

Muslims must present non-Muslims with the three choices of Sura 9:29 of the (Koran): conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paji eh Wong



Joined: 03 Jun 2003

PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:11 am    Post subject: Re: re. Reply with quote

Gwangjuboy wrote:


Right of the bat you are resorting to the "lie, label opponents liars, and call them names for pointing out my lies" tactic. You unequivocally stated that the inmates at Gitmo were not being charged with decapitating anyone, but you also admitted that you don't know what they are being charged with. Don't get angry with me merely because I pointd out that your position was self-contradictory. Here is what eminated from your keyboard,

Quote:
How many of the Gitmo detainees are accused of beheadings? Oh, I remember now. None.


and later,

Quote:
part of the problem at Gitmo is that no one, including the people being held there, know what they are actually accused of.


Word for word this is the sum of what you said. Contrary to your outlandish claims that I have lied about what you said, I have accurately quoted what you said.



Um. Did we fail our basic logic course? According to the quotes you provided, no one at Gitmo has been accused of beheading anyone because no one at Gitmo has been accused of anything.

Where is the inconsistancy?

BTW, I believe it's SOP in the USA to be formally charged with a crime before detainment.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gwangjuboy



Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England

PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 4:00 am    Post subject: Re: re. Reply with quote

Paji eh Wong wrote:
According to the quotes you provided, no one at Gitmo has been accused of beheading anyone because no one at Gitmo has been accused of anything.


Err, yes, I know that.

Quote:
Um. Did we fail our basic logic course?


I think you should read this thread in its entirity before jumping to conclusions. I have not stated that anyone at Gitmo is accused of beheadings. Indeed, it was another poster who first refered to it. The problem with the back slapping late comers is that they often skim through a thread and miss out important details. You are guilty of that right here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paji eh Wong



Joined: 03 Jun 2003

PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh fer christ's sake. Now I remember why I don't post much on this board much anymore. I'll let this one sink into the murk.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
On the other hand



Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue

PostPosted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The military is releasing some more details of the Koran desecrations:

Quote:
The Pentagon on Friday released new details about mishandling of the Quran at the Guantanamo Bay prison for terror suspects, confirming that a soldier deliberately kicked the Muslim holy book and that an interrogator stepped on a Quran and was later fired for ¡°a pattern of unacceptable behavior.¡±


Quote:
In the most recent confirmed case, Hood said a detainee complained on March 25, 2005, of urine splashing on him and his Quran. An unidentified guard admitted at the time that ¡°he was at fault,¡± the Hood report said, although it did not say whether the act was deliberate. The guard¡¯s supervisor reprimanded him and assigned him to gate guard duty, where he had no contact with detainees for the remainder of his assignment at Guantanamo Bay.

As described in the Hood report, the guard had left his observation post and went outside to urinate. He urinated near an air vent and the wind blew his urine through the vent into the cell block. The incident was not further explained.


Quote:
In another of the confirmed cases, a contract interrogator stepped on a detainee¡¯s Quran in July 2003 and then apologized.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8090656/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2013 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International