|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 6:58 pm Post subject: "Enemy Combatant", first book by a Guantanamo pris |
 |
|
Source = Washingtonpost.com
| Quote: |
In Enemy Combatant , co-authored with Victoria Brittain, Moazzam Begg becomes the first prisoner to give book-length voice to the experience of being on the other side of America's war on terror. Begg's memoir details the three years he spent as a U.S.-held detainee in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, before being released without charges in his native Great Britain. His book shows that he does indeed pose a serious threat -- but not the sort for which our intelligence and military establishments have steeled themselves. Begg has launched a devastating public-relations attack against American policies, one that is all the more effective because it is restrained, fair-minded and highly readable.
It's both fascinating and frustrating to read this firsthand account. To this day, no impartial outsider has been allowed to interview a single one of the more than 500 detainees still caged in Guantanamo, with the possible exception of the Red Cross, which is proscribed from publicizing its findings.
....
In the midst of this information vacuum, Begg provides some ideological counterweight to the one-sided spin coming from the U.S. government. He writes passionately and personally, stripping readers of the comforting lie that somehow the detainees aren't really like us, with emotional attachments, intellectual interests and fully developed humanity. Surprisingly perhaps, given his viewpoint, not all of the detainees he describes are innocent. One in particular, an unapologetic, self-described member of al-Qaeda, continues to defend the Sept. 11 attacks as sanctioned by Islam, despite Begg's arguments with him to the contrary.
Even more unexpectedly, perhaps, in Begg's view not all of the American prison guards are evil. In fact, he forged amazing friendships with some, who related to him as a fellow human being, unshackling him as they confided their dreams and doubts about everything from their personal lives to American foreign policy. From these conversations, Begg says he learned that "all Americans were not the same." Some of the Americans who come into contact with him seem equally surprised to find that not all Muslims are terrorists. These odd flashes of understanding in this most unlikely of settings add elements of humor and hope, saving both the author and his book from bitterness.
Frustration sets in for anyone seeking definitive proof because Begg's account is subjective and unverifiable. He hears screams from unknown prisoners, including a hauntingly tortured female voice at a U.S. military prison in Afghanistan. He witnesses what he believes are two murders of fellow captives in Afghanistan by sadistic U.S. servicemen. He is interrogated more than 300 times, by his count, during which the authorities get nothing they can prosecute him with, other than a laughably false confession. Meanwhile, the allegations against him are fuzzy, the conditions of his imprisonment Kafkaesque. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 2:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| In the midst of this information vacuum, Begg provides some ideological counterweight to the one-sided spin coming from the U.S. government. He writes passionately and personally, stripping readers of the comforting lie that somehow the detainees aren't really like us, with emotional attachments, intellectual interests and fully developed humanity. |
Ha! This seems like exactly what I've been doing the last several months here on Dave's -- confronting all the macho , shoot to kill, don't see others as more than air bags......tin pan bigots. Won't quote names but I wish they'd look up from their own self absorbed, bread and butter world.......
I recommend as a following this below, among others like "the Plague" by Camus, maybe even Kafka and also something like the genius of "Darkness at Noon" by Koestler. For a start. Or even better they can watch how animals squeal when they are killed, how a calf will roll its eyes up at you when you hammer it good with a sledge on the forehead. Most of the ignoramous' on this board spouting off kill and let's lock em up and throw em out -- just haven't lived enough....
There are a number of good articles in this issue, but the one I most particularly want to call to your attention is �American Gulag: Prisoners� Tales from the War on Terror� by Eliza Griswold. Griswold interviewed several former prisoners at Guantanamo and elsewhere, and talked to family members and lawyers of prisoners still being held. The lawyers, working pro bono, are among 500 lawyers organized by the Center for Constitutional Rights to represent prisoners at Guantanamo. (The article probably will be posted on the web eventually, but not for two or three months.)
If even half of what Griswold writes is true, Guantanamo could be the blackest mark yet on our country�s history.
Highlights:
►There is no indication that the Hamdan decision will make a dime�s worth of difference to the �450 prisoners held at Guantanamo, let alone the 13,000 people currently �detained� in Iraq, the 500 or so in Afghanistan, and the unknown number (estimated to be about 100) at secret CIA �black sites� around the world,� Griswold writes. President Bush has made up his mind that the Court in Hamdan ruled in his favor, so he sees no reason to change.
►To date, �98 detainees have died (34 of those deaths are being investigated as homicides) and more than 600 U.S. personnel have been implicated in some form of abuse.�
►Since even the Red Cross is given extremely limited and restricted access to the prisons (and, of course, no access at all to the �black sites,� shipboard brigs, or �forward operating sites� where most abuses occur), essentially this means there is no way to find out what�s really going on.
►Only about 5 percent of the prisoners at Guantanamo were arrested by Americans. The rest were captured by other Arabs Muslims/Middle Easterners and turned over or sold for a bounty. For example, Abdullah al Noaimi of Bahrain was captured by Pashtun tribesmen and sold to Pakistani security forces in 2001. At the time, Griswold writes, �there seemed to be a bounty on every Arab�s head, and fliers promising �wealth and power beyond your dreams� were dropping, as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said, �like snowflakes in December in Chicago.�� After several weeks of detention by the Pakistanis, al Noaimi was turned over to Americans at Kandahar. Al Noaimi had visited the U.S. and for a time was a student at Old Dominion University in Virginia. He figured he�d tell the Americans his arrest was a mistake, and he could go home.
Abdullah al Noaimi was kept in Guantanamo for four years. He only recently returned home. The U.S. military decided al Noaimi was an enemy combatant, although the evidence supporting this claim remains secret.
►�Despite everything that is hidden about the practices in Guantanamo Bay,� Griswold says, �it is still the most transparent piece of the large mosaic of U.S. detention. And so the U.S. has begun to employ a sort of shell game to hide the more embarrassingly innocent detainees from public scrutiny: we simply send them home to be imprisoned by their own governments.�
►A prominent Yemeni businessman, Abdulsalam al Hila, was in Egypt on business in September 2002 when he disappeared. His family had no idea where he was until, two years later, they received a letter smuggled out of a U.S. prison in Afghanistan.
►In 2004 an Afghani man was taken prisoner with his 12-year-old son. Both the father and son had a bag over their heads for eighteen days.
►Men released from Bagram describe frequent beatings and days without food. The lawyers of the Center for Constitutional Rights say there is nothing they can do for prisoners there. They cannot even prove that U.S. law applies in Bagram.
Someday, whatever is going on in those prisons will see the light of day. And then there will be global outrage, and Americans will be shocked and say they had no idea any such thing was going on.
On this board, these same guys will be saying "but who would have known?" or also the infamous -- " well in anycase, they had it coming" "they are all the same"........
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R. S. Refugee
Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Location: Shangra La, ROK
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
On this board, these same guys will be saying "but who would have known?" or also the infamous -- " well in anycase, they had it coming" "they are all the same"........
DD |
Uh, dd, don't forget that moldy, oldey, "If they'd just give up their war..." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
| Quote: |
| In the midst of this information vacuum, Begg provides some ideological counterweight to the one-sided spin coming from the U.S. government. He writes passionately and personally, stripping readers of the comforting lie that somehow the detainees aren't really like us, with emotional attachments, intellectual interests and fully developed humanity. |
Ha! This seems like exactly what I've been doing the last several months here on Dave's -- confronting all the macho , shoot to kill, don't see others as more than air bags......tin pan bigots. Won't quote names but I wish they'd look up from their own self absorbed, bread and butter world.......
I recommend as a following this below, among others like "the Plague" by Camus, maybe even Kafka and also something like the genius of "Darkness at Noon" by Koestler. For a start. Or even better they can watch how animals squeal when they are killed, how a calf will roll its eyes up at you when you hammer it good with a sledge on the forehead. Most of the ignoramous' on this board spouting off kill and let's lock em up and throw em out -- just haven't lived enough....
There are a number of good articles in this issue, but the one I most particularly want to call to your attention is �American Gulag: Prisoners� Tales from the War on Terror� by Eliza Griswold. Griswold interviewed several former prisoners at Guantanamo and elsewhere, and talked to family members and lawyers of prisoners still being held. The lawyers, working pro bono, are among 500 lawyers organized by the Center for Constitutional Rights to represent prisoners at Guantanamo. (The article probably will be posted on the web eventually, but not for two or three months.)
If even half of what Griswold writes is true, Guantanamo could be the blackest mark yet on our country�s history.
Highlights:
►There is no indication that the Hamdan decision will make a dime�s worth of difference to the �450 prisoners held at Guantanamo, let alone the 13,000 people currently �detained� in Iraq, the 500 or so in Afghanistan, and the unknown number (estimated to be about 100) at secret CIA �black sites� around the world,� Griswold writes. President Bush has made up his mind that the Court in Hamdan ruled in his favor, so he sees no reason to change.
►To date, �98 detainees have died (34 of those deaths are being investigated as homicides) and more than 600 U.S. personnel have been implicated in some form of abuse.�
►Since even the Red Cross is given extremely limited and restricted access to the prisons (and, of course, no access at all to the �black sites,� shipboard brigs, or �forward operating sites� where most abuses occur), essentially this means there is no way to find out what�s really going on.
►Only about 5 percent of the prisoners at Guantanamo were arrested by Americans. The rest were captured by other Arabs Muslims/Middle Easterners and turned over or sold for a bounty. For example, Abdullah al Noaimi of Bahrain was captured by Pashtun tribesmen and sold to Pakistani security forces in 2001. At the time, Griswold writes, �there seemed to be a bounty on every Arab�s head, and fliers promising �wealth and power beyond your dreams� were dropping, as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said, �like snowflakes in December in Chicago.�� After several weeks of detention by the Pakistanis, al Noaimi was turned over to Americans at Kandahar. Al Noaimi had visited the U.S. and for a time was a student at Old Dominion University in Virginia. He figured he�d tell the Americans his arrest was a mistake, and he could go home.
Abdullah al Noaimi was kept in Guantanamo for four years. He only recently returned home. The U.S. military decided al Noaimi was an enemy combatant, although the evidence supporting this claim remains secret.
►�Despite everything that is hidden about the practices in Guantanamo Bay,� Griswold says, �it is still the most transparent piece of the large mosaic of U.S. detention. And so the U.S. has begun to employ a sort of shell game to hide the more embarrassingly innocent detainees from public scrutiny: we simply send them home to be imprisoned by their own governments.�
►A prominent Yemeni businessman, Abdulsalam al Hila, was in Egypt on business in September 2002 when he disappeared. His family had no idea where he was until, two years later, they received a letter smuggled out of a U.S. prison in Afghanistan.
►In 2004 an Afghani man was taken prisoner with his 12-year-old son. Both the father and son had a bag over their heads for eighteen days.
►Men released from Bagram describe frequent beatings and days without food. The lawyers of the Center for Constitutional Rights say there is nothing they can do for prisoners there. They cannot even prove that U.S. law applies in Bagram.
Someday, whatever is going on in those prisons will see the light of day. And then there will be global outrage, and Americans will be shocked and say they had no idea any such thing was going on.
On this board, these same guys will be saying "but who would have known?" or also the infamous -- " well in anycase, they had it coming" "they are all the same"........
DD |
Blah blah blah More Liberal BS blah blah.
First offf the peole imprisoned in Cuba arent US citizens therefore the constitution doesn't apply. 2ndly, recently the US government decided to apply to them the rights of the Geneva convention
3rdly: Everyone who ends up at gauntanamo is there fir a good reason. They didnt just go picking up Arabs off the streets
4tthly: You Liberals have a messed up thought process. you will appease regimes such as North Korea whos crimes are far worse then anything the US is doing, with their human rights abuses, concentration camps, executions, etc etc etc but yet no Liberal blasts them...but they see something done in the US they don't like and all of a sudden the US becomes evil incarnate. What a bunch of bull.
Now a days this Hiipy-esque train of thought will get people killed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually, there are quite a few people sitting in Guantanamo that even the US government admits are innocent. And the vast majority of Guantanomo prisoners were captured not on the battlefield and not even by US forces, but rather by foreign intelligence services or bounty hunters. In point of fact, many of them did just grab random people to get bounties and promotions.
We are in war which cannot be won by hard, military power. It must be won by soft power -- diplomacy, yes, but even more than that, just by the people of the world being able to see the goodness of the US and see through the lies of bin Laden and his ilk. 60 years after the US was the driving force for the creation of the United Nations, the Geneva Conventions, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (notice the word 'universal' in there?), we are now making a mockery of ourselves with Guantanamo, black sites, and the disgusting attempts to define torture and war crimes out of existence with Clintonesque legal hairsplitting.
http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/09/what_weve_lost.html
| Quote: |
I was deployed in my reserve unit (USMCR) as part of operation Desert Storm and Desert Shield. Marine infantry, and we were on the front lines, supposedly to guard a gunship base, but really, though, the gunships guarded us.
Not too much later, it was time to take prisoners. One of the platoons went north, and when they came back, there were stories about how Iraqi soldiers lined the roads, trying to surrender. I spent a week guarding Iraqi men in a makeshift prison camp, a way-station really, and more than I could count. They didn't look like they were starving or dehydrated. Apparently, once the ground war began, they just pitched their weapons and headed south at first opportunity. The more I've thought about it, the more I realize that they knew bone deep that they'd get fair treatment. We gave them MREs (with the pork entree's removed) but almost immediately some Special Forces guys arrived and set up a real chow line for them. We gave each man a blanket, (I kept an extra as a souvie) and I think I saw a Special Forces doc giving some of them a once over.
...
Thinking hard on what I now know of history, psychology, and the meanness of politics, that reputation for fairness was damn near unique in world history. Can you tell me of any major military power that had it? Ever? France? No. Think Algeria. The UK? Sorry, Northern Ireland, the Boxer Rebellion in China... China or Russia. I don't think so. But America had it. If those men had even put up token resistance, some of us would not have come back. But they didn't even bother, and surrendered at least in part because of our reputation. Our two hundred year old reputation for being fair and humane and decent. All the way back to George Washington, and from President George H.W. Bush all the way down to a lance-corporal jarhead at the front.
Its gone now, even from me. I can't get past that image of the Iraqi, in the hood with the wires and I'm not what you'd call a sensitive type. You know the picture. And now we have a total bust-out in the White House, and a bunch of rubber-stamps in the House, trying to make it so that half-drowning people isn't torture. That hypothermia isn't torture. That degradation isn't torture. We don't have that reputation for fairness anymore. Just the opposite, I think. And the next real enemy we face will fight like only the cornered and desperate fight. How many Marines' lives will be lost in the war ahead just because of this asshole who never once risked anything for this country? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hater Depot wrote: |
Actually, there are quite a few people sitting in Guantanamo that even the US government admits are innocent. And the vast majority of Guantanomo prisoners were captured not on the battlefield and not even by US forces, but rather by foreign intelligence services or bounty hunters. In point of fact, many of them did just grab random people to get bounties and promotions.
We are in war which cannot be won by hard, military power. It must be won by soft power -- diplomacy, yes, but even more than that, just by the people of the world being able to see the goodness of the US and see through the lies of bin Laden and his ilk. 60 years after the US was the driving force for the creation of the United Nations, the Geneva Conventions, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (notice the word 'universal' in there?), we are now making a mockery of ourselves with Guantanamo, black sites, and the disgusting attempts to define torture and war crimes out of existence with Clintonesque legal hairsplitting.
http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/09/what_weve_lost.html
| Quote: |
I was deployed in my reserve unit (USMCR) as part of operation Desert Storm and Desert Shield. Marine infantry, and we were on the front lines, supposedly to guard a gunship base, but really, though, the gunships guarded us.
Not too much later, it was time to take prisoners. One of the platoons went north, and when they came back, there were stories about how Iraqi soldiers lined the roads, trying to surrender. I spent a week guarding Iraqi men in a makeshift prison camp, a way-station really, and more than I could count. They didn't look like they were starving or dehydrated. Apparently, once the ground war began, they just pitched their weapons and headed south at first opportunity. The more I've thought about it, the more I realize that they knew bone deep that they'd get fair treatment. We gave them MREs (with the pork entree's removed) but almost immediately some Special Forces guys arrived and set up a real chow line for them. We gave each man a blanket, (I kept an extra as a souvie) and I think I saw a Special Forces doc giving some of them a once over.
...
Thinking hard on what I now know of history, psychology, and the meanness of politics, that reputation for fairness was damn near unique in world history. Can you tell me of any major military power that had it? Ever? France? No. Think Algeria. The UK? Sorry, Northern Ireland, the Boxer Rebellion in China... China or Russia. I don't think so. But America had it. If those men had even put up token resistance, some of us would not have come back. But they didn't even bother, and surrendered at least in part because of our reputation. Our two hundred year old reputation for being fair and humane and decent. All the way back to George Washington, and from President George H.W. Bush all the way down to a lance-corporal jarhead at the front.
Its gone now, even from me. I can't get past that image of the Iraqi, in the hood with the wires and I'm not what you'd call a sensitive type. You know the picture. And now we have a total bust-out in the White House, and a bunch of rubber-stamps in the House, trying to make it so that half-drowning people isn't torture. That hypothermia isn't torture. That degradation isn't torture. We don't have that reputation for fairness anymore. Just the opposite, I think. And the next real enemy we face will fight like only the cornered and desperate fight. How many Marines' lives will be lost in the war ahead just because of this *beep* who never once risked anything for this country? |
|
But the things they are calling torture arent even really that bad. Prolonged standing? not being able to sleep??? big whoop!
Ive done that sort of thing just doing my job!
Now adays it seems as if liberals term anything discomforting as torture. "Torture" used to mean something.
Ask NAM former POW/MIAs. They had bamboo stiucks shoved under their nails, electric shocks applied etc etc now thats torture. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Ask NAM former POW/MIAs. |
OK.
http://www.phrusa.org/research/torture/mccain_text.html
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/111305Y.shtml
| Quote: |
But I do, respectfully, take issue with the position that the demands of this war require us to accord a lower station to the moral imperatives that should govern our conduct in war and peace when they come in conflict with the unyielding inhumanity of our vicious enemy.
Obviously, to defeat our enemies we need intelligence, but intelligence that is reliable. We should not torture or treat inhumanely terrorists we have captured. The abuse of prisoners harms, not helps, our war effort. In my experience, abuse of prisoners often produces bad intelligence because under torture a person will say anything he thinks his captors want to hear-whether it is true or false-if he believes it will relieve his suffering. I was once physically coerced to provide my enemies with the names of the members of my flight squadron, information that had little if any value to my enemies as actionable intelligence. But I did not refuse, or repeat my insistence that I was required under the Geneva Conventions to provide my captors only with my name, rank and serial number. Instead, I gave them the names of the Green Bay Packers' offensive line, knowing that providing them false information was sufficient to suspend the abuse. It seems probable to me that the terrorists we interrogate under less than humane standards of treatment are also likely to resort to deceptive answers that are perhaps less provably false than that which I once offered.
...
To prevail in this war we need more than victories on the battlefield. This is a war of ideas, a struggle to advance freedom in the face of terror in places where oppressive rule has bred the malevolence that creates terrorists. Prisoner abuses exact a terrible toll on us in this war of ideas. They inevitably become public, and when they do they threaten our moral standing, and expose us to false but widely disseminated charges that democracies are no more inherently idealistic and moral than other regimes. This is an existential fight, to be sure. If they could, Islamic extremists who resort to terror would destroy us utterly. But to defeat them we must prevail in our defense of American political values as well. The mistreatment of prisoners greatly injures that effort.
The mistreatment of prisoners harms us more than our enemies. I don't think I'm naive about how terrible are the wages of war, and how terrible are the things that must be done to wage it successfully. It is an awful business, and no matter how noble the cause for which it is fought, no matter how valiant their service, many veterans spend much of their subsequent lives trying to forget not only what was done to them, but some of what had to be done by them to prevail. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hater Depot wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Ask NAM former POW/MIAs. |
OK.
http://www.phrusa.org/research/torture/mccain_text.html
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/111305Y.shtml
| Quote: |
But I do, respectfully, take issue with the position that the demands of this war require us to accord a lower station to the moral imperatives that should govern our conduct in war and peace when they come in conflict with the unyielding inhumanity of our vicious enemy.
Obviously, to defeat our enemies we need intelligence, but intelligence that is reliable. We should not torture or treat inhumanely terrorists we have captured. The abuse of prisoners harms, not helps, our war effort. In my experience, abuse of prisoners often produces bad intelligence because under torture a person will say anything he thinks his captors want to hear-whether it is true or false-if he believes it will relieve his suffering. I was once physically coerced to provide my enemies with the names of the members of my flight squadron, information that had little if any value to my enemies as actionable intelligence. But I did not refuse, or repeat my insistence that I was required under the Geneva Conventions to provide my captors only with my name, rank and serial number. Instead, I gave them the names of the Green Bay Packers' offensive line, knowing that providing them false information was sufficient to suspend the abuse. It seems probable to me that the terrorists we interrogate under less than humane standards of treatment are also likely to resort to deceptive answers that are perhaps less provably false than that which I once offered.
...
To prevail in this war we need more than victories on the battlefield. This is a war of ideas, a struggle to advance freedom in the face of terror in places where oppressive rule has bred the malevolence that creates terrorists. Prisoner abuses exact a terrible toll on us in this war of ideas. They inevitably become public, and when they do they threaten our moral standing, and expose us to false but widely disseminated charges that democracies are no more inherently idealistic and moral than other regimes. This is an existential fight, to be sure. If they could, Islamic extremists who resort to terror would destroy us utterly. But to defeat them we must prevail in our defense of American political values as well. The mistreatment of prisoners greatly injures that effort.
The mistreatment of prisoners harms us more than our enemies. I don't think I'm naive about how terrible are the wages of war, and how terrible are the things that must be done to wage it successfully. It is an awful business, and no matter how noble the cause for which it is fought, no matter how valiant their service, many veterans spend much of their subsequent lives trying to forget not only what was done to them, but some of what had to be done by them to prevail. |
|
??
One link about the law prohibitting curel and unusual punishment and McCains thoughts about the war?
Again though, depriving someone of sleep for a couple days or making him stand for a long time isnt cruel. it isnt like your beating them or something.
There seems to be no standrard for what is cruel and what isnt.
But the abuses at ABuGhraib etc..obviously wrong and the US Gov agrees and now people are in prison over it.
But as far as these lesser techniques go, sleep depravation, prolonged standing and such (the water based techniques got the boot so there not even used) like I said do not sound cruel nor unusual. And Ive had to go days without sleeping, i've had to stnd up for hours on end all throughout the course of my job. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| R. S. Refugee wrote: |
| ddeubel wrote: |
On this board, these same guys will be saying "but who would have known?" or also the infamous -- " well in anycase, they had it coming" "they are all the same"........
DD |
Uh, dd, don't forget that moldy, oldey, "If they'd just give up their war..." |
Well why don't they?
Gitmo and Aub Gaharib were probably better than most prisons in the mideast.
I fell sorry for anyone innocent who suffered, but if one is an Al Qaeda member or a Bathist well who cares? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
