×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Diffing Guantanamo Bay SOP Manuals

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the maybe-they-forgot-we-had-computers dept.

Government 563

James Hardine writes "The Washington Post is reporting that Wikileaks has released another manual for Camp Delta, Guantanamo Bay together with the US military's rendition operations manual. This release follows from the Wikileaks release of the 2003 SOP Manual as discussed on Slashdot last month. Wikileaks compares the two manuals (2003, 2004) and reveals damning changes in official US detainee policy in exquisite detail. Who knew that diff could be such a powerful political weapon?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

563 comments

congrats to wikileak (1, Flamebait)

Adult film producer (866485) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571705)

for weaking america and making all of more vulnerable to terrorist attacks, hope you are proud of the work you are doing.

Re:congrats to wikileak (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21571869)

I didn't know they let fundamentalist Republicans on slashdot.

Re:congrats to wikileak (2, Insightful)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571921)

...hope you are proud of the work you are doing.

Me too. I'm very proud of people who actively try to make the world a better place by exposing the atrocities committed by these pigs. I say, Right on! And feel free to log in the next time you post, Mr. President. You have nothing to fear from us.

Re:congrats to wikileak (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21571993)

Relax, Dick. You, Bush and the rest of the cabinet are still allowed to have circle jerks on the constitution while watching torture porn.

Re:congrats to wikileak (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572021)

Don't be too angry at them. They only do it because they hate freedom.

Re:congrats to wikileak (4, Insightful)

apparently (756613) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572135)

for weaking america and making all of more vulnerable to terrorist attacks, hope you are proud of the work you are doing.

I wonder if they're as proud as Bush was for ignoring memos titled Bin Laden determined to attack in US [thesmokinggun.com], not taking heed (and improving airline security), and successfully making us vulnerable to an attack.
Cause that's totally comparable to someone releasing the SOP manuals of a prison.
You see, friend, it's people like you who "weaken" and make America "more vulnerable to terrorist attacks". Instead of targeting your anger toward an administration that has let its incompetence actually harm American interests, you'd rather cry about some hypothetical weakening.

Re:congrats to wikileak (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572321)

My first trip through your post had me misread "take heed" as "take head". Somehow, that still reads better and sheds more light on your average American. Blowjobs are serious business, but lying, stealing, and torture are just fine.

A happy Torture Tuesday and a good Waterboard Wednesday to you too.

Re:congrats to wikileak (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572585)

Since our intelligence resources are still struggling to infiltrate al-qaida and similar groups perhaps you can give some constructive advice on what exactly Bush should have done in the 5 months between that vague memo and the 9/11 attack?

Also, would you care to comment on Clinton's limp-wristed response to FOUR attacks by al-qaida while he was president?

Re:congrats to wikileak (5, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572513)

Exactly how did this weaken America? America is suppose to be the land of the free and a place where democracy rules. Gitmo is a prison (from what I understand, it is the nicest of all of our external prisons) where we are holding suspects. This prison is the one that the feds MEANT to show the press. So why should the press and our citizens not see what is the absolute nicest that we will be.

What should worry ppl is what is NOT being seen. In those dark rooms, is where we should be casting a light.

The Rules (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571735)

The first rule of Guantanamo is, there are no rules.

The second rule of Guantanamo is, there are no rules.

The third rule of Guantanamo is, always obey the rules.

Re:The Rules (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572385)

I thought the first rule of Guantanomo is you do not talk about Guantanomo.

Re:The Rules (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572567)

Nononono.

1. These are the rules of Gitmo.
2. Nobody can or will find out whether they're upheld.
3. Draw conclusions.

Diff is powerful (2, Interesting)

bytesex (112972) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571751)

In my last job, I'd pull word docs through antiword and then diff them; usually contracts for salespeople who got these fuckers from other parties and wanted to make sure none of the language had changed. Very quick and powerful indeed.

Re:Diff is powerful (2, Interesting)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571763)

I'm not sure if someone is already doing this with laws, but I think it would be a good thing to hilight the changes.

Re:Diff is powerful (1, Insightful)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572097)

Many laws are passed as patches to existing laws. So if you check the text of the resolution, it will say stuff like, "Section(1)Paragraph(7) change word 'shall' to 'must'". In my (admittedly limited) experience, you only see the full law in the resolution if it's completely new.

Re:Diff is powerful (2, Interesting)

djasbestos (1035410) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572151)

I've seen some laws notated with strikethrough on amended or stricken provisions, but not in the bills that modify them. It'd be nice if there were a uniform way of doing this...part of the reason the newer, sneakier laws (Patriot Act?) are so damn huge is because they spend half a page telling you what comma they are changing and what obfuscated subclause is being added, so that as a whole, one would have little idea what the legislation is doing exactly (like you said).

Although I don't see Congress utilizing a differential to improve quality of service anytime soon.

Re:Diff is powerful (4, Insightful)

sqrt(2) (786011) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572261)

That's exactly right. It even happens with our constitution. Amendment 18 enacted prohibition, and over a decade later the 21st amendment nullified the 18th; but they're both still there.

Re:Diff is powerful (1)

JamesP (688957) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572251)

That's it!!

We need a syntax highlighting script for VIM/Emacs for SOP manual diffs.

Damning changes? (5, Insightful)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571757)

Except for the fact that soldiers no longer have to carry a human rights card, what are these damning changes? I see little to protest in the diff.

Re:Damning changes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21571833)

Except for the fact that soldiers no longer have to carry a human rights card, what are these damning changes? I see little to protest in the diff.
Then you missed change (t) in the line 298 section: Guards may no longer carry iPods. OH NOES! Think of the guards!

Re:Damning changes? (2, Interesting)

grassy_knoll (412409) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571965)

One thing that caught my eye is that "MP" was replaced with "Guards".

Could be nothing; they could be using other military personnel who aren't MPs as a form of staff augmentation ( i.e. Navy MAAs, USAF security police, et. al. ). Could be contractors, FBI agents ( kinda doubt it, but hey, why not? ).. just people without the MP MOS.

Not sure if it qualifies as "damning", but did seem interesting.

Re:Damning changes? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572345)

If they're guarded by Military Police, then the likely logical argument that follows is that they're prisoners of war. If they're guarded by guards, then who can really say what they are?

We can't tolerate any suggestion that they might be prisoners. They're detainees. We barely acknowledge that they're human beings.

That's SOP in the Bush administrations' "War on Terra".

Re:Damning changes? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572611)

Maybe they're outsourcing security to the inmates who've been there before in exchange for privileges.

Hey, who said they didn't learn from history [wikipedia.org]?

(apologies to Godwin)

Re:Damning changes? (1, Insightful)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572695)

Except for the fact that soldiers no longer have to carry a human rights card, what are these damning changes? I see little to protest in the diff.


Umm... I think that's pretty damning, in and of itself.

Just a thought about Gitmo (2, Interesting)

techpawn (969834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571795)

Here we say that these people are the worst of the worst then try to send them to their home countries who either don't take them back (they've already been labeled a pariah but the U.S.) or they grant them a full pardon if tired in civilian courts.

I don't agree with this sort of treatment, but what should we do with them now? It's a bit late to say don't let it happen in the first place. We have a large group of people pissed off at the United States and with good reason. If we let them go and their home countries won't take them back, where should we put them?

Re:Just a thought about Gitmo (4, Insightful)

bperkins (12056) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571945)

What do you do when you've managed to grab a a wolf by there ears?

One approach would be to claim that it's not really a wolf, it's a bloodthirsty monster, and we don't really have it by the ears, and it's being well treated anyway. Plus no one else will grab it by the ears for us.

Or you can just take your licks for doing something that's so obviously stupid.

My claim is that you need to introduce them to the US judicial system and let it sort things out. Some bad guys might be able to slip through the cracks, but in my opinion we deserve any blowback that we get.

Re:Just a thought about Gitmo (1)

techpawn (969834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572023)

My claim is that you need to introduce them to the US judicial system
The problem with that is we already have a system for dealing with captured solders. If the Gitmo detainees are "enemy combatants" they should have access to THAT system in all of its honest workings. When you open it up to the civilian judicial system you have things like Habius Corpus that wouldn't really work in a military trial. Also, do you open it up to JUST them or EVERY captured solder EVER?

As much as I hate it Military and civilian worlds should NOT mix, not everyone is a solder and for good reasons.

Re:Just a thought about Gitmo (5, Insightful)

ray-auch (454705) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572317)

If soldiers, they would be POWs and under Geneva conventions.

If not, they are allegedly civilian criminals and should be prosecuted in the civilian judicial system.

Problem with Gitmo is the US has decided these people are neither soldiers nor civilians but fall in some black hole category in between, where they have no access to civilian justice and no POW rights either.

Re:Just a thought about Gitmo (1)

techpawn (969834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572449)

Thank you for your insight! I assumed that the label "enemy combatant" they would then be considered POWs. But if not the logical answer is civilian courts or some form of extradition if possible, if not then the US civilian courts. But would they get a fair trail in the US?

Re:Just a thought about Gitmo (1)

mosb1000 (710161) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572337)

Did you know that that system involves holding enemy combatants indefinitely until a they are released by the terms of a truce or surrender, or at the end of hostilities? Is that what you had in mind? Because we shouldn't be releasing them in that event. . .

Re:Just a thought about Gitmo (4, Informative)

lymond01 (314120) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572467)

From Enemy Combatants [cfr.org] on a site called the "Council on Foreign Relations" that has the tagline "A Nonpartisan Resource for Information and Analysis" (and not knowing anything about the CFR, that sounds a bit like a "fair and balanced" view of things, if you get my meaning).

I quote:

An "enemy combatant" is an individual who, under the laws and customs of war, may be detained for the duration of an armed conflict. In the current conflict with al Qaida and the Taliban, the term includes a member, agent, or associate of al Qaida or the Taliban. In applying this definition, the United States government has acted consistently with the observation of the Supreme Court of the United States in Ex parte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1, 37-38 (1942): "Citizens who associate themselves with the military arm of the enemy government, and with its aid, guidance and direction enter this country bent on hostile acts are enemy belligerents within the meaning of the Hague Convention and the law of war."

"Enemy combatant" is a general category that subsumes two sub-categories: lawful and unlawful combatants. See Quirin, 317 U.S. at 37-38. Lawful combatants receive prisoner of war (POW) status and the protections of the Third Geneva Convention. Unlawful combatants do not receive POW status and do not receive the full protections of the Third Geneva Convention. (The treatment accorded to unlawful combatants is discussed below).

The President has determined that al Qaida members are unlawful combatants because (among other reasons) they are members of a non-state actor terrorist group that does not receive the protections of the Third Geneva Convention. He additionally determined that the Taliban detainees are unlawful combatants because they do not satisfy the criteria for POW status set out in Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention. Although the President's determination on this issue is final, courts have concurred with his determination.

Re:Just a thought about Gitmo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572163)

The rest of the world (and the half of your population not
enthralled to Fox) told you you were wrong, but you wouldn't
listen. You fucked up, you work it out how to fix it.

Re:Just a thought about Gitmo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572351)

We have a large group of people pissed off at the United States and with good reason. If we let them go and their home countries won't take them back, where should we put them?

Well, you wanted them, now you have them. I suppose give them an american passport, a small house somewhere in the countryside and tell them to go live the american dream.

Re:Just a thought about Gitmo (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572479)

Judge them in a fair trial. Give innocent people compensation for their unfair imprisonment. Give every people compensation for their mistreatment if there were any.

You know, treat them as you think human beings should be treated ? Yes, almost exactly like an American. Time for a quote :

"Article 1
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."
--- Universal Declaration of Human Rights

I know this is non-binding. But nowadays its violation by governments is considered a good excuse to wage a war.

Re:Give them refugee status. (1)

AxeTheMax (1163705) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572621)

Well, the US is responsible for their present predicament, so it seems that the answer is that the US should give them political asylum!

Problem solved! Don't forget they may want to bring in their families in as well.

Re:Just a thought about Gitmo (1)

Archtech (159117) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572623)

"I don't agree with this sort of treatment, but what should we do with them now?"

The same thing we in decent free nations, under the rule of law, do for anyone who has been wronged. Free them, and punish those who wrongfully imprisoned them. Right up to the very top of the tree - the place where the buck stops (although the present incumbent doesn't think so).

Today I heard something truly hilarious on a BBC news broadcast. The reader described the US intelligence report that says Iran stopped trying to develop nuclear weapons years ago, then reflected: "This runs contrary to the received wisdom in Washington".

The received *what*?

orwell (1)

illuminatedwax (537131) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571805)

Anyone who's read 1984 or Animal Farm knows just how powerful diff is politically.

Re:orwell (3, Funny)

scubamage (727538) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572075)

From this day forward diff will be known as "rm." Please update all records accordingly. Sincerely, the ministry of homeland security.

Re:orwell (2, Funny)

Cus (700562) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572463)

~$ diff -s humans pigs
Files humans and pigs are identical
Guess you're right :)

Take one in for Christmas (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21571821)

Maybe Zonk should take one prisoner in for Christmas.

Damning? (-1, Flamebait)

rindeee (530084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571849)

Yawn. Wait, I mean; "Rally the protesters! Where's the guy with the drum?! Everyone knows any good protest has to have some jackass that beats a drum while we chant our witty rhyming mantra!"

We're all boiling frogs (5, Insightful)

Peter Cooper (660482) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571853)

Reading this article made me realize just how we've all fallen victim to the "boiling frog syndrome [wikipedia.org]". Ten years ago it would have seemed nuts to be reading, and hearing about, the operation of concentration camps in the West, other than when reading about WWII. Now we read stuff about concentration camps, internment, loss of habeas corpus, the US kidnapping people from around the world, etc, and it's all just regular, "same old" news. A few people still feel a little shock, and even fewer actually bother to do anything about it, while the rest of us twiddle our thumbs and either hope it'll all go away or think that "well, we've done nothing wrong, so we'll be fine."

I wonder what sort of stories we'll be reading in another ten years that would shock us now but will seem like regular occurrences in 2017? Thoughtcrime executions, archived recording of all telephone calls (the European Union is already working on this!), incarcerating people because they have the "genes" of a potential psychopath (again, the EU is looking into this)? It's gunna happen and we'll just keep boiling like the frogs we are.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (2, Insightful)

InsaneProcessor (869563) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571997)

"I wonder what sort of stories we'll be reading..."

The keyword here is "stories". I am really wondering how much of these Wikileaks documents are just stories (fiction) and how many are really leaked documents. These could be so easily fabricated. I question all sorces (/. included) on the internet as anything can be faked here: http://www.snopes.com/photos/space/blackout.asp [snopes.com]

Re:We're all boiling frogs (2, Insightful)

DrFruit (1178261) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572171)

Most Americans are probably such decent people, that they simply cannot accept the real facts anymore when they are - on rare occasions - presented to them. Not only are they swimming in boiling water, but when a visitor in the kitchen points out the fact that someone is cooking you alive, you doubt his motives for upsetting you.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572027)

A few people still feel a little shock, and even fewer actually bother to do anything about it, while the rest of us twiddle our thumbs and either hope it'll all go away or think that "well, we've done nothing wrong, so we'll be fine."

just keep voting democrat. that's the solution. they'll draw us out of this problem.

oh wait...

Re:We're all boiling frogs (1)

nickos (91443) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572365)

What you need to do is campaign for electoral reform so that votes cast for parties other than the Republicans and the Democrats are not wasted. Might I suggest Proportional Representation [wikipedia.org] as used by many countries other than the US and the UK.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572079)

Did I miss a memo? When did we create an a concentration camp? Sorry, but when I think of those words I think of two of the more commonly known examples of concentration/internment camps: the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII and the German Concentration camps. Now, how can we even compare anything we are doing today to that? I do not see ever Muslim living in America being thrown into a camp. Hell, I do not even see a large majority. I will admit that some of the powers granted by unconstitutional laws like the PATRIOT Act are disturbing; but to state that we have known internment/concentration camps is bordering on the absurd.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (1, Insightful)

GreyPoopon (411036) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572121)

Reading this article made me realize just how we've all fallen victim to the "boiling frog syndrome [wikipedia.org]".

Aside from the fact that Gitmo is similar to a concentration camp, what did you read in the article that leads you to that point of view? As others have mentioned, glancing at the diff doesn't seem to produce any truly "damning" evidence. The real tragedy is not the way the SOP dictates that the prisoners (I won't stoop to calling them the PC detainees) be treated, but that they have spent so much time incarcerated without a trial. I'll admit I didn't got through the entire diff file in detail, but maybe you can save the rest of us the trouble by being more specific about what little hints you see that indicate that the frog is in the pot and the temperature is slowly rising. Or are you just meaning that Guantanamo (in general) in combination with the other stuff you mentioned (which is unrelated to the SOP) is the sign that the dial on the stove is slowly being turned?

Re:We're all boiling frogs (1)

Peter Cooper (660482) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572293)

Aside from the fact that Gitmo is similar to a concentration camp, what did you read in the article that leads you to that point of view?

It was the implicit notion I had that went.. "hey, reading this actually seems semi-normal nowadays.. and that shouldn't be the case." We shouldn't have to read about this crap because it shouldn't be going on in the first place but now it's part of the same-old.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (1, Insightful)

BigDumbAnimal (532071) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572153)

Get over yourself. Calling Gitmo a "concentration camp" is nuts.

Read the SOP. They are issued Korans, pray related items, clothes, toothpaste etc., and get this 'Wet wipes'. WET WIPES!!! Let me know when prisoners are beaten, maimed, gases, burned, frozen, shot, or made to watch their children murdered.

Let's contrast this with these lovely freedom fighters, who for a little while were video taping a beheading-of the-week to be played all over the world. They murder innocent people by the thousands in the name of Allah. Lying to/about infidels is encouraged. SOP for detainees is to whine about mistreatment, torture, Koran mishandling, etc.

These are not US citizens; therefore, the Bill of Rights + Constitution do not apply. These are not uniformed soldiers of a sovereign state; therefore, Geneva Conventions do not apply. But we treat them far better than any other military would treat them.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572329)

You are confusing the terms "concentration camp" and "nazi concentration camp". The former doesn't imply mistreatment; it's merely a place where people are held (or concentrated) without trial, typically in wartime. So Gitmo is a concentration camp. That's a simple statement of fact.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (1, Troll)

91degrees (207121) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572359)

These are not US citizens; therefore, the Bill of Rights + Constitution do not apply.

Yes it does. The Bill of Rights applies to the government of the US. Any mention of people is "The People". Not "citizens of the US".

These are not uniformed soldiers of a sovereign state; therefore, Geneva Conventions do not apply.

Read the Geneva convention. Find out who the rules actually apply to. It's not limitted to uniformed soldiers of a sovereign state.

And you're assuming that these people have actually done anything wrong in the first place. Sicne we're not allowed to see any evdence (and neither are they) we're taking this as on faith.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (1)

Blue6 (975702) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572551)

1. The United States never signed the full Geneva Convention. 2. "The People" are the citizens of the United States i.e. those who consented to be governed "to formed a more perfect Union" We have just tried for the moral high ground on most issues.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572391)

++

Of course, to complain about the real problems that really exist in Gitmo won't cut it - they are too small. So they have to abuse strong words and lie deliberately.

What really scares me is the (mostly unchallenged) leftist bias everywhere. And I'm not even American, I'm just talking because, if USA fall, my country won't stand a chance.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572683)

Hey, I'm from Canada too!

Re:We're all boiling frogs (4, Insightful)

Sique (173459) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572399)

Please get your facts straight.

1. About half of the "lovely freedom fighters" are sent home already, and none of them ever got charged with anything. Obviously at least half of them were never "lovely freedom fighters". Whoever they were, they surely aren't THEY beheading innocent people and videotaping them.
Please explain how detaining people not connected to those crimes helps fighting the criminals.

2. A concentration camp is something else than an extermination camp. Concentration camps were set up and are set up to round up people deemed somehow dangerous without ever telling anyone why exept for some general accusations. Germans were using the term "concentration camp" because it didn't have the horrible sound until it was discovered that the German concentration camps in fact were extermination camps.

3. Please explain why you can mistreat people just because they aren't U.S. citizens.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572519)

1: That's factually incorrect. Dozens have been charged in their home countries.

2: If these people are getting wet wipes, then it's not a concentration camp in the least.

3: We aren't mistreating non-US citizens, we're interrogating and gaining intelligence from suspected and known terrorists. So, if we let one go and they end up flying an aircraft into another US building, killing thousands, can we expect you to denounce the US government for "not connecting the dots", like everyone else does?

Re:We're all boiling frogs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572409)

The Nazis used your argument, and it got them hung. How does it feel to be a Nazi?

They are HUMAN BEINGS, almost all (perhaps even all!) of whom are INNOCENT! Legal standing means nothing compared to the simple fact that they are living, breathing, innocent people whose only crime was to be catch some soldier's roving, malevolent eye.

The people imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay are not the people beheading contractors in Iraq. If they were, that would be one thing. But they're not; THEY ARE INNOCENTS!

"We treat them far better than any other military" is complete horseshit. Somehow that makes it OK, just because we're better than the next guy?

Oh yeah, you raped that girl, but at least you didn't scar her face with a dirty knife like the other guy, so that makes it OK, right? Right??

Do not insult my heritage, my blood, my family, my country by comparing "us" to "them" and excusing our abominable behavior just it is "not as bad as them".

Re:We're all boiling frogs (0)

antibryce (124264) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572439)

I'm glad to see someone else pointing this out. If a U.S. citizen were found trying to overthrow Musharraf or the Saudis he'd be taken out into the street and, if he's lucky, shot in the head. If he's not lucky he gets his head sawn off.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572459)

So you're basically saying the US has the right to detain any non-US-citizen who is also not a soldier of another country, because they stop being humans the moment the US says so, and so human rights shouldn't apply. Way to go. I wonder, though, how you would react if some other country started "legally" holding US non-military personell without trial. After all, a US civilian in $country is not a citizen of $country, therefore, human rights don't apply, and he is also not military, so Geneva is out. I figure you must be shit scared of going abroad.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572493)

But we treat them far better than any other military would treat them.

Is morality relative or absolute?

Re:We're all boiling frogs (4, Insightful)

MadJo (674225) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572577)

People are being sent there without just trial! You say "bill of rights + constitution" do not apply, how about the laws of the country where they were taken from? How about human rights?
The US is in the business of kidnapping people and imprisoning them without any form of trial or appeal. How is that fair? How is that just? How is that according to your rules of the land?
To me that's bullying behaviour: "We don't like him, let's put him behind bars in a place where he can't hurt us."
How many innocent people are in Guantanamo Bay?
And why did the US built that prison in a foreign country?

I can't believe you can still sleep at night.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572595)

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Unless you're not a citizen in which case we can hold you without Liberty or Happiness for no reason. Ok, maybe we have a reason but we don't have to tell you why or even give you a chance to defend yourself. (I realize that is the Declaration of Independence but it was the first thing that came to my mind). The Bill of Rights you just pointed to was based on Enlightenment ideas about human rights.

This isn't about tit-for-tat, its about what we *should* be doing. You can't talk about Liberty and Democracy without equal justice for all. While we could go on and on about equal justice in this country - if you don't even get charged and have a trial there's really no chance of having a fair trial.

It is a concentration camp (note: concentration camps aren't just the death camps built by the Axis during WWII). The concentration camps built by the US for Japanese-Americans in WWII were also concentration camps.

Holding people without trial is just asking for abuse. That's why that whole Habeus Corpus thing was put into the Constitution.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (2, Insightful)

DrFruit (1178261) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572613)

"By a process of elimination, we have found out that you are not an A or B class human being. So now we can do with you as we please." The fact that CERTAIN people (suicide bombers, beheaders) do horrible things, does not give you the right to consider OTHER people as second rate. This seems very hard to grasp for some people, but the detainees in Guantanamo Bay are most likely NOT all criminals. In fact, none of us can determine how many of them are guilty of anything, as the US has made it impossible for them to get a decent trial and for us to be a witness to that.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572675)

Its hard to get concrete evidence on a terrorist that kills in a country where the acquaintances are afraid to come forward. That is why many are released. Freedom fighter implies a fight against a government, these people fight civilians, that makes them terrorists - THAT IS CONCRETE.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572335)

Reading this article made me realize just how we've all fallen victim to the "boiling frog syndrome".


I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.
--James Madison

Re:We're all boiling frogs (2, Insightful)

BobandMax (95054) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572389)

In wartime, US presidents have often violated the Constitution, citing threat to the republic. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, Wilson signed the odious Sedition Act of 1918 and Franklin Roosevelt interred citizens unsuspected of crimes. All of these actions were against US citizens who had not acted against the republic.

Bush acted against enemy combatants unidentified with a governmental entity and who are killing US troops. Whether you disagree with this policy or not, the internees are not eligible for constitutional protections under any legal theory with which I am familiar. Please cite the federal statute that provides for these protections so that we may be enlightened.

Re:We're all boiling frogs (0, Troll)

megaditto (982598) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572407)

First they came for the terrorists, but I said nothing because I was not a terrorist.
Then they came for the child rapists, and I still said nothing because I am not a child rapist.
Finally, they came for me, but the child rapists and the terrorists could no longer protect my freedom?

Do you really think that's how it works?

MP changed to guard, one example (2, Interesting)

spazmolytic666 (549909) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571873)

c. Utilize six MPs, including one MP with a shotgun, per detainee bus.

is now

c. Utilize six guards, including one guard with a shotgun, per detainee bus.

Every instance of MP was changed to "guard". I guess it sounds more friendly.

Re:MP changed to guard, one example (1)

sqrt(2) (786011) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572343)

Since they're not specifically Military Police now, maybe we're going to start using private contractors for guards, a la Blackwater.

prohibited! (-1, Troll)

icepick72 (834363) | more than 6 years ago | (#21571881)

exercise as punishment is prohibited.


Ah, ya, really damning evidence. I mean, do they not have to eat their broccoli either as "punishment".

Re:prohibited! (4, Interesting)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572383)

"exercise as punishment is prohibited."
  Okay do 500 pushups and tell me that isn't punishment. Run 20 miles with no water and tell me that isn't punishment.

Actually excessive exercise is a pretty effective form of torture. There is a line between torture and punishment. Three days in solitary confinement is a punishment. Six years could be torture. Being given 20 push ups to do is punishment for a solder. two hundred ...
For the average Slashdot reader two push ups might be a violation of their human rights :)
I am actually pretty conservative but torture is wrong.

Conservative? LIberal?` (3, Insightful)

Tony (765) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572635)

I am actually pretty conservative but torture is wrong.

It's sad that conservatism has fallen into such disrepute. I used to think, "Hey, my conservative friends and I want the same things. We just have different ideas about how to accomplish those things."

Now, all my "conservative" friends are suddenly very liberal. They haven't changed. The terms have changed.

Re:prohibited! (1)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572647)

A friend of mine surprised me by actually trying to argue that we shouldn't prohibit torture as it would "limit our options" when it came to interrogating prisoners. All of my reasoning about how torture gives unreliable information was greeted with "Well, you weren't tortured, so you don't know." Then it struck me. *He* was never tortured either. I pointed out this inconsistency in his argument to him, and told him that I would defer to someone who was tortured for advice. John McCain was tortured as a soldier and is now strongly against the use of torture. That's good enough for me. (Even though I disagree with him on other points and probably wouldn't vote for him, I respect and admire his stance on torture.)

Hows That Impeachment Coming Along Y'all? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21571895)

Heh.

If you want to diff it.. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21571909)

How's about comparing it to al Qaeda's manual?

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/jihadmanual.html [thesmokinggun.com]

Re:If you want to diff it.. (1)

scubamage (727538) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572107)

Actually they're two fundamentally different things. The manual you posted is a guide to field operations, and some tactics. Basically its nothing that would seem out of place in a classroom in West Point (not surprising considering a number of the "terrorists" we're fighting were either trained in Europe, or the United States School of Americas).

Re:If you want to diff it.. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572197)

Oh yeah.. you're right.. here's their prisoner treatment manual..

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0524072torture1.html [thesmokinggun.com]

That's better.

Re:If you want to diff it.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572303)

Thank you, I'm really tired of people claiming the US is equivalent to terrorists.

Who, us? (1)

Tony (765) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572543)

Of *course* we're not equivalent to terrorists.

The terrorists are organized.

*rimshot*

Re:If you want to diff it.. (2, Informative)

scubamage (727538) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572471)

And what makes you think we do anything different in our undisclosed prisons and torture chambers in Turkey, Pakistan, and numerous other nations? You do realize that there have been leaked special forces interrogation manuals detailing how to remove skin from the chest, exposing nerve endings which can be manipulated via medical implements, fire, etc, to cause mind numbing pain?

Re:If you want to diff it.. (1)

UltraAyla (828879) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572227)

Interesting as a comparison tool, but just remember when reading this that "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." I'm not sure that this parent was suggesting anything that needs this response, but I think it's an important consideration regardless.

Who Writes this CRAP in the First Place? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21571911)

Who writes this CRAP? Is this some Officer with nothing better to do with his/her time, or have the politician/lawyer been assigned to spew this out?

Re:Who Writes this CRAP in the First Place? (1)

happyemoticon (543015) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572557)

The military isn't just a fighting force, it's a gigantic bureaucracy - one famous for having rules and procedures spelled out in such painstaking detail that any person with the ability to read can follow them.

Should this diff be reffered to (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21571971)

as the 'Camp Delta delta'?

You can thank me for the earbug later. (1, Funny)

xerxesVII (707232) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572131)

When a problem comes along, you must diff it.
I say diff it.
Diff it good.

Changed MPs to Guards (3, Insightful)

phoenix.bam! (642635) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572133)

This seems to be the scariest change for me. MPs can handle that type of guard duty. Changing all references of MP to Guard means the military can start using either regular enlisted who are not properly trained to run a prison, or hire private contractors to run the prison. We already have private prisons stateside.

come on. (4, Insightful)

apodyopsis (1048476) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572253)

If they are guilty then charge them and let them have their day in court.

If there is no evidence then release them.

But holding them indefinitely on hearsay and suspicion in a legal limbo is madness. The problem will not get easier to deal with the longer you leave it, at some point they will have to be dealt with - so better to get it out of the way now. Confront the problem whatever the cost, return or charge them, and get that embarrassment and shut down.

Re:come on. (1)

bonkeydcow (1186443) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572641)

They are not us citizens. They did not rob a starbucks. This is not a court matter. Stop trying to equate war criminals to U.S. citizens. Try reading the constition some time instead of thinking you know what it says.

daming to ?. and wikeleaks you mean? (2, Interesting)

scrout (814004) | more than 6 years ago | (#21572255)

What horseshit, nice titles and such. Please post your damning evidence, why it is damning, and whom it is damning to. There is a new program where you can "bring a Gitmo guy to breakfast", should be popular with the US is bad , buys trying to blow us up good crowd.

Re:daming to ?. and wikeleaks you mean? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572499)

buys trying to blow us up good crowd.

Any time you want to prove that, feel free to. The military refuses to, the government refuses to, so apparently you have some insider evidence that nobody else has access to that can prove beyond a doubt that the people in prison are terrorists.

Maybe you can post your proof to wikileaks, then we can see if they're biased against the truth or not.

Fris8t psot (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21572617)

you'"re toLd. It's
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...