Talk:Camp X-Ray
|
|
| Contents |
Misc
Does anyone know how many people were interred in Gitmo since the creation of camp X-ray, how many have been released, how many are still detained, and how many were actually charged with crimminal activity (either by the US or their home countries, very curious about this last one). This would be interesting information to add to the article. Thanks!
Removed the statement that "unlawful combatant" has no meaning in international law. It does.
Has anyone else noticed that there is another article with the same title yet different content? Perhaps these should be merged.
- merging done.
Here is a news item of note: [1] (http://www.myafghan.com/news2.asp?id=284379348) ... if someone here is working on this article. Kingturtle 00:15 May 11, 2003 (UTC)
Here is a news item of note: [2] (http://www.myafghan.com/news2.asp?id=-702766104&search=11/26/2003) ...please add it to this article. Kingturtle 22:01, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for the above, Kingturtle, but how reliable/neutral is this source? News articles on the site don't seem to be properly credited, and the site is run as a special interest of just one individual. I for one would prefer to hear the reassuring information it gives from something more like Reuters, or such like. No disrespect intended to the person who runs the site.... TonyClarke 01:15, 29 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- That first story is from the AP. The second one is from Dawn in Pakistan. Take them for what they are worth. Here is another interesting AP story...[3] (http://www.myafghan.com/news2.asp?id=1076523318&search=2/11/2004) Kingturtle 21:40, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
AFAIK Halliburton (or a subsidiary) constructed Camp X-Ray. pir 11:43, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
another news item
This news item (http://www.myafghan.com/news2.asp?id=1147279552&search=3/10/2004) will be of use to anyone working on this article. Kingturtle 18:35, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
It is often described as a concentration camp.
I removed the above statement. The camp is not referred to as a concentration camp in any credible news organization or by academics with an understanding of the definition of a concentration camp. The wikipedia entry for concentration camp itself indicates that camp x-ray could not be accurately described as a concentration camp. Michael A.
- Hey, you forgot to sign. I do not quite see why you think the term does not apply or that the article indicates so. The article had a judgement that was not neutral and explained that some people but neither governments nor amnesty international use the term. The definition given kind of fits: A concentration camp is a large detention centre for political opponents, specific ethnic or religious groups, or other groups of people. ... The term refers to situations where the internees are civilians, especially those selected for their conformance to broad criteria without judicial process, rather than having been judged as individuals. However, unless we have references I do not see why we should mention that the camps were often referred to as concentration camps.Get-back-world-respect 23:12, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Hi - sorry about forgetting to sign. Is there a way to setup some form of autosignature? All I can find is the 3/4 tilde idiom, are you typing yours out each time or am I missing some setting in preferences? I agree with your assertion that the statement shouldn't be included without some references. If people seek references and wish to reintroduce it I will make the case for why the term is inappropriate. Michael A. 02:28, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- 3 or 4 tildes (generally 4 for talk page comments). It becomes a habit pretty quickly. You can set in your prefs exactly what that's expanded to - David Gerard 07:07, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Hi - sorry about forgetting to sign. Is there a way to setup some form of autosignature? All I can find is the 3/4 tilde idiom, are you typing yours out each time or am I missing some setting in preferences? I agree with your assertion that the statement shouldn't be included without some references. If people seek references and wish to reintroduce it I will make the case for why the term is inappropriate. Michael A. 02:28, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
International conventions section
I would have thought this section would be better served by another article... it seems a little out-of-place here. Comments? Andrewferrier 18:08, 2004 Nov 30 (UTC)
Saudi Arabia
Most of the inmates in Guantanamo Bay are Saudis according to Saudi Arabia.[4] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1789142.stm)
I think that's important considering 15 of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and since they seem to be the primary breeding ground for the world's terrorists.
Should it be added? If so, where?
another news item from last summer
might this be helpful to anyone writing here? [5] (http://www.myafghan.com/news2.asp?id=-1370862477&search=7/5/2004) Kingturtle 18:44, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Prisonner of War vs Criminal prisonner
I am a little bit surprised that the discussion about prisoners of war does not mention the fact that a person under arrest without the protection of the Geneva Conventions faces indictement under the criminal laws of the appropriate State. However, the detainees of Gantanamo have not been treated according US criminal laws. Could this be mentionned somewhere ? Rama 22:45, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
nationalities of detainees
It'd be interesting and useful to see a list of the nationalities of detainees at the camp if anyone can find this infomation. Grunners 17:24, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality of the word "Detainee"
While, strictly speaking, kidnapping people and torturing them for years on end may be "detaining" I don't think that it is a neutral term. Note the dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=detain) definition of detain.
de·tain ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-tn) tr.v. de·tained, de·tain·ing, de·tains
- 1. To keep from proceeding; delay or retard.
- 2. To keep in custody or temporary confinement: The police detained several suspects for questioning. The disruptive students were detained after school until their parents had been notified.
Hence, the human beings held by force at gitmo cannot accurately be described as detainees. The term is not neutral and to be charitable it represents orwellian military doublespeak. I vote that the term be removed from the article all together. user:TitaniumDreads 03:32am Apr 25, 2005
- To be replaced by what ? Rama 09:11, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I think prisoner is more neutral, it indicates that they are being held indefinitely but avoids the ridiculous "are they prisoners of war?" debate. TitaniumDreads 19:13, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The Platt Amendment
So I've been wondering for the last three years why it is that the US has a naval base in an ostensibly hostile neighbor (at least dangerous enough that we think they deserve sanctions). When the US stole cuba by force from spain those pesky cubans eventually demanded their own freedom. The US Gov "gave" it to them but with the caveat that it could keep a permanent military base, intervene in treaties, etc. Formally this was called the Platt Amendment. I added it to the see also section but I think it deserves a more prominent role in the article, perhaps a history section?
"concentration camp"
I removed a reference to the camp as a "concentration camp" without changing the content or context of the original sentence. Although it might be argued that Gitmo technically represents a "concentration camp," I think that the historical and cultural significance of that term with regards to the Holocaust render that term inappropriate. Clearly Guantanamo, although certainly not a pleasant place, does not have the same conditions or goals of the deservedly more infamous Nazi concentration (and extermination) camps.
Exised section
Removed for POV langauge.
The Guantanamo prison facility is a "black hole" where, as of June 2005, more than 500 detainees are being held without recourse to due process of law. None of them has been charged with a crime and many if not most of them have been tortured. Both the Geneva Conventions and the U.S. Constitution have been abrogated, and as a result prominent figures such as former President Jimmy Carter and U.S. Senator Joseph Biden have called for the closure of the Guanantamo prison.
- As of June 2005, more than 500 detainees are being held in the Guantanamo prison facility without recourse to due process of law. None of them has been charged with a crime a number of them have been tortured. Both the Geneva Conventions and U.S. laws have not been applied there, and as a result prominent figures such as former President Jimmy Carter and U.S. Senator Joseph Biden have called for the closure of the Guanantamo prison.
- ? Rama 17:11, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
+1. If it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt that prisoners have been tortured. Eric B. and Rakim 20:50, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Ed
Ed, given the fact that you are currently in mediation on a page related to this topic, it might be a gesture of good faith to avoid edits here for a while
What do you think?
Collegially, BrandonYusufToropov 21:35, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I'll stay off any page which you agree to not to edit yourself. Fair enough? -- Uncle Ed (talk) 21:48, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
- More than fair. BrandonYusufToropov 21:50, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)