After the liberation De Gaulle’s government held on to internees from many countries in officially closed centres to hide collaboration
Jon Henley in Paris
Monday October 4, 2004 The Guardian
"The government of Charles de Gaulle held hundreds of foreigners, including at least three Britons, in an internment camp near Toulouse for up to four years after the second world war, according to secret documents. "…(excerted from article)
"Lost’ archives surface with a distnctly cheesy smell…Vive Le Vichy!
From the Guardian no less. I wonder what our “friends” have to say about Guantanamo now? I mean we did not deliberately imprison our allies after all, only those that were clearly terrorists no matter how you slice it. Caught fighting with a weapon in Afghanistan fighting against American troops and it was a what? “misunderstanding” a “mistake?” Right. But this, this is just shameful.
Whoopeee doo. The french allegedly detained prisoners illegally 50 years ago.
Over 600 prisoners are presently locked in a prison today, in harsh conditions, without having been charged with any crime, without having access to lawyers, without rights, in the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Right on clockwork with the self-abasing groveling. I am sure somewhere someone in some other country really truly does respect you for this. Really. Truly. haha
None are American citizens.
None were fighting for the American cause in these wars.
All were caught under highly suspicious circumstances directly fighting American forces.
Any of these that would prefer to return to governments in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia should be allowed to do so. I am sure that they will find their stays in their home countries so much more comfortable and amenable. We are already releasing those baddies to allied nations such as the UK who are still looking very seriously at these people.
Final say, there is no international law that covers sabateurs, terrorists, spies, enemy agents out of uniform. None are American citizens and therefore have no American rights. One of those released because of this bilious high-minded criticism returned to Afghanistan where he was involved in actively fighting American and allied forces. He may have been responsible for several deaths. What would you like to say to the families of those whose sons were killed by this man MT? HMMM
In the meantime, France deliberately held soldiers fighting on its behalf from allied nations for four years. What does one say to this kind of cynicism and cruelty? I mean these men were fighting for France. Probably wanted to hush them up so that the Resistance would not be laughed off the planet for single handedly “liberating” France? We should have left it to the Germans. They know how to handle French bravado. Funny isn’t it that France never gave the Germans the hard time that the Yugoslavs did or even the Scandinavians for that matter. But do praise them MT. They aren’t Americans so how can criticism of their activities possibly fit in with your Chomskyite agenda. Pathetic.
I have though I am still waiting to see the movie made and banned back in the 1950s called “Algier.”
I will not, however, criticize the French nor their actions in Algieria though since this was essentially a civil war. It was not pretty but show me a civil war that is. It would be comparable to Union and Confederate forces engagements and some of the terrible things that happened where battles took place. Ugly but not typically French. Universal.
You are correct. “Battle of Algiers” is the correct title. Where did you see it? How can I see it? I have heard fantastic things about the cinematography. Remind me of the director again, whose name escapes me.
[quote]Tomorrow marks the [color=red]1,000th day in captivity [/color]for 12 Kuwaiti prisoners who have been held [color=red]without being charged [/color]in a U.S. detention camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The imprisonment is [color=red]in violation of three U.S. Supreme Court decisions [/color]that, in June 2004, ordered the Bush administration to either charge the men with a crime or set them free.
All of the Kuwaitis have been [color=red]held in isolation without legal representation or visits from friends or family[/color] since they were taken prisoner in the Middle East and flown to Guantanamo in 2002. To date, [color=red]none has been charged with any crime or given their rights under due process of U.S. law,[/color] despite the Supreme Court decisions earlier this year that reaffirmed their right to trial, their right to habeas corpus, and their right to legally challenge their detention.
The imprisonment has been decried by political and social leaders
throughout the world, from Tony Blair to Desmond Tutu[/quote] prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stori … 367&EDATE=
[quote]Archbishop [color=red]Desmond Tutu today branded the Guantanamo Bay prison camp a
Under what circumstances were these hapless Kuwaitis arrested and detained? Hmmm. Supply that information if you can MT and we may look at things differently. As is, you seem to make the point that these innocent victims were just rounded up somewhere by accident? Where were they when they were arrested and what were they doing? If you don’t answer, I am less inclined to care. Interesting that 600 detainees held by the Americans make for such a disgrace in Desmond Tutu’s eyes. I wonder where he was when Saddam was doing the same thing to the tune of millions? Perhaps he would like to discuss how asylum seekers are housed in France and Germany? Or better yet, what is going on in Iran. All of these I would imagine are far more “disgraceful” but as with MT’s self-abasing posts, they do not involve America, the only nation that can truly commit evil. haha Knees. Knees. Knees.
[quote]Isn’t the American way innocent until proven guilty?
Surely the burden of proof is on those defending illegal imprisonment.
Where is the proof that the Kuwaitis were doing something wrong? [/quote]
Relatively weak argument and clearly shows a general weakness in knowledge of US law and international law in regards to non uniformed soldiers.
They weren’t caught on American soil
These were non-uniformed enemy combatants and not generally protected by any treaty
They worked with a terrorist organization
If they are in Guantanamo, I can pretty much bet that they were fighting US forces in Afghanistan.
I’m betting, that they wouldn’t want to go back to Kuwait
I’m still interested in what MT can bring out about there background. They could present a problem by going back to fight us in Afghanistan. It’s not too different from holding prisoners of war till hostilities cease. As far as Desmond Tutu goes, fuck him. If he wants to draw attention to the detention of non-uniformed enemy combatants in wartime, versus the really serious problems in Iran, Sudan, or even China. It just goes to show you what kind of media whore he is.
Could not have said it better myself including the comment about the Communist Desmond Tutu. Finally, though, I would add these are not American citizens and therefore they get zippo for rights. They are not protected by the American consistution. They are unlawful combattants if captured in Afghanistan fighting American soldiers out of uniform. Bet you dimes to donuts that this is where they were captured. Why not provide that info MT? Hmmm? Let us have the whole picture rather than the knee-based view.
[quote=“Okami”][quote]Isn’t the American way innocent until proven guilty?
Surely the burden of proof is on those defending illegal imprisonment.
Where is the proof that the Kuwaitis were doing something wrong? [/quote]
Relatively weak argument and clearly shows a general weakness in knowledge of US law and international law in regards to non uniformed soldiers.[/quote]
Relatively weak insult as I was referring to FS insisting on MT providing links or substantiation to prove the Kuwatis were doing something wrong. In a facetious way, I was suggesting he follow suit and establish guilt through links, quotes or sources.
You got me though, I know zip about international law and soldiers and their uniforms.
Well then, I guess my assumption and this could be wrong is that almost everyone in Guantanamo is there for a very good reason despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth among the press. I do not have the time at present but I would challenge anyone to find me a link with proof that those in Guantanamo were somehow merely out walking their dog in the wrong place at the wrong time and just happened to end up there. My understanding is that most if not all were nonlawful combattants and are therefore NOT covered under the Geneva Convention. I am open however to being proven wrong on this but will need evidence.
