Part 1
To the misinformed half-wit, Nick L, about 'torture' at Guantanamo Bay.
Sucked in by Islamofascist propaganda, or pro-jihadi? Refute this if you can:
Gitmo is "a camp where the medical staff outnumber the prisoners." You'll get swifter, cleaner and more efficient treatment than most Australians do under Medicare. The only gulag in history where the detainees leave in better health and weighing more than when they arrive. This means they're in much better shape when they return to their hectic schedule of killing infidels: Of the more than 200 detainees who've been released, 12 have since been recaptured on the battlefield.
No serious allegation of torture at Gitmo has been substantiated. In the al-Qaida training manual Rule 18 reads: When held captive by infidels, members must "complain to the court of mistreatment while in prison" and say that "torture was inflicted on them." Useful idiots will believe these thugs over Americans.
Out of about 24,000 interrogations at Guantanamo, there were seven confirmed cases of abuse, all of which were relatively minor. In the eyes of history, compared to any other camp in any other war, this is an astonishingly small number. Two of the documented offenses involved “female interrogators who, on their own initiative, touched and spoke to detainees in a sexually suggestive manner.” Not exactly torture, is it?.
They’re getting better than they deserve.
Released Prisoners receive a new copy of the Qur'an plus a free pair of blue jeans in their new size: the average detainee puts on 13 pounds during his stay, thanks to the “mustard-baked dill fish”, “baked Tandoori chicken breast” and other delicacies. These and other recipes from Gitmo’s kitchen have now been collected by some Internet wags and published as The Gitmo Cookbook. CONT.

Part 2
Imagine, if in WW2, nazi prisoners were given a copy of Mein Kampf! These killers get a copy of the Qur'an and the guards have to handle them with kid-gloves. If anything, the Yanks are too soft.
Christina Aguilera records are played at full volume to soften up detainees. Glove puppets are used to 'satirize detainee's association with Al Qaeda'. A female interrogator took the unusual approach to wear down a detainee by reading a Harry Potter book aloud for hours. A picture of a 9/11 victim was taped to a detainee's trousers. Torture?
Republican and Democrat politicians toured Gitmo, and even the looniest of the bunch - Sheila Jackson Lee, had to grudgingly admit it didn’t seem all that bad.
Abuse definitely exists at Gitmo, but it fails to receive the press attention it deserves: it’s the relentless, merciless attacks on American servicemen by these thugs. Many of them fight their captors at every opportunity, openly bragging of their desire to kill Americans. One has promised that, if released, he would find MPs in their homes through the internet, break into their houses at night, and “cut the throats of them and their families like sheep.” Others claim authority/vindication to kill women, children, and anyone who opposes their jihadist mission authorized by the Qur'an (that hangs in every cell from a specially-designed holder intended to protect it from touching the floor). They attack guards whenever the soldiers enter their cells, trying to reach up under facemasks to gouge eyes and tear mouths. They make weapons and try to stab the guards or grab and break limbs as the guards pass them food.
If Rumsfeld had wanted to be “culturally sensitive” to the detainees, he’d simply have herded them on to some Afghan soccer pitch and shot them as the half-time entertainment, the way Mullah Omar’s boys liked to do things.

Skids,
If you believe the propaganda the US releases regarding Gitmo, I expect you believe ‘reality tv’ represents a view of the real world. At least it’s entertaining for you….

Nick,

I am not unaware of any American soldiers from Gitmo establishing a religion, nor do I know of anybody that thinks they did great things. The same is not true for Mohammed. Muslims cannot praise him enough, and never a word of disappoval. Of course, if torture, slavery, murder and sleeping with little girls is OK for you, then ‘Mo’ is your man!

I would like you to give me the reference(s) regarding your statement “just as some Muslims justify Mohammed's apparent use of such tactics.” Since I was talking about torture, I assume by “tactics” that is what you mean. Please provide references because I would like to read the comments and justifications of the prophet torturing people from an Islamic perspective. My finding is that Muslims prefer to ignore much of Mohammed’s actions, as if they never happened. If you bring the subject up with them face to face, they look at you and say “So?” “Duhhhhhh” or “You don’t understand”. It is like the zombies in the “Night of the living Dead” movie, walking with glazed, unblinking eyes.

It would be almost be funny if it weren’t about people, their lives and the future. As I have said, there is no way we can have honest dialogue with Muslims unless they can be honest about basic issues such as torture. This same standard applies for everybody: Christans, athiests, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, etc... No exceptions!

This issue is symptomatic of the larger issue of trust and the ability to live together. This is why Muslim’s condemn terror and the terror continues. You cannot be against terror and hold Islam’s prophet in high regard. There are just too many accounts of evil deeds against often innocent and unsuspecting people. What is it, about 30+ recorded raids (including unprovoked surprise attacks) on caravans and villages by the prophet and his men? Then there were the spoils – prisoners, slaves, women to be taken and given as booty. Great man this?

If Muslims cannot condemn these things, there should be no dialogue.

Kactuz

PS: I hate beer!

Kaktuz,

Your sources of information are entertaining.
Please read historians work on the life of Mohamed (Karen Armstrong, George Sale and William Muir).

Your views are your truth, not mine and not other muslims.

AK

Bosk,
To recognise what we are saying is based in the very foundations and attitudes and behaviour of the founder who constructs the doctrine and practise of the religion.

The term Muslim like Christian is a generic term refering to people who classify themselves as following the religion.

Islam founded in Abraham, they claim, however he worshipped El Shaddai only as God - monotheism. The Arab Mahomet 630 BC attracted to his Jewish friends pure religion gave it new character by cleansing the nation of infidels and enforcing totalitarian shari'ah. A draconian law built upon ancient Israeli law and subsequent additions till the Babylonian Talmud 600BC. For them adherence to law is the foundation of the religion and the nation purity.

The nominal followers of this religion are often non-violent and delightful people, who do not behave with the fanaticism of Mahomet. However when reminded of their committment to Allah by Immams are envigorated to follow the example as set by their prophet.

Compare persons who are nominally Christian who frequently act outside the principles of the doctrine and behaviour of Christ and when reminded of Christ are brought to check against His attitudes and behaviour. He makes individual appeal to those who should follow godly behaviour and does not see Nationalism as his kingdom. I suggest you study the behaviour and doctrine set by these two men.

Quote, "Now let's compare what BD, Philo & co say. A muslim kills people, well that just shows us how evil Islam or muslims as a group are. But a christian kills people, well that christian was just a crackpot, a fanatic, not a true christian. just a lone individual. His act says NOTHING bad about christians or christianity. Sounds frighteningly similar to Gobbels' guiding principle doesn't it?