SO, taking away ALL of their rights (even the choice of whether or not to eat), doing this in non-optimal positions, without the help of even water, being strapped down, ALSO being forced to do this during their religious fasting....not torture?

She's a troll! She's a catholic, Jack Donaghy loving troll! (To Donaghy somebody=if you can get the other person to yell while you keep an even tone of voice, even if what you are saying is evil and wrong, then supposedly this means that you have won the argument).

here. a, b, and c.

Hey, I read it! I guess my wording was slightly different, but...

That's because there isn't anything to do about the hunger strike. We created the problem, and now we have to deal with the outcome. (looking bad for forcefeeding counts). Even the guilty ones deserve due process. I suppose we could consider that, but godforfuckingbid.

ugh, people. Ignorance is bliss, I guess?

It's fantastic to know that somebody who doesn't "care about the welfare or comfort for the majority of those detainees" who considers their "conditions that while not torture are intolerable" acceptable, that somebody like that is working in apparently close quarters with them.

That's utterly ridiculous. The Geneva Convention absolutely applies to them if we are holding them "lawfully" because they were arrested as unlawful combatants in a warzone by military forces. That would be the very definition of Prisoner Of War. Seriously? seriously? And as we have all said, a number of times....sooo…

I'd say the exact opposite: political prisoners need a lot of incentive to kill themselves in a slow, uncomfortable, painful way. I think it is incredibly naive and incorrect thing to assume that (people taken because of their last names, people taken and never charged, people taken and cleared of charges, people…

omg, just exploded.

Ha, I notice you didn't tell me that you aren't as well versed in the actual detainees as I am, or that you were just playing devils advocate. But what do I know, right?

Thank you for telling your story here!

Well, no intervention is the Maggie Thatcher route...

Thank You!!!!

I said this to somebody else, so I'm just gonna copynpaste:

PLEASE GO READ THE THIRD GENEVA CONVENTION AND ABOUT HABEUS CORPUS, thank you! (btw, in case you didn't know, we helped write that Geneva thing, omg!)

The questions you are asking are tough questions, and the prisoners aren't just doing this idiotically. The point is to possibly die, or to utilize these force feedings as a way to get this message out about the horrorshow that is happening there. Now suddenly people are talking about Gitmo again, and that is good,…

WHOA, whoa, whoa...back up there. The problem is that you assumed something. You said "Let's assume that all the inmates that are left are indeed combatants, terrorists, or have blood on their hands..."

That's not an option for those prisoners. They want to starve to death. They are being held there indefinitely without charges.

I'm not watching the video, and I'm not a medical expert but I have two thoughts on this: