Captain America vs. The Patriot Act?

Nerd_52637 writes "Yesterday, Marvel Comics released the first in its miniseries Civil War, which can only be described as a gutsy comic-book series focusing on the whole debate over homeland security and tighter government controls in the name of public safety. The seven-issue series once again puts superheroes right back in the thick of real-world news, just as DC Comics has Batman battling al-Qaeda in a soon-to-appear comic and Marvel's X-Men continue to explore themes of public intolerance and discrimination. In Civil War, hero is pitted against hero in the choice of whether or not to side with the government, as issues ranging from a Guantanamo-like prison camp for superheroes, embedded reporters and the power of media all play in the mix as Superheroes are ordered to register as human WMDs or be branded fugitives."

Comments

Mod parent up!

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod parent up +5 nonexistent!

Re:Mod parent up!

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice way to say you are a fish

Been there, done that

[Quiet_Desperation]

Watchmen. Astro City - Confession, etc.

Re:Been there, done that

[enrac]

They touched on this in Dark Night Returns. Reagan uses Superman in some Cold War skirmish, Batman is a fugitive . . .

Re:Been there, done that

[Count Fenring]

Hmmm... I disagree. While both awesome pieces of work, neither is really dealing with the issues of government control in the same way, if at all.

For one, the conspiracy in Watchmen is non-governmental: It's actually an exceedingly liberal private citizen (Adrian/Ozymandias) who is controlling public opinion and worldview. The government plays a strang side-role in this; they are environment, not actor.

And Astro City: Confession, while one of my all-time favorite comics, is really dealing with public opinion and its manipulation by authority in a much softer, more human-focused way.

Maybe a better example would be Frank Miller's Martha Washington books, or Elektra: Assassin. Still, I don't think anything out there invalidates this project.

Re:Been there, done that

[ryusen]

When i read the part abotu prison camps and registering super powers, that suddenly reminded me of "Days of Future Past." That old X-men alternate future... how long ago was that?

Re:Been there, done that

[NMerriam]

And it's still enjoyable today when Watchmen just makes one depressed with its 1980s "the end is nigh" fearmongering.

I agree, that '80s stuff is so dated, I can't believe anyone would think it has any relevance to modern events. Most political commentary really has no relevence beyond a few months from publication date, so I don't understand why anyone would waste their time writing or reading it.

I'd write more, but I'm meeting a friend to see V for Vendetta in a few minutes.

Re:Been there, done that

[mge]

paralells The Incredibles

Re:Been there, done that

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. Dude, that was some awesome burn.

Re:Been there, done that

[krotkruton]

True, these issues have been discussed before, but this is news because Marvel is doing it, and many more people know about Marvel than they do Watchmen. It's a lot like all the publicity around Brokeback Mountain. That theme has been done independently, but never in a major motion picture.

People expect independents to make controversial subject matter. They don't expect to see it in the mainstream, and when they do, it raises eyebrows.

Re:Been there, done that

[Saanvik]

or Powers

Re:Been there, done that

[Anonymous Coward]

What about the environment that led to the current situation -- the criminalizing of superheroes? That is what is happening in the Marvel series. In Watchmen, it already happened, and the story is about the aftereffects. My own interpretation is that in a world without superheroes or superpowers, there are still people who think they are above all else in order to achieve the common good.

Re:Been there, done that

[aussie_a]

OP raises point X, you refute point Y. Well done. With such tactics you must be a master debater in your local area.

Just because something is dated, doesn't mean it has no relevance. After all, many people claim Shakespeare has relevance to today's society. However I think everyone would agree it's clearly dated.

Re:Been there, done that

[CRCulver]

Mod parent down. Link contains referral. If he has a point to make, he needs to make it without including an advertisement.

I've a browser extension that automatically creates a referrer link when the cite tag is used. So, whenever I mention a media item in a post, a referral link is then applied. I am not spamming Slashdot, since my posts are first thought out before a referrer tag even comes into the picture. Check my posting history and you'll see that I've made plenty of posts without referral links. It is only when it is necessary to cite a publication that referral links even come into the picture.

Honestly, it's fucking pathetic that you're trying to make money by spamming Slashdot with referral links.

There's nothing pathetic about making a little money (more than a little actually, at Slashdot referral links fetch up to $100/day tax-free for some) for posting well-written and insightful commentary. My karma is "Excellent", obviously most people here find value in what I say.

Re:Been there, done that

[Kelson]

this is news because Marvel is doing it

Anyone remember the Mutant Registration Act?

Re:Been there, done that

[cliffmeece]

Not just that, but in the eighties the Avengers had this as a recurring story element. Specifically it was about government regulation of the Avengers, and if I recall correctly, they had some government regulator guy who was always breathing down their neck. Flat-top guy with sunglasses.

Also, that was the same guy ( I'm pretty sure ) that tried to screw Captain America out of his identity, which again is pretty much the same storyline.

Their argument was that they (the government) 'owned' the concept and image of Captain America and wanted to get some return on their investment. CA refused and gave up the costume and shield and became a fugitive hero (much like in Civil War) while the government appointed super patriot as the new CA.

It got worked out in the end, though ;-)

Re:Been there, done that

[syntaxglitch]

He was making a joke. The recent movie V for Vendetta is, with a few tweaks to make nods to current events, based on a comic from the 80s by, I think, the same author as Watchmen, the "dated" material being referred to.

Humor through sarcasm and tongue-in-cheek faux-hypocracy.

Re:Been there, done that

[snuf23]

Yes they are both graphic novels by Alan Moore.
I agree that V for Vendetta (although one could consider it fear mongering) is absolutely relevant today, just as it was when it was written.
I suppose OP might consider 1984 to be outdated as well, but I believe the basic story of a government exerting total and brutal control over the population is a timeless warning message.

Re:Been there, done that

[TrentC]

Watchmen. Astro City - Confession, etc.

Marvel tried this before with the Mutant Registration Act of the late 1980's (which figured into the X-Men titles for a while before it quietly disappeared).

Re:Been there, done that

[FLEB]

and I am an intelligent person that can destroy your arguments without a second thought.

You're destroying things, but the arguments aren't it (Hint: Aim for the content! The CONTENT!). And, yes, it's rather obvious you aren't sparing a second thought on this thread, but it's nothing really worth boasting about.

So, in conclusion: July, STFU. CRC, please don't feed the trolls. FLEB, take your own advice.

Re:Been there, done that

[zippthorne]

erm.. why would that $100/day be tax free?

Re:Been there, done that

[Babbster]

1980-1981, as I recall. It's remained a consistent reference ever since because the future is never in the present. So, though the inciting details have changed this could lead to the DoFP events as easily as assassinating Senator Robert Kelly (who, by the way, went mutant neutral/pro a while back).

Re:Been there, done that

[Babbster]

The sweet, red-headed fellow you're talking about was Avengers liaison, Henry Peter Gyrich who, by the way, became something of a "nice" guy during the last run of Avengers leading up to the infamous (and annoying) "Avengers Disassembled" storyline. One of his "best" moments was when he forced The Falcon onto the Avengers because he felt that they didn't have enough minority representation (and, to be fair, they didn't). It was a pretty interesting storyline considering the uproar that Affirmative Action has caused over the years.

Re:Been there, done that

[NMerriam]

erm.. why would that $100/day be tax free?

I assume he thinks so because he would be turning around and redeeming it for goods from Amazon and never getting a check. It is, of course, taxable income, but I don't know if Amazon reports credit earned through the affiliate program if it isn't sent as a check, so there wouldn't be any practical way for the IRS to know about it.

Re:Been there, done that

[July 21, 2006]

"You're destroying things, but the arguments aren't it (Hint: Aim for the content! The CONTENT!). And, yes, it's rather obvious you aren't sparing a second thought on this thread, but it's nothing really worth boasting about."

Listen, everyone complains when the Slashvertisements come down from above and aren't denoted as such. The thinly veiled ads that are presented as stories are insulting to readers and undermine the credibility of Slashdot. In the same way, a comment that contains an advertisement undermines the validity of the comment and have no place here. If someone wants to put a referral link in their signature, I will accept that but comments that exist only for the sake of the poster being able to put their referral link into the story are insulting and undermine Slashdot.

So call me a troll if you want, I've made my point and the fact that you can't refute it but can only call names and spew other tired insults shows that you are just as pathetic as the moron I was taking to task.

And again, I hope Christopher Culver rots in hell for his behavior.

Re:Been there, done that

[DDLKermit007]

Funny...you just stated that political comentary has no relevance yet the very movie you are useing for your excuse of not coming up with a reason to backup your claims is a very old political comentary. Maybe your trieing to be funny, but I smell troll.

Re:Been there, done that

[somersault]

"I am an intelligent person that can destroy your arguments without a second thought. I hope you rot in hell you pathetic loser."

You seem more like a troll of probably average intelligence, and you should learn to use punctuation and grammar properly before trying to flame someone like that. Why you feel the need to call someone a pathetic loser just because they have a hyperlink to amazon in their story is quite incredible. I didnt know you could make money like this, and it's an interesting idea, though you're right that it's not much (though better than nothing).

Re:Been there, done that

[mvdwege]

the conspiracy in Watchmen is non-governmental: It's actually an exceedingly liberal private citizen (Adrian/Ozymandias) who is controlling public opinion and worldview.

I respectfully submit that when a person starts to think that they can cure all humanity's ills by themselves, that they are the only enlightened leader capable of doing so, and that the end justifies the means, even if the means is killing millions, that that person has no right to any political classification but Fascist.

If they were to proclaim it was in service of the greater good, of which they are merely the executive officer, then they might make a claim to the classification of Communist (specifically a Marxist-Leninist, 'vanguard of the proletariat' and all that).

In no way can it be claimed they are a liberal, not even in the distorted US meaning of the word.

This message brought to you by your local Political Education Officer.

Mart

Re:Been there, done that

[somersault]

So call me a troll if you want, I've made my point and the fact that you can't refute it but can only call names and spew other tired insults shows that you are just as pathetic as the moron I was taking to task."

...

Re:Been there, done that

[siesta at uni]

Transmetropolitan?

All about corrupt government, and a president who seems to be able to get away with incredible abuses of power, with no-one seeming to care.

Re:Been there, done that

[Anonymous Coward]

omg. clue stick.

Re:Been there, done that

[odourpreventer]

The Authority, perhaps? Although it's a tad over the top.

Re:Been there, done that

[Anonymous Coward]

To quote Rorschach: "liberal. possible homosexual."
 
I rest my case.
:-P

Re:Been there, done that

[kaiocool]

Marvel made R.Kelly into a senator??

Re:Been there, done that

[abb3w]

I respectfully submit that when a person starts to think that they can cure all humanity's ills by themselves, that they are the only enlightened leader capable of doing so, and that the end justifies the means, even if the means is killing millions, that that person has no right to any political classification but Fascist.

No; Fascist implies they work to do so via means of governmental action. Monarchist would be another alternative. And while considering -ists, Terrorist incidentally fits Ozy's methods rather well.

In no way can it be claimed they are a liberal, not even in the distorted US meaning of the word.

Liberal: "I'm free to try; you're free to try and stop me." =)
(Yes, I realize that's closer to anarchist than Ozy comes.)

Myself, I think the best political classification for Ozymandias is "Whacko".

Re:Been there, done that

[mvdwege]

No; Fascist implies they work to do so via means of governmental action.

Governmental action is by no means a requisite for Fascism. All of Mussolini, Franco and Hitler were rather insistent on the primacy of a strong single leader; Hitler went in fact so far as to designate it the primary principle of his brand of Fascism: the Führerprinzip.

Liberal: "I'm free to try; you're free to try and stop me."

That's Classical Liberalism, verging on Libertarianism, as you righly point out. However, true adherents to both philosophies do realise that an individual cannot make decisions for other individuals, especially if those decisions force a sacrifice on others. Therefore, in that definition, Adrian Veidt is no liberal, nor a Liberal.

Myself, I think the best political classification for Ozymandias is "Whacko".

Oh, I agree. I tend to take the Orwellian route, and just mark these kind of people as totalitarians. After all is said and done, whether you're murdered because the State thinks it's necessary, or because the Leader thinks it, you're dead anyway.

Mart

Re:Been there, done that

[geekoid]

Batman is retired, not a fugitive.

Re:Been there, done that

[July 21, 2006]

"You seem more like a troll of probably average intelligence, and you should learn to use punctuation and grammar properly before trying to flame someone like that. Why you feel the need to call someone a pathetic loser just because they have a hyperlink to amazon in their story is quite incredible. I didnt know you could make money like this, and it's an interesting idea, though you're right that it's not much (though better than nothing)."

Might want to check your punctuation, tough guy. The apostrophe exists and is used in contractions. Other than that, I have nothing to say to you. You made no points worth addressing.

Re:Been there, done that

[somersault]

ooh. I wasn't (:o) attempting to flame you anyway, just pointing out how stupid you're being. With oft used words like didn't and don't then I dont really bother anymore. They're decent enough words in their own right, but with matters of ownership on words like it then I use it. It's not just for contractions. If it wasn't worth addressing, then why even reply? The mind boggles.

Sounds Familiar

[QuantumSpritz]

Rising Stars? I swear I've read that plotline before...

Re:Sounds Familiar

[Soybean47]

I love JMS too, and I understand your desire to mention his work whenever you can. In this case, though, you're reaching pretty far. In an industry whose main subject is superheroes, "government attempting to control superheroes" isn't a plot, it's a category of plots. If the Marvel Civil War is a ripoff of Rising Stars, then Rising Stars must be a ripoff of the way the police were always after Spider-Man back in the 70's, right? Rising Stars wasn't even about government controls; the government control of the super-kids was just a plot device in a different story.

Yeah, but will it be

[Ryz0r]

The Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny?

OK, that flash has been overused recently, but Hero vs Hero? I couldnt resist!

Future issues with issues

[nizo]

...Guantanamo-like prison camp for superheroes...

I just know the issue where they make all the superheroes pile into a giant naked pyramid will be a big hit.

Re:Future issues with issues

[i am kman]

Too late - Drawn Together does that pretty much every week. And they forced the superheros to wear women's panties on their heads. But, then again, that did make Superman cry.

Re:Future issues with issues

[Distinguished Hero]

You're thinking of "Abu Gharib." I don't believe there to be any hard evidence that prisoners are mistreated at Guantanamo; the greatest complaint is that they are tried before a military tribunal instead of a civilian one (could be wrong, I hardly follow the issue).

Re:Future issues with issues

[killjoe]

"I don't believe there to be any hard evidence that prisoners are mistreated at Guantanamo;"

I don't know what you mean by "hard" evidence but we know for sure people have been waterboarded there and that's classified as torture. People have also been subjected to food and sleep deprivation, extremes of temprature, and being strapped in uncomfortable positions for extended periods in specially built devices. Finally people have been injected with various drugs.

Those have all been admitted to by the military itself. Not just allegations by prisoners. The military feels like those actions are not torture. But they again the military also feels like these human beings do not deserve all the rights specified under the UN human rights charter or the geneva conventions.

"the greatest complaint is that they are tried before a military tribunal instead of a civilian one (could be wrong, I hardly follow the issue)."

No the greatest complaint is that people have been severly tortured for extended periods of time. Those complaints are from people who were eventually let go. Perhaps you should follow the issue more closely. It's your country after all and you are somewhat responsible for what it does.

Having said that who know what's going there? It's not like any of us are allowed visits and even the red cross has to ask permission and schedule a visit. Nobody is stupid enough to torture people in front of visiting congressmen and red cross. They probably clean up for those visits.

Finally when the red cross asked to interview prisoners privately they were refused. The military would not allow it. Take that for what it's worth. I remember Saddam didn't want his scientists interviewed privately by the weapons inspectors before the war too.

Re:Future issues with issues

[Kadmos]

I don't believe there to be any hard evidence that prisoners are mistreated at Guantanamo

You don't believe your own government? Well that is very understandable.

Re:Future issues with issues

[thealsir]

Since superman wears panties already, I don't see why they needed ladies for him

Re:Future issues with issues

[damgx]

I don't believe there to be any hard evidence that prisoners are mistreated at Guantanamo

So it is okay, to strip people of all rights?
If the USA does not want to follow the Geneva Convention, then they (the prisoners) should have the same rights as American citisens. (They are either soldiers or 'normal' criminals make up your mind).

Fysical abuse is only one aspect. Not knowing what you are being accused of and for how long you need to be locked up, is to me atleast very wrong. This is the same elements as in torture.

I hope people don't just forget how the US act, and even these people should not just be "out of sight - out of mind".

Two wrongs does not make a right...

Re:Future issues with issues

[PostItNote]

You don't get it both ways. They are either soldiers, or they are criminals. If they are criminals, then they get trials in front of a judge. If they are soldiers, then they get POW status and Geneva Convention protection. There ain't no third category except in the minds of people who want to establish a class of subhumans that have not been endowed by their creator with any inherent and inalienable rights; (among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness).

Re:Future issues with issues

[Anonymous Coward]

They are either innocent, POWs, or criminals.

If they are innocent, we violate basic morality by torturing them.
If they are POWs, we violate treaties by torturing them.
If they are criminals (even noncitizens), it is unconstitutional to torture them.

As for the whole "nuke about to go off" torture scenario: That's what a presidential pardon is for, so you let's not pretend it justifies systematic government-sponsored torture.

--Guy without a slashdot account
Defunct blog: http://deltanin.blogspot.com/

Re:Future issues with issues

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, what ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? How are we to know that these people in Guantanamo are actually guilty if there's no fair and public trial?

Re:Future issues with issues

[SEAL]

Good lord, aside from the drug-injection allegation, some of the things you listed are positively cozy compared to special forces training. Not just in the U.S. but in many nations. The problem is that everyone has their own definition of torture.

I'd really like to see a link where the U.S. military said they were injecting Guantanamo Bay inmates with drugs for any purpose other than medical attention.

Working against the U.S. administration is the current debate about whether interrogation guidelines should remain classified. I can see both sides of the argument on that one.

Now what I don't agree with is prisoners being held in a legal-limbo for years without trial. As someone else said, they are either foreign soldiers who should be treated as POWs, or they are foreign criminals. If they are the latter, ok they may not have Constitutional rights that an American would have, but they should at least be extradited to their home countries, or prosecuted in the U.S. civilian system as a foreign national.

Re:Future issues with issues

[Millenniumman]

Innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply to POWs. If they are captured while shooting at American soldiers in an occupied country, then they are prisoners of war.

Re:Future issues with issues

[Watson Ladd]

But they have rights. Like food, medical attention, and no waterboarding. And you release them after the war is over.

Re:Future issues with issues

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn straight. Okay, let's leave aside the fact that torture rarely gets you anything besides false information, made up on the spot to end the torture. (Yeah, it works on TV, because TV editors are lazy, and good interrogation techniques are boring. Good-cop/bad-cop is probably the most dramatic, and it's done to death on cop shows, so....)
  The "nuke about to go off" argument always seemed like a dishonest contrivance to me, and the people who always bring it up make me VERY nervous.
  Think about it this way: I'm sure you could make up some crazy-ass scenario where you just HAD to expose yourself to a classroom full of children or else people were going to die, but if you're really pushing that story and arguing for your legal right to drop trou in front of the kiddies, we're gonna start to suspect you're not really in it for the whole saving-lives part, are you?

  Incidentally, most of the torture techniques we are using were not even designed for extracting information at all! They're an ad-hoc assortment of KGB and Gestapo* techniques, nearly all of which were primarily used to break down a person's psyche, so that false confessions could be extracted from captured soldiers. These were not for finding out where the bomb is, they were strictly for propaganda films!

  * Temperature modification was one of the Gestapo's favorites. You know: the "Playin' with th' thermostat, HAW! HAW!" style fraternity hijinks, according to the torture apologists. Yeah. Try being naked, chained to the floor, as you repeatedly go from sweating profusely, to feeling that sweat begin to freeze on your skin, over and over, for a few days. I'm sure the old Chinese Water Torture was "practically cozy" too! After all, it's not they was a-beatin' on ya!

Re:Future issues with issues

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

Documented in an Army Inspector General's report obtained by Salon. Here's a link to the official report (sorry, PDF).

If the methods used at Guantanamo disturbed the FBI agents who visited (another source of problem reports early on), then the rest of us should be disturbed too.

Re:Future issues with issues

[jasonditz]

Shame on you, you forgot the forced feedings with "extra-wide" tubes.

Re:Future issues with issues

[killjoe]

"Good lord, aside from the drug-injection allegation, some of the things you listed are positively cozy compared to special forces training."

I hope you are not telling me it's OK for the army to abduct me and force me to go through the special forces training.

"Not just in the U.S. but in many nations. The problem is that everyone has their own definition of torture."

Sure. The UN has defined torture in one way, the US laws have defined torture one way, this administration has defined torture another way. It's gotten to the stage where nobody can accuse anybody of torture anymore. If accused you simply re-define torture and claim you are fine.

"I'd really like to see a link where the U.S. military said they were injecting Guantanamo Bay inmates with drugs for any purpose other than medical attention."

The intelligence agencies have lots of drugs they inject people in order to get them to tell the truth. Many of these are opiates or hallucinegens of some sort. They are top secret though so outside of the military I don't think anybody has done analysis on them.

". If they are the latter, ok they may not have Constitutional rights that an American would have"

I agree with your there. I also would add that they are human beings and should be treated as human beings and according the universal declaration of human rights as defined by the UN. No matter how vile they are still humans and are thus endowed by their creator with certain inailable rights.

Re:Future issues with issues

[Photon Ghoul]

Would mod you up if I could, though I don't like the fact that you play down torture because you feel you went through worse in training, though. Then again, I'm just a plain old citizen.

Re:Future issues with issues

[killjoe]

"Innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply to POWs. If they are captured while shooting at American soldiers in an occupied country, then they are prisoners of war."

What if you were not shooting at americans? What if you were a barber or a taxi driver or a baker?

Having said that I am all for treating these people as prisoners of war. That would improve their lot greatly.

Re:Future issues with issues

[killjoe]

How do you know they are terrorists? Because the president says so?

Also there have been many people released from guantanamo after two years of being there. Is the US releasing terrorists into afghanistan?

Re:Future issues with issues

[Anonymous Coward]

Reminds me of the Authority (I think) where they build a super prison to house the most harden super villains. or was that in the DC universe where Barda and (whatever his name in the mask who is a great escape artist) help build a super prison...ack..I forgot!!!

Re:Future issues with issues

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, why not?

It would fit right in with the whole homo-erotic comic book thing.

I know the first thing I would do if I ever woke up one morning with super powers. I'd go shopping for tights!

Not!

Re:Future issues with issues

[dynamo]

All the US military ever says publically is no comment.
I don't think you'll be getting the bulk of torture evidence from military press releases.

As for drugs being used for non-medical reasons, check into Sodium Thiopental and other places

Re:Future issues with issues

[avasol]

Cause he's a terrorist but he's okay, he works all night and he sleeps all day.

Cause he's a terrorist but he's okay, he works all night and he sleeps all day.

Re:Future issues with issues

[orthogonal]

I don't believe there to be any hard evidence that prisoners are mistreated at Guantanamo; the greatest complaint is that they are tried before a military tribunal instead of a civilian one (could be wrong, I hardly follow the issue).

Vladimir Bukovsky, an innocent Russian tortured by the Soviet Union's KGB:

The feeding pipe was thick, thicker than my nostril, and would not go in. Blood came gushing out of my nose and tears down my cheeks, but they kept pushing until the cartilages cracked. I guess I would have screamed if I could, but I could not with the pipe in my throat.

Khaled El-Masri, a innocent German citizen kidnapped and tortured by the CIA:

...I was beaten again and left in a small, dirty, cold concrete cell. I was extremely thirsty, but there was only a bottle of putrid water in the cell. I was refused fresh water.... They told me that I was now in a country with no laws, and did I understand what that meant?... In desperation, I began a hunger strike.... After 37 days without food, I was dragged to the interrogation room, where a feeding tube was forced through my nose into my stomach. I became extremely ill, suffering the worst pain of my life.

I grew up proud America stood in opposition to Soviet tortures. Are American kids growing up now supposed to take pride that American can be just as barbaric as the worst Stalinists?

Re:Future issues with issues

[Jedi Alec]

Good lord, aside from the drug-injection allegation, some of the things you listed are positively cozy compared to special forces training. Not just in the U.S. but in many nations. The problem is that everyone has their own definition of torture.

Ehmm, yeah sure. Did these guys sign up for this training? Do they get to drop out when they can't take it anymore?

Re:Future issues with issues

[mr100percent]

General Miller was sent from Guantanamo to oversee the Abu Ghraib prison system before the scandal hit; he was credited with finding ways of interrogation at Guantanamo and was asked to do the same at Abu Ghraib. Clearly there's a connection.

That's also along with 2 ex-Guantanamo employees who wrote books on their experiences, interviews with former Guantanamo detainees and FBI reports of abuse. Heck, the Department of Defense had to concede of instances of inappropriate actions like a female guard sitting on a detainee's lap and trying to stroke his hair, or throwing red ink on a man and telling him it was menstrual blood.

Re:Future issues with issues

[Dobeln]

Out-of-uniform enemy combattants have never had much protection, for the simple reason that protecting them would be stupid, in giving a huge advantage to those willing to flout the rules.

If the new NGO-driven interpretations of Geneva would force the US to recognize out-of-uniform combattants, the US would be better of just withdrawing from the treaty.

Re:Future issues with issues

[plumby]

However, many of the people in Guantanamo were not captured while shooting at American soldiers - most were turned over to the US by bounty hunters - people being paid rewards for every "suspect" that they delivered (according to the Pentagon only 5% of the prisoners were actually captured by US troops, whether in direct combat situations or not).

Re:Future issues with issues

[RenatoRam]

Except many of the prisoners (not only of those in Guantanamo) were kidnapped by the CIA around the world during *illegal* operations.

There is a trial going in italy because an egyptian citizen (Abu Omar, an imam in italy) has been kidnapped and brought to a secret prison in egypt with a so-called "rendition flight". He was tortured on behalf of the usa's administration.

There are a number of this kind of "prisons" around the world, in coutries friendly to the usa, and you can bet they do not respect human rights there.

Re:Future issues with issues

[ConceptJunkie]

Not to defend everything the military has done, because I agree that some of it is plain wrong, but the Geneva Conventions definitely do not apply.

Re:Future issues with issues

[Johnny5000]

Is the US releasing terrorists into afghanistan?

If they weren't terrorists before, maybe they will be now that they have a bone to pick with the US. Being imprisoned and tortured for a few years might leave you with a bit of a grudge.

Re:Future issues with issues

[elrous0]

That episode where they gave them all the Ebola virus as part of the house challenge was going too far. I mean, I don't watch TV for a bunch of science stuff about developing an "anti-virus." They must have went at least 35 seconds without an explosion to entertain me.

-Eric

Re:Future issues with issues

[elrous0]

he Geneva Conventions definitely do not apply

The next time we're at war with a REAL country, they might just say the same thing about the Americans they capture.

May as well throw them in the damn trash.

-Eric

Re:Future issues with issues

[gedhrel]

The Geneva Conventions _always_ apply. What may be open for debate is whether POW status applies; in that instance, the prisoners should have their status determined by competant tribunal as soon as possible. Until their status is determined, they are eligilbe for treatment as POWs. Afterwards, they may be treated as criminals according to criminal law if they are determined to not be POWs.

This is all pretty clear. What the US is doing is in direct contravention.

Re:Future issues with issues

[21st Century Peon]

It was Kingdom Come, by Mark Waid & Alex Ross, and It was Scott Free, AKA Mister Miracle.

Re:Future issues with issues

[N1EY]

Are we going to pretend camps such as Gitmo have not existed previously? Why doesn't someone make some comparisons to the legal context of the DP camps after World War II and the imprisonment of many German officers and soldiers for long periods before they even received a trial? They were fighting in uniform! I look at the situation as a return to the 1940's and the 1950's after decades of weakening Presidential power. We've just returned to the FDR regime, and it isn't new. So can someone explain how the law changed in the meantime? I would love to know. If you think that I'm joking, then just remember that most people couldn't take pictures of much their surroundings during the 40's due to secrecy and security. bill www.N1EY.com

Re:Future issues with issues

[ConceptJunkie]

You're right, I was not describing it well. The Geneva Conventions regarding _POWs_ does not apply.

Nevertheless, I do not and cannot defend some of the things the U.S. is doing to these prisoners, although it pales in comparison to what many countries will do (not that that's an excuse - the same can be said about the Spanish Inquisition, that it was mild compared to secular governments at the time, but that doesn't make everything they did OK). By the same token, the sensitivity we have shown towards Muslim prisoners is actually being exploited against us. All this crap about us flushing the Koran just chafes by butt. First, does anyone use a toilet? How do you flush a book! Second, this kind of stuff happens regularly to Bibles, and while Christians are willing to acknowledge the difference between the Word and what the Word is printed on, no one seems to worry about it. After all, someone drawing a cartoon mocking Mohammed and half of Europe is in flames (OK, I'm exaggerating), but blasphemous picture of Jesus are not only common, but are considered protected speech, probably because Christians don't riot every time someone offends them. (I'm not saying Christians are perfect, there are plenty of bad Christians too).

The U.S. made a big mistake by taking the moral high ground and not comporting itself in a flawless way. Of course, by taking the moral high ground, we can be 100 times better than our enemies regarding human rights (which is probably about accurate on the whole), but we will still get crap about it. Although in this case, some of the "crap" is justified.

Re:Future issues with issues

[readin]

Heck, the Department of Defense had to concede of instances of inappropriate actions like a female guard sitting on a detainee's lap and trying to stroke his hair,

Are you nuts announcing that here!? Pretty soon they'll be thousands of slashdotter's fighting US troops in Afghanistan just so they can be sent to Guantanamo!

Re:Future issues with issues

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't get it, do you, you fuckin pinko?

These are not Americans. These are foreign scum. They are not human. They are there for us to blow away.

How will you feel when your wife and daughter are raped in front of your eyes by an invading Somali army because you were too squeamish to torture some low-life to death?

If we are to maintain our standard of living we'll have to kill everyone in the world who disagrees with us, so we'd better start as soon as possible. The Chinese are already breeding faster than we can make bullets. If torturing all the Middle East to death saves one American that makes it all right in my book!

Gitmo-like?

[Anonymous Coward]

What you, the poster, or any Slashdot editor actually knows about Gitmo would fill a thimble with room left over for an elephant.

What they'll try to pass off as fact about Gitmo is actually what comes out of the elephant.

Have a nice day in the USA, parlor-boys.

Human WMD?

[Oldsmobile]

Human WMD?

Is that what the dirty bomber is?

Re:Human WMD?

[KrayzieKyd]

To be fair, and correct for that matter, post-humans, otherwise known as "super heroes" are not being asked to register as "Human WMD's." They are being asked to register as law abiding crime fighters so someone can be held accountable for destruction of public property and life. I won't get into my views on it, since I am an avid comic book reader and highly invested in Civil War, but don't write an article about it if you don't know ABSOLUTELY EVEYRTHING about the subject. 'nuff said.

Re:Human WMD?

[surelyserious]

if you don't know ABSOLUTELY EVEYRTHING about the subject.

Superheroes(TM) are brands.

Superheroes have always been in worse positions than any of us, because superheroes are unable to live for themselves. They are unable to shit, to fuck, to hurt, to die. Not even imaginably.

Superpowers exist to alleviate misery. And right now, with even superheroes defending themselves from the exact same attacks all of us regular ol' non-heroes are defending ourselves against - cowardice, fighting, and rampantly betraying our own kinds - each of us is in the same boat as Wolverine, Spiderman, Mr. Fantastic, Iron Man, and even...Captain America!!!, it is time for the wheels to turn again.

Not back to September 10th, 2001 (a fine day!), but forward to a future where those of us who choose to live freely and happily can do so without detriment to any others.

But, sorry, having the good guys become bad guys who are after the good guys who are now the bad guys is only making matters worse.

I read comics because I believe in hope, and the possibilities, and power of having dreams. Marvel and DC make comics because they want us to sell out those dreams for expensive books, unimaginative storylines, and cheap headlines.

Trademark the concept superhero? Impossible.

How so?

Because my soul is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 License.

Nuff said(TM)?

In classic comic tradition

[i am kman]

Kudos to Marvel!

Comics in general and Marvel in particular have had a long tradition in embracing social issues - witness the classic Marvel comic series that decried on McCarthyism. This one is interesting because they aren't really taking sides.

Of course, many cartoons these days are overtly political (Southpark, American Dad, Boondocks) - at least Marvel tries hard to let the readers make up their own minds and explore the issue themselves.

Re:In classic comic tradition

[subgrappler]

now lets see "Hulk vs DRM" imagine how pissed he would be when he finds out his music player only supports atrac.

Re:In classic comic tradition

[mblase]

Comics in general and Marvel in particular have had a long tradition in embracing social issues - witness the classic Marvel comic series that decried on McCarthyism. This one is interesting because they aren't really taking sides.

Let's not delude ourselves here. "Civil War" is just another excuse for Marvel to have half its comic heroes beating up the other half in classic tried-and-true summer crossover fashion.

Yesterday, Marvel Comics released the first in its miniseries Civil War, which can only be described as a gutsy comic-book series focusing on the whole debate over homeland security and tighter government controls in the name of public safety.

The "whole debate" is over a new version of the Mutant Registration Act, which has been a mainstay of X-Men plotlines since the late 1970s. The first "X-Men" movie revolved around it. The only difference this time is that the rest of the Marvel Universe is getting in on the debate, and they only reason they're doing that is because comic books don't sell well enough for Marvel to segregate their mega-crossovers into X-Men, Avengers, and Spider-Man universes anymore.

I think it'll be a story to watch, but let's not have any misconceptions that this is something radical and different for them.

lol, wut?

[voice_of_all_reason]

Superheroes are ordered to register as human WMDs

Or what? They'll arrest them? Superheroes are used to fighting other super-beings. If pissed off, how many puny humans could they kill before getting taken down?

This could turn out to be made of Win and Good after all.

Re:lol, wut?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's when they send the gubmint freaks after them, you know the ones, all of the other human WMDs that DID register?

Re:lol, wut?

[Firethorn]

For that matter, what effect would 'registration' have? How would having a list of 'Human WMDs' enhance your safety? It's like a gun registry. It only helps you when you feel the need to collect them from the law-abiding group who registered them according to the laws. The criminals aren't going to tell you about them. Besides, if you know enough to go after them for being a unregistered WMD, can't the government note that down in the list that way?

GURPs superheroes had a service where you could register your paranormal powers at an agency. If a situation came up that you'd be useful for, you could be called up and hired as a temporary contractor for extremely good money.

Do you have the ability to shrink down to 6" while retaining your normal strength? Well, Timmy fell down this well...

Re:lol, wut?

[deadsquid]

No, no, no. They'll sue them for copyright infringement because "superhero" is taken. "WMD" is not.

Re:lol, wut?

[GreyKnight]

Superheroes are ordered to register as human WMDs

Or what? They'll arrest them? Superheroes are used to fighting other super-beings. If pissed off, how many puny humans could they kill before getting taken down?

Sonuds like you haven't been watching Justice League Unlimited. A government agency with sufficient resources can indeed make itself a threat to superheroes...

Re:lol, wut?

[Anonymous Coward]

Question 42: Your weakness is

a) kryptonite
b) low fuel
c) daylight
d) lack of head armor
e) other: _______

Question 43: Your "secret" identity is...

Re:lol, wut?

[Kelson]

Or what? They'll arrest them? Superheroes are used to fighting other super-beings.

Exactly.

The ones who agree to work with the government are now authorized -- perhaps even obligated -- to take down those who don't.

Re:lol, wut?

[voice_of_all_reason]

Hmm, interesting turn. Sounds kinda like the Alex Ross series Kingdom Come, and I really liked that.

Re:lol, wut?

[BaseSequence]

Hulk Smash!

Re:lol, wut?

[Locke2005]

Ok, take a deep breath...

Now repeat over and over to yourself "Superheroes are fictional characters. They do whatever they're authors imagine they should do. They are under no obligation to obey the laws of physics, let alone do what I imagine they should do." Keep repeating this mantra until you no longer feel the need to speculate about how superheros would be behave if they were real and not fictional.

Getting laid may also help. In fact, in your case, I think it would help a lot.

Re:lol, wut?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or what? They'll arrest them? Superheroes are used to fighting other super-beings. If pissed off, how many puny humans could they kill before getting taken down?

Judging by the types of laws currently being passed, presumably Superheroes would need to declare their vulnerability or vulnerabilities and submit to having those tested in order for their registration to be accepted.

Re:lol, wut?

[ZenKen]

Register... wait. Wasn't that a big part of Rising Stars? Chuck Norris should also register his feet.

Re:lol, wut?

[hey!]

Or what? They'll arrest them? Superheroes are used to fighting other super-beings. If pissed off, how many puny humans could they kill before getting taken down?

Even a physically invulnerable person has vulnerabilities, provided they have some kind of internal narrative that includes (a) the future and (b) other people.

In other words, if you want to get at Superman, you go after Lois Lane.

Re:lol, wut?

[voice_of_all_reason]

In other words, if you want to get at Superman, you go after Lois Lane.

That's just going to piss him off even more. Remember the Green Lantern? Killing his wife worked out reeaal well.

Re:lol, wut?

[IWantMoreSpamPlease]

Read "For those who walk in darkness" to find out what happens when meta-normals refuse to register.

Excellent reading (just ignore the cartoon based off the book)

Re:lol, wut?

[Anonymous Coward]

Guns are registered so, when a criminal is caught with a gun, the police know who legitimately had it last.

Then, they bring charges against that person for failing to watch their gun, or the owner of the gun shop for selling guns to criminals.

Stan shold retire

[Joiseybill]

Damn - from the guy who gave us SpiderMan /Venom , X-Men and countless original storylines

We now get reality TV http://www.whowantstobeasuperhero.tv/ and storylines already beaten to death by Slashdot.

What's next - will Tony Stark release Iron Man's suit code under GPL?

feh

Re:Stan shold retire

[nametaken]

What's next - will Tony Stark release Iron Man's suit code under GPL?

Oh hell yeah.

Kidding aside, I'm just having a problem with the notion of equating terrorists with the heros I grew up loving.

Re:Stan shold retire

[Big Nemo '60]

Kidding aside, I'm just having a problem with the notion of equating terrorists with the heros I grew up loving.

When I was a kid, my favourite novel was about a guy who financed insurrections around the world, while cruising the oceans and sinking battleships with his submarine.

Maybe you have read it too. The title is '20.000 Leagues Under The Sea', by some French guy named Jules Verne...

Re:Stan shold retire

[nametaken]

He was not one of my heros.

Superheroes always do The Right Thing(tm)

[necro2607]

"In Civil War, hero is pitted against hero in the choice of whether or not to side with the government, [...] as Superheroes are ordered to register as human WMDs or be branded fugitives."

Of course, we all know they'll do The Right Thing(tm).

No... I'm not cynical about all my favorite comics, movies etc. being ruined by politically-correct mediocrity... ;)

Re:Superheroes always do The Right Thing(tm)

[2nd Post!]

What about Captain America as The Nomad and The Captain? He's currently signed up as the anti-registration faction leader, too.

Are you doing a jack nicholson impression?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is this your way of saying "You can't handle the truth"?

Hollywood did it better.

Hardly brilliant.

[Distinguished Hero]

From TFA: "In the first issue of Civil War, he brilliantly folds an entire dissertation on security into one succinct dialogue bubble by saying: "Don't play politics with me, lady. Superheroes need to stay above that stuff or Washington starts telling us who the supervillains are."

I would hardly call those two sentences brilliant, or even succinct for that matter. In fact, the third sentence does not even seem grammatically correct (though I could be wrong; English is my third language).

Re:Hardly brilliant.

[vertinox]

I would hardly call those two sentences brilliant, or even succinct for that matter. In fact, the third sentence does not even seem grammatically correct (though I could be wrong; English is my third language).

When you can crush a man with your pinky finger or shoot lasers from your eyes... No one is going to tell you what they think your grammar skills.

Re:Hardly brilliant.

[Asim]

I would hardly call those two sentences brilliant, or even succinct for that matter. In fact, the third sentence does not even seem grammatically correct

I've seen that segment of the comic on an online forum. Suffice to say that text is NOT verbatim.

Re:Hardly brilliant.

[Anonymous Coward]

Regardless, you have to take into account the spirit in which he said it.

In earlier comics, Captain America has said that he doesn't fight for the country, he fights for the idea. That America can be better, can inspire, etc etc. In that particular section of the comic, he's asked what his stance on the registration act is - and when he starts leaning towards being against it (and saying what was previously quoted) - they bring out a bunch of guys with guns. Hardly a good idea when you know that the guy you're going up against has been around since WW2 fighting guys a lot tougher than SHIELD operatives.

Anyway, my point is that I agreed with what Captain America said. Super Heroes need the extra leeway to fight - if you started saying that 'Super Heroes must only fight a villain in Fight Area A' - then any chance of small to large crime types being stopped would be thrown to the wolves! How can you stop someone selling crack to school children when you're not allowed to step into the zone they're in?

I remember when DC called it...

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember when DC called it 'Kingdom Come'.

Re:I remember when DC called it...

[Goldrush]

Kingdom Come was the other extreme. The "metas" policed themselves, leaving the government and the rest of humanity out completely.

Right subjects, wrong audience

[Anonymous Coward]

All very good, but enlightening a generation far too young to do anything. In another 15 years kids who experience political intelligence and develop the ability to weigh up complex social debates will be able to make a difference to the world. If one still exists. The problem is not our children, its the fucking clueless, apathetic, greedy and lazy adults that grew up on a diet of might-is-right Hollywood poison for the last two decades. How do you re-educate people who live in denial while other peoples kids are bombed with depleted uranium so they can drive their fat ass around in a gas guzzling SUV?

Re:Right subjects, wrong audience

[RobotRunAmok]

All very good, but enlightening a generation far too young to do anything.

Uh huh. And what would you say is the target demographic -- and the average age -- of today's comic book reader?

(Hint: Your first guess is wrong.)

Re:Right subjects, wrong audience

[zakezuke]

Uh huh. And what would you say is the target demographic -- and the average age -- of today's comic book reader?

Why don't you tell us? I for one have no clue. I sort of understand the 80s were a silver age of comics, which would sugest that anyone who liked them then and still buys them would be in their mid 30s. But I don't have a clue... to me a comic book was something one bought as a kid as light reading on a long road trip... while certainly entertaining in order to get a full story one had to buy them monthly at 75cent to 1.50 a pop... when it was generally easier to wait until the TV show and hear others complain about how the comic book was better.

Perhaps i'm one of the few people on Slashdot who wasn't into comics, so please, enlighten us.

Re:Right subjects, wrong audience

[StikyPad]

I'm guessing it's the same demographic that's already largely aware of current events, at least insomuch as there seems to be a large overlap between /. readers and comic readers.

no no no

[Lehk228]

at gitmo they pee on the koran

This is the best article you got Slashdot?

[Anonymous Coward]

shutdown /t:0

Re:Human WMD -- wrong story

[www.sorehands.com]

The dirty bomber is "The Spleen" from the movie Mystery Men.

Pull my finger.

Um...

[Spy der Mann]

From TFA:

There is, for instance, one accident where a group of novice superheroes gets in over its head, leading to the death of a schoolyard full of children.

The politicians are concerned about public safety. So Congress passes a bill forcing all superheroes to register with the government as human weapons of mass destruction, and to work, in effect, for Washington. Superheroes who don't comply will themselves be branded fugitives.

Geez, weren't the X-men already hiding from the government for being dangerous?

Try something more intelligent, people. Talk about the ISPs snooping on you, about the RIAA lobbying the congress, about the Patriot Act, DRM, DMCA and all that stuff that's being shoved down our throats.

But do it in the near future, present a fear-driven country, where all civil liberties are ALREADY lost. We want to see people being arrested for having analog TV's! For copying music in authorized formats! For using encryption in their e-mails! We want Big Brother! (in the comics, that is)

Re:Um...

[wpegden]

We want to see people being arrested for ... using encryption in their e-mails!

How about a comic book about France (not the getting arrested part, of course, just the illegality....)? This stuff isn't as far off as some think...

Re:Um...

[Anonymous Coward]

"But do it in the near future, present a fear-driven country, where all civil liberties are ALREADY lost."

What like tomorrow? Your civil liberties have been lost, this is a fear driven country. Don't believe me? Then why is our right to use mass transit controled by what our current "Threat-Level" is?

Re:Um...

[Anonymous Coward]

Max Headroom (the US-produced version of the series) had a couple of gems like this. In one episode, Edison Carter is framed for credit fraud, which is worse than murder. In another, they note that a "blank" (person without proper government-provided identity number) has a television with an off switch, which is illegal.

Re:Um...

[Anonymous Coward]

But do it in the near future, present a fear-driven country, where all civil liberties are ALREADY lost.

Maybe a generation ago, there would have been a point to that. But these days, most people lack the foresight to make the connection between that potential future and the actions of today's politicians.

Re:Um...

[wjeff]

I don't know why you posted anonymous, that was probably one of the most intelligent things I have ever seen posted on slashdot.

Re:Um...

[pseudochaotic]

Ah, slashdot. Where your pet issues are the only important, meaningful ones.

Re:Um...

[Anonymous Coward]

perfect. well done, sir... i was going to reply, but it had already been said.

Re:Um...

[argStyopa]

...and so goes the hyperbole-driven debate, where it's much easier to scream shrilly than to engage in any sort of rational discussion. I mean, it's the internet, so why not? We're both anonymous, so what use is consensus? Anonymity means no consequences for anything we say. It's not like we have to live together, right?

But that's the problem, isn't it? No matter what nom de plume we spew invective under, it affects our perceptions and, if we're successful, persuasive writers, it affects the perceptions of others.

So then we (believe that we) leave our 'internet personas' behind, get up from the computer and enter the social arena of daily life. But we're laden with anger and angst from the unresolved (and unresolveable) hate-filled discussions we participate in, and think that somehow that doesn't taint our everyday social conduct? Our perceptions?

I know you're postulating a "near" future, but let's be absolutely honest. As much as I despise the whores in Congress and lobbyist(s) du jour in the legislative equivalent of bukkake, people will manage to operate around stupid laws and legislators. We haven't lost any civil rights (much less "all" in your near-future), George Bush is no more a fascist than Kerry or Gore were communists. The FBI isn't even looking at library-loan records, and if the NSA is recording my international phone calls, what do I (really) care?

Is this a fear-driven country? Perhaps. But I find it telling that one person's "irrational" fear (The "War" on Terror, WMDs in Iraq, etc.) is someone else's absolutely CERTAIN "impending catastrophe" (Global Warming, DDT, Bird Flu, etc.). Face it - the media is in business to get and hold your attention so they can sell your eyes to their customers, the advertisers. Fear has a wonderful ability to focus one's attention, so they use that. The Right Wing extremists use one set of fear iconography, the Left uses another.

Neither are valid, because they are both playing to the lunatic fringe.
But to swallow the red or blue kool-aide and expect that the world of the near future is going to be a horrible disaster seems like it almost invites itself to be self-fulfilling.

Re:Um...

[Anonymous Coward]

Seconded. The GP is perhaps the most concise statement of what is wrong with Slashdot that I've ever read on Slashdot.

Re:Um...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, let's ban him. Or at least torture him to find out where we can find more people like him...

It's true! Just ask Al Jazeera

[i am kman]

But Al Jazeera said prisoners were abused in Guantanamo, so it must be true!!

http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=8723 :)

(Added the ':)' in case any lunatics out there thought I was serious).

Re:It's true! Just ask Al Jazeera

[Photon Ghoul]

But Al Jazeera said prisoners were abused in Guantanamo, so it must be false!! :)

Re:Ren and Stimpy VS The Decider

[studyguidesystems]

George Bush Can't read.

Re:Ren and Stimpy VS The Decider

[lokiman]

Thus the comic book comment. I am sure he loves them funnies. Probably mostly reads ziggy or Family Circus though.

If they make them register

[MourningBlade]

...but even if they DO register as human WMDs will the government know where they are?

I am such a nerd

[way2trivial]

GENOSHA... search for that in relation to x-men.

Re:I am such a nerd

[Firethorn]

I remembered the name, but not the specifics. Quick google check fixed that.

I was thinking more along the lines of the Sentinels, personaly. Having a list of mutants would of made their job easier, but like with the gun registry, they'd be getting mostly the law-abiding mutants who meekly signed up because it was the law.

Whoever has HULK on their side would win H vs H

[Hulkster]

'Nuff said!

Re:Whoever has HULK on their side would win H vs H

[BrynM]

Not if Juggernaut or Blob is on the other side. Man I wanna see Blob, Juggy and Hulk throw down... from a distance... a big distance.

Re:Whoever has HULK on their side would win H vs H

[Bieeanda]

Of course, there's a reason why Planet Hulk is transpiring at the same time...

Re:Put down that comic and go to church.

[Anonymous Coward]

As fellow A.C., here's the truth:

Green Arrow, Oliver Queen the unpowered archer, can beat JEsus. He'll do one of those great Neil Adams poses, decry the lack of honesty of Jesus's followers, and then come the boxing glove arrows.

The ways GA is better then JEsus:

He died (actually Vaporized saving Metropolis) and came back.
He has a son. Who's a premier martial artist and archer.
He teams with everyone from Green Lantern, to the JLA to Batman.
He has raised two orphans.
He has a better beard.

Jesus Green Arrow.

Face it.

Was already wondering when this is gonna come

[Opportunist]

I mean, think about it. Some guy with super powers that could bag any government agency including its agents anytime and twice on Sunday, and he's still allowed to have a secret identity, lead a normal life and only put on his spandex to hunt down some bad guys?

In reality, he'd have been approached by the feds ages ago and offered the choice to either work for them or, more likely, some dirt would've been dumped on him to have the media label him the greatest threat to humanity since Saddam, then he'd been hunted down 'til he's dead.

Face it. Government does NOT like power that isn't in its hands and under its control.

Re:Was already wondering when this is gonna come

[Nerd_52637]

some dirt would've been dumped on him to have the media label him the greatest threat to humanity since Saddam

That would only work until the real villian reveals himself in a big climactic ending and the superhero saves the day in public and then everybody loves him again.

At least that's how it always happens for Spiderman...

Re:Was already wondering when this is gonna come

[Anonymous Coward]

Two comics that are similar but explore something else are...(from the top of my head)

Secret Identity (DC Comics) about a boy growing up with the name Clark Kent, but in our reality instead. He gets made fun of and shit, then one day a meteor gives him near Superman like powers (not quite invulnerable). Despite he's doing all he can to help, he gets attacked by the US gov (feds) and even captured once. A bit of a sappy/happy ending, but explores US reaction..

Marvel comics releases a comic book hero called Hyperion in a world w/o superheroes (vol 1 is Contact). A ship lands and there are a few people who are granted with superpower, but most significant is a baby boy discovered by an old farm couple...who quickly at gunpoint hand over the children to the US government to raise as any good old apple pie American.

Re:Was already wondering when this is gonna come

[Opportunist]

In reality, the cops would probably be shooting at Spiderman instead of the villain, then blame Spidey for the villain's existance.

Nobody may save the day except for the authorized security forces. For the simple reason that if one man can save the day, and he decides to run for any political office, he has it. Hands down. I know, Schwarzenegger is a bad example, he would have won against Davis even without his popularity, but it sure as hell helped him into office.

Now replace a fiction hero with a real one. Which politician could hold his office against him?

Re:Was already wondering when this is gonna come

[Anonymous Coward]

Government does NOT like power that isn't in its hands and under its control.

That's only natural. Government is, after all, defined as the organization holding the unique "right" to employ coercion (to initiate force) as its business model. The keyword here is unique, meaning they hold a monopoly over that "right". There is absolutely no room for competition -- if there was competition for this "right", you'd call them warlords or militant groups instead of "government".

This is the only objective, unambiguous, non-arbitrary way to define government -- the only definition that applies to every government that has ever existed and any government that could ever exist.

CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[Anonymous Coward]

As a card-carrying member of Amnesty International (AI), I was shocked when AI accused Washington of running a Soviet-style gulag. I burned my AI membership card and flushed the ashes down the toilet. After all, AI could not provide any evidence supporting the outrageous claims, and using hyperbole to support human rights damages AI's credibility and the ultimate mission of rescuing victims of brutal (often Chinese) human-rights abuses.

Then, last month, I read about the stunning news report by the "Washington Post". It reported on CIA-gate: the CIA, with the full approval of the president, has been running a network of secret prisons where enemies of the American nation are interrogated. Although this network is nowhere near the status of the Soviet gulag, the network does put tremendous credibility in the original accusations by AI.

At times like these, we need a Captain America to fight for truth, justice, and Western values. A network of secret prisons grossly violates the most sacred of Western values.

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[FLEB]

At times like these, we need a Captain America to fight for truth, justice, and Western values.

As well as a plunger and some Scotch tape.

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[Maserati]

And somebody who's really good at pointing at genitalia.

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[Wyatt Earp]

Of course though secret prisons/cell-blocks/wings for intelligence work have been used for about as long as there have been Nation-States and Intelligence operations, so what the CIA is doing isn't anything really new except for the fact that they shuffle people around in other countries.

When one operates as a spy or irregular military operative traditionally they don't have near the same rights or protections as a uniformed military or diplomatic operative. But now things are different in terms of the media and the general public's mind as to how these people are treated while the actual treatment of said operatives continues on as it has in times of war for hundreds of years.

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[Anonymous Coward]

When one operates as a spy or irregular military operative traditionally they don't have near the same rights or protections as a uniformed military or diplomatic operative.

Ummm... the rest of your post almost seemed to be saying that the spies had a right to imprison people indefinitely without trial, but here you say that they have fewer rights rather than more. Which is it? Or do you think the government in general can legally lock someone up indefinitely on the basis of an accusation that needn't even be made publicly?

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[Travoltus]

What he is saying is that he is okay with people being accused of being spies and then treated as non-humans without any evidence to back up those accusa

er,

wait, isn't that what police states do?

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[Anonymous Coward]

Captain Canuck has been sitting back and watching it all unfold with a sort of morbid fascination. Captain America in the mean time is toying with moving North -- he always did enjoy blasting down a large snow covered hill on that shield when nobody was looking.

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[pla]

As a card-carrying member of Amnesty International (AI), I was shocked when AI accused Washington of running a Soviet-style gulag.

It surprises me that a "card-carrying member" of AI wouldn't already have heard the extensive proof of our network of secret prisons when the story finally hit the mainstream news... Indy media such as Democracy Now have covered the topic every few months since 2004!

One from November 2004, an interview with Stephen Gray...
July 2004 with Michael Posner...
June 2004 (just a brief unsubstantiated blurb on the topic).



Sadly, superheroes could tell the government to go pound sand - What could Bush do against Superman? But we mere normals have little choice in the matter. Please leave your DNA sample at the door and you'll receive your RealID card in two to six weeks as long as your name doesn't sound Middle-Eastern.


Now, if you want secret prison conspiracy theories - Google for "Rex 84".

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[Anonymous Coward]

I burned my AI membership card and flushed the ashes down the toilet.

And you did that to protest their extremism, did you?

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[Anonymous Coward]

No citizen, that is not what police states do.

Please come with us. We need to discuss your confusion at the Educational Camp for Misguided Terrorist Sympathizers. No, put the cell phone away: you don't need to call a lawyer.

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[dbatkins]

Scotch tape? My man, this calls for the allmighty "duck" tape.

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[TheGavster]

The CIA may do some damn distasteful things, but I have yet to hear *any* credible report that they round up people by the millions and work them slowly to death at labor camps. To compare the CIA to the tradgedy that was Stalin's reign is disrespectful to the millions who died because they inconvenienced him.

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[why-is-it]

I was shocked when AI accused Washington of running a Soviet-style gulag.

What, you had not heard of Guantanamo Bay or Abu Ghraib before?

Re:CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International

[why-is-it]

Well said!

marvel has some great writers

[blew_fantom]

with stories like 'x-tinction agenda' and 'god loves man kills', marvel has always been pretty edgy and had some good social commentary. and that's while they are still under the comics code! more and more writers are seeing comics as a viable medium to tell their story and i'm looking forward to more good quality stories in the future.

"Cape & Hammer" RPG

[Anonymous Coward]

In the "Universal Decay" rules that are used for the d20-variant "Dead Stars" universe, there is a section on using the rules for other genres. One of them is the "Cape & Hammer" super-hero setting. I was lucky enough to be in on one of the early playtests, and got to explore a world of super-heroes and politics run rampant.

The tone of the setting is that the super-hero world, having just recently recovered from the bad PR of the very first super-human being a nazi commando, is blamed for 9/11. The fact that they COULD have stopped it, but nobody DID stop it, is used as "evidence" that super-humans are all potential terrorists...if not ACTUAL terrorists.

When Bush is assassinated by a super-powered, and uncaptured, killer shortly after the passage of the Patriot Act, Chenney steps into the oval office. His first act is to spearhead legislation which removes minority protection from super-beings, and effectively places them all on probation. This essentially gives the nation the feeling that it is OK to express long-supressed intolerance towards super-beings, and nation-wide incidents of violence ensues.

One such incident, which occurs shortly after we bomb Bagdad and occupy the rubble, is the firebombing of Lodestone Construction Services in Pheonix, AZ. A construction company run by an 80-yr-old super-being trapped in the form of a rusted metal humanoid, since changng back would kill his frail heart. He employs several otehr lesser super-beings, who use their powers to assist in building construction. Fortunately for Lodestone, he is fireproof. Unfortunately for the rest of Pheonix, his employees..who were his surrogate familly...were not.

In a rage Lodestone breaks into the local TV station and takes the crew hostage. In accordance to his demands, they put him on national TV. He declares that, in memory of his lost loved ones, Pheonix is now independant from US authority and is declared a safe haven for all super-beings and those who respect thier individuality.

Then the lights go out in Pheonix, and everyplace within five miles of it. So do all electronic devices, as Lodestone supresses ALL circuit activity in the vicinity.

Over the next year of attempts to use old WWII-era technology to try and retake Pheonix (since nothing electrical works there after that night), it is discovered that Lodestone is not only fireproof but also anti-tank orund proof. And strong enough to use tanks like beach balls. There is even footage of him in action on the internet.

Now it is the year 2004. All super-beings have been declared "enemy combatants", and therefore have no civil rights, with the DHS being tasked with finding and "neutralizing" them. Pheonix is STILL under Lodestone's control, and is surrounded by a military cordon. Chenney, siting the succession of Pheonix and the ongoing troubles in the middle east with Iran invading Iraq to liberate it from the US, has suspended elections due to "national emergency concearns".

That is the setting, and DAMN it was fun!

We played DHS agents who secretly had super-powers, and were on the super-being task force...but tried to subvert the system from within ;)

Re:"Cape & Hammer" RPG

[Anonymous Coward]

Coooool.

What comic books are you freaking reading

[technoextreme]

f course, we all know they'll do The Right Thing(tm).

No... I'm not cynical about all my favorite comics, movies etc. being ruined by politically-correct mediocrity... ;)

Have you even read any comic books lately? Let me tell you what has just gone on recently. Batman has had his mind erased by other superheros because he found out that Zatanna was presured into erasing the minds of villians by other super heroes. I just read a comic book where Giant Man is an abusive @sshole and sprays his wife (Wasp) with bugspray when they got into a fight. He then essentally helps another world faction of heros to essentially invade the United States. (Almost confused this plot line in the Ultimate universe with the mentioned in the article.)

Will it get the sour taste of DK2 out of my brain?

[jpellino]

How long did we wait for the third installment of DK Strikes Again - all the time hearing that the delay had nothing to do with the concurrent events following September 11 - all to bizarre effect - something that could have been bigger and better than DK Returns and fell to the earth with a muffled thud.

Try Identity Crisis.

[technoextreme]

Try something more intelligent, people. Talk about the ISPs snooping on you, about the RIAA lobbying the congress, about the Patriot Act, DRM, DMCA and all that stuff that's being shoved down our throats. But do it in the near future, present a fear-driven country, where all civil liberties are ALREADY lost. We want to see people being arrested for having analog TV's! For copying music in authorized formats! For using encryption in their e-mails! We want Big Brother! (in the comics, that is)

Try reading Identity Crisis. It's close to what you are looking for. Essentially, the plot deals with how far the DC comic book heroes were willing to protect the people that they care for. While it isn't exactly an oppresive regime brought on by the likes superheroes it does deal with issues that aren't entirely black and white.

Comics and Politics

[peterfa]

My friend who's a major comic book buff once told me that he thinks the idea of Batman going after Usama bin Ladin was a bad idea. I was surprised at his comment since I thought it would be really interesting to see Batman go at it. My friends opinion was that a comic must be a good read for both children and adults and mixing political messages defeats that effect.

And someone mod'ed that "insightful".

[khasim]

Have you read the geneva conventions?

Yes. Many times.

They are being granted the "rights" given under the geneva conventions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Geneva_Conventi on to those who fight without uniform against civilian populations.

And you're linking to Wikipedia. How about just linking to the documents themselves?

http://www.genevaconventions.org/

The "rights" of terrorists include the right to be killed like the barbarians they are.

You won't find that stated as such in there.

What you will find is that ... if you do not meet the qualifications to be a POW, you are a "civilian" and must be turned over to the local authorities for any crimes you may have committed.

If the local authorities do not exist, you may be held until they are established.

Other than that, you have all the same rights and protections that a POW has, except for things like getting paid.

The military is not allowed to torture anyone it captures. Regardless of their past actions.

Re:And someone mod'ed that "insightful".

[bkirkby]

actually, there is a third category of persons beyond "lawful enemy combatant" and "citizen". that is the "unlawful enemy combatant". this is a special case where the person was engaged in hostile war actions against the enemy, but does not meet the requirments of being a POW (because they engaged in military acts unlawfully as defined by article 4 of geneva convention iii).

they aern't civliians because they engaged in war acts and they aren't awarded geneva protections as a POW because they didn't meet the standard defined in the geneva convention (specifically, they fought like terrorists).

article 5 of GC iii decalres that if the status of an individual is in question (i.e. not a lawful enemy combatant and not a civilian), then they are to be treated with accord to the geneva convention until a competent tribunal declares their status.

what tribunal would that be? well, a military tribunal that is run by the commander of the enemy armed forces.

in the case of gitmo detainees, they have their tribunal and they are declared by Bush (the leader of the US armed forces) to be "unlawful enemy combatants", which is a class defined by US precedent (ex parte quirin) that is neither a civilian or a lawful prisoner of war.

there are those who would claim that "unlawful enemy combatant" doesn't really exist because the geneva convention doesn't define it ignore an important and relevant point that the geneva convention (in article 4 of GCiii) defines in painstaking detail what a lawful enemy combatant would be.

if it was as simple as "those who engage in the war are lawful enemy combatants and all others are civilians", then why didn't the geneva convention state that? the obvious reason is because it would be ridiculous. the naive interpretation of the geneva convention would have us going into afghanistan to get al-queda, but when we caputre a terrorist, we would need to turn them over TO al-queda for prosecution because they don't fit the narrow definition of a lawful enemy combatant.

the fact that the geneva convention does take painstaking detail to describe teh types of persons who are qualified to be treated with the rights of the geneva convention, implies the existence of unlawful enemy combatants. us supreme court precedent then confirms that implication (search for ex parte quirin).

Re:And someone mod'ed that "insightful".

[Pseudonym]

in the case of gitmo detainees, they have their tribunal

The first tribunal was held in November 2004, a full three years after the first detainees were captured. (To be fair, the tribunals were delayed by about four months due to their legal statis being challenged in the US courts.)

The Geneva Convention doesn't state how long you have to wait to get your tribunal, though the US has laws against indefinite detention without trial. Nevertheless, it does state that you should be afforded all of the rights of a POW while you wait. Whether or not the detainees were afforded those rights before November 2004 is a reasonable question to ask.

Re:And someone mod'ed that "insightful".

[m50d]

The Geneva Convention doesn't state how long you have to wait to get your tribunal

I'm sure there's "entitled to a speedy decision by a competent tribunal" in there. If you want to treat them as unlawful combatants, you have to give then the tribunal as soon as reasonably practical.

Re:And someone mod'ed that "insightful".

[Anonymous Coward]

actually, there is a third category of persons beyond "lawful enemy combatant" and "citizen". that is the "unlawful enemy combatant". this is a special case where the person was engaged in hostile war actions against the enemy, but does not meet the requirments of being a POW (because they engaged in military acts unlawfully as defined by article 4 of geneva convention iii).

I'm not clear on all this stuff, but is that anything like how the 'coalition of the willing' went to war in Iraq when then UN declared it unlawful?

Are coalition troops unlawful enemy combatants over there?

Re:And someone mod'ed that "insightful".

[killjoe]

Unless you are ready to deny that they are human beings you still can't legally hold them without charges or trials and you certainly can't torture them.

The universal declaration of human rights covers all humans beings no matter what acts they may have comitted or how the president of the united states refers to them.

The only defense Bush has left is to redefine torture, which he as done.

"article 5 of GC iii decalres that if the status of an individual is in question (i.e. not a lawful enemy combatant and not a civilian), then they are to be treated with accord to the geneva convention until a competent tribunal declares their status."

Right. In this case no such tribunal has taken place for most of them. They have been held and tortured for years now without a tribunal. For those that have been afforded a tribunal (lets face it it's a kangaroo court held by the torturers themsevles) there has been no change in status. They are still not classified as a pow or a civillian.

Re:And someone mod'ed that "insightful".

[Anonymous Coward]

they aern't civliians because they engaged in war acts and they aren't awarded geneva protections as a POW because they didn't meet the standard defined in the geneva convention (specifically, they fought like terrorists).

You appear to be under the mistaken belief that the people in Camp Delta were all captured in combat against US forces in Afghanistan or Iraq. Unfortunately, that is completely false. Some were; many were not.

In fact, the detainees include people like Bisher al-Rawi and Jamil el-Banna who were arrested in Gambia, while on a business trip. How anyone can classify such people as "unlawful combatants", I cannot imagine. They were not engaging in combat in any sense of the word. They were not even present in a war zone! Even if they are terrorists, which is a crime they have not been charged with, that does not alter the fact that they are unambiguously civilians. And that means it is unambiguously unconstitutional for them to be held indefinitely without charge or trial.

Moussaoui was not sent to Camp Delta; the fair trial he has been given is the finest thing America has achieved this year. So why are other people accused of similar acts (plotting, but not carrying out, terrorism) not being given similarly fair civilian trials?

----------
Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment. It's been 1 hour, 20 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment - this is getting ridiculous. If you want to dissuade people from posting anonymously, then at least have the honesty to say so, instead of pretending you're trying to stop flooding.

Re:And someone mod'ed that "insightful".

[grimJester]

The only place where the word "unlawful" appears in the third Geneva Convention is the sentence

"Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention.".

The word "lawful" doesn't appear at all. The definitions you're talking about are prefaced with

"Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:"

The text relevant to those who don't fall under any of the POW categories is as follows:

Part I. General Provisions

...

Art. 5 Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.

Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be.

Re:And someone mod'ed that "insightful".

[Anonymous Coward]

You've just found the loophole that gives it all sense (in a disturbing fascist way but sense none the less). Of note, "They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be"

So basically by saying we're constantly under attack and there is no security and fear fear fear 9/11 9/11 the neocons say they don't have to offer these rights yet because we haven't reach a point at which we can have a "date consistant with" our security because we're still constantly under attack right? They can just keep pushing that secure date back at their convenience.

Re:And someone mod'ed that "insightful".

[bkirkby]

which is what i stated. the "unlawful" definition was fleshed out in a us supreme court decision circa ~1944 called "ex parte quirin" (just google it to find it). what the geneva convention says is that detainees of questionable status are to be treated under geneva convention protocols UNTIL their status is determined by a competent tribunal, which in this case is the US military and President Bush.

in the case of ex parte quirin, the unlawful enemy combatants where given their tribunal, found guilty (of being unlawful enemy combatants) and summarily executed (which would have been a violation of the Geneva convention IF they were lawful enemy combatants). In the case of gitmo, the unlawful enemy combatants are given their tribunal, found guilty (of being unlawful enemy combatants) and further detained and interrogated for intelligence purposes. After interrogation, in some cases, they get more information to prosecute the war on terror, in other cases they determine that the unlawful enemy combatant is not a further threat to the US and they let them go.

In Civil War, hero is pitted against hero

[iminplaya]

In the Iraq war, pirate is pitted against pirate. There are no heroes. Well, maybe the mothers who try to shield their children from the bombs and bullets...

This is about more than the theme

[orbz]

To all you people rushing to say "Obscure comic company X did this in 1983 maaaan!"... just because some comic you read dealt with the issue of corrupt government before is not the same thing. This particular government is QUITE a particular government, and George Bush is named as the president in this Marvel series (according to TFA), which makes this a pretty specific attack on this very specific post-9/11 presidency and I think that makes this quite noteworthy. This isn't just about the fiction of it.

Re:This is about more than the theme

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, comics like the Watchers and Judge Dredd were clearly targeting Thatcher-ism, and in fact Thatcher is mentioned in these on more than one occasion even when the timelines were different.

It's still unoriginal.

LOTS of books borrow from other books -- some do so in a blindingly obvious matter - ripping paragraphs -- while others follow the template already laid out. It doesn't mean the "modern" rewrite is worse quality.

Somehow I doubt the story will accurately portray history, like Rumsfeld crusading against Saddam on one day, which is a hell of a flip-flop from the days where he was shaking hands with him and providing sattelite data on Iranian troops so they could launch their poison gas. The documentation's there, but some history's so buried no one wants to believe it.

cpt america

[duke12aw]

I dont know about everyone else, but im with Cpt. America on this one

Re:cpt america

[wjeff]

Right there with you.

Re:Put down that comic and go to church.

[Beyond_GoodandEvil]

"If you wanna kiss the sky better learn how to kneel."

Eh the whole Registration thing won't work

[Ka D'Argo]

Sure it's been done in the X-Men back and forth but in the Marvel Universe there's just too many uber-powerful characters to require Registration.

Scarlet Witch registers, ok cool. So the government now has her on file as a human (or humanoid really for the non human types as well) WMD. That's great. What the fuck does that do to stop a character, like old Scarlet, from going apeshit and destroying the entire fucking universe?

It's already technically done as well in another sense: villians. Example, take Thanos right. Villian, bad guy. Automatically you consider him a humanoid WMD right. Again same situation. Having him on file, does jack and or shit. So Uncle Sam keeps him on file, hell we'll go one step further, keeps GPS and the whole schebang on him 24/7. Yea when he gets a huge powerup like the Infinite Gauntlet, being able to scramble your military ain't shit. The only benefit it would have is if they notified heroes of such things apon villians. But it's not, since they are only doing Hero registration.

Either way it's somewhat of an old storyline that while a good one, seems to be a publicity stunt. Considering the current state of America, we're pretty unhappy with our government, our president and basically how restricted life has become. Leave it to Marvel to sellout for the all mighty $

Re:Eh the whole Registration thing won't work

[Original Replica]

"Having him on file, does jack and or shit. So Uncle Sam keeps him on file, hell we'll go one step further, keeps GPS and the whole schebang on him 24/7. Yea when he gets a huge powerup like the Infinite Gauntlet, being able to scramble your military ain't shit."
Hmm, so you think maybe Marvel is saying that the government might make some huge invasive program in the name of Protecting the People, but in reality it is only hot air, postureing, and a loss of civil rights with no additional safety. Where did they get that idea? It's almost like they aren't really talking about superheros...

Re:Eh the whole Registration thing won't work

[Khashishi]

Of course it's a publicity stunt. It's an absolutely brilliant one, too.

Re:Eh the whole Registration thing won't work

[Dobeln]

"and basically how restricted life has become."

So, how has your life "become more restricted"?

Re:Eh the whole Registration thing won't work

[Ka D'Argo]

If you aren't an avid comic reader or casual fan, sure you probably find it awesome. Every major world issue has been explored ten times over in comics since well, the creation of comics. X-Men as mentioned by others, has covered most of them, usually racial hate and intolerance. It's nothing new. At best Marvel will hit two markets with this; people who are either casual andor casual readers to people who hear/see/learn about this story arc specifically and get all into it cause its either controversial or they have a side with one of the sides of the situation.

I mean, honestly (no offense to you or other /.'ers) but it's the same as the original Star Wars dvd's just announced: it's just milking the cash cow. Only difference is using a controversy to spark "interest" aka more people buying it. I really expected more from Marvel. Not I'm not a diehard DC fanboy I would expect the same from them, Image, Darkhorse, etc

Then again this is the company that thought "feral" style Wolverine was a good idea, oh and team him up with a resurrected (for what the umpteenth time?) Elecktra. So yea I don't have much faith in such decisions.

Re:Eh the whole Registration thing won't work

[mblase]

Scarlet Witch registers, ok cool. So the government now has her on file as a human (or humanoid really for the non human types as well) WMD. That's great. What the fuck does that do to stop a character, like old Scarlet, from going apeshit and destroying the entire fucking universe?

She already did that in last year's "House of M" crossover, and at the end of it she depowered herself and relocated to Europe.

The underlying question you ask, of course, is the same one you might ask of the US or Russia regarding their nuclear missiles. Who stops people with overwhelming destructive power from destroying the world with it? The answer is: everyone else who has the same power.

Re:Eh the whole Registration thing won't work

[Scudsucker]

Example, take Thanos right. Villian, bad guy. Automatically you consider him a humanoid WMD right. Again same situation. Having him on file, does jack and or shit.

Showing my inner geek here...it wouldn't matter to Thantos. He can already go toe to toe with many of the heavies in the MU, and that's just with his natural abilities, without any powerups. He also has very advanced alien technology that would make Nimrod look like a car from the Flintstones. In his own series he even managed to hold off a fully energized Galactus (temporarily) with an energy sheild.

Not really all that noteworthy

[technoextreme]

To all you people rushing to say "Obscure comic company X did this in 1983 maaaan!"... just because some comic you read dealt with the issue of corrupt government before is not the same thing. This particular government is QUITE a particular government, and George Bush is named as the president in this Marvel series (according to TFA), which makes this a pretty specific attack on this very specific post-9/11 presidency and I think that makes this quite noteworthy. This isn't just about the fiction of it.

They are doing it in both universes so it isn't really all that noteworthy. I imnmediately thought this article was about the Ultimate Story Line which is a bit more drastic in that we piss off France, China, Russia, Syria, North Korea and Iran so much that they basically invade the Untied States with their own version of the Ultimates.

Happened all ready

[technoextreme]

In reality, he'd have been approached by the feds ages ago and offered the choice to either work for them or, more likely, some dirt would've been dumped on him to have the media label him the greatest threat to humanity since Saddam, then he'd been hunted down 'til he's dead.

It happened to Batman and Superman. Now mind you the President of the United States at the time was Lex Luthor but with Batman he was going after Bruce Wayne and accidently hired the only person who knew that he was a super hero.

Actually Scralet Witch did go apeshit

[technoextreme]

Scarlet Witch registers, ok cool. So the government now has her on file as a human (or humanoid really for the non human types as well) WMD. That's great. What the fuck does that do to stop a character, like old Scarlet, from going apeshit and destroying the entire fucking universe?

Actually, she did go apeshit and she did warp the reality at large. According to Marvel that this does play a role in this storyline but I don't know how because I haven't read either storyline.

Re:Actually Scralet Witch did go apeshit

[Ka D'Argo]

I know, that's why I mentioned her specifically. She's one of the handful of characters who have the power or ability to royally fuck up the universe, at a whim if deemed nesscary. It also opens the door to the whole entire Universe story arcs which half the time suck but thats another issue completely. Either way, characters like her make no sense to register for such a thing, even the government in the comics isn't quick enough or powerful enough to stop such a character from fubaring reality.

well good point, but check your Hulk #300

[Anonymous Coward]

I know I know, many years back, but Thor pretty much went toe-to-toe with BigMeanAndGreen, to a stalemate no less. Doc Strange ended up banishing the Hulk to the freakerverse where he couldn't harm precious earthlings.... a plot point that has been rehashed MANY times since. Much like this "register with the gov't or else" plot point.

One of my favorite comics, Hulk #300.

But be that as it may, Bendis knows what he is doing, and he can make rehashing look like originality with very little effort.

Great, but are the superheroines...

[csoto]

...still wearing skin tight leotards?

Unfair!

[SEWilco]

But I'm not a WMD, my only power is in gaining /. Funny mod karma!

Virtue is its own reward.

[khasim]

Fysical abuse is only one aspect. Not knowing what you are being accused of and for how long you need to be locked up, is to me atleast very wrong. This is the same elements as in torture.

Big time. It doesn't matter if you've heard of "worse" being done in "training" or whatever.

In training, you always have the option to say "Fuck this, I quit". You do NOT have that option in captivity.

Two wrongs does not make a right...

But 1 wrong and 1 right can.

Basically, you have several different scenarios:

#1. Innocent guy captured.
        1a. Innocent guy tortured
                1a1. Innocent guy swears vengence. (loss)
                1a2. Innocent guy does not swear vengence. (gain)

        1b. Innocent guy treated decently.
                1b1. Innocent guy swears vengence. (why?) (loss)
                1b2. Innocent guy does not swear vengence. (gain)

#2. Terrorist supporter captured.
        2a. Terrorist supporter tortured
                2a1. Terrorist supporter swears vengence. (no loss)
                2a2. Terrorist supporter does not swear vengence. (gain)

        2b. Terrorist supporter treated decently.
                2b1. Terrorist supporter swears vengence. (no loss)
                2b2. Terrorist supporter does not swear vengence. (gain)

So, by looking at it logically, it would seem that by treating the prisoners decently, we actually come out ahead of the game.

The innocents would have no reason to hate us and the guilty may be convinced that we are not the Great Satan as they have been told.

Yes, I am counting it as a "gain" anytime the prisoner does not vow to to strap on a bomb and blow himself up.

The thing about being the "good" guys is not the circumstances under which you perform the same actions the "bad" guys do.

The "good" guys will NOT perform certain actions, regardless of the circumstances. Anyone who argues any other way would be a great follower of Saddam, if you were born in Iraq instead of here.

Re:Virtue is its own reward.

[Johnny5000]

Basically, you have several different scenarios:

First off, I'll say I do not condone torture in any way.
but...

the scenerios you present ignore the "justification" that torture supporters use-
2a3. Terrorist has information about next terrorist plot- terrorist is tortured and tells all, terror attack is thwarted, thousands of lives saved.
(again, to clarify I don't support this point of view, but that's the pro-torture argument.)

of course this also comes with the scenerio:
terrorist/innocent civilian is tortured, makes up a story to stop the pain, fake leads are followed up on, wasting valuable anti-terror resources while actual terrorists blow up stuff, thousands die.

Re:Virtue is its own reward.

[WilliamSChips]

2a3. Terrorist has information about next terrorist plot- terrorist is tortured and tells all, terror attack is thwarted, thousands of lives saved.

Terrorist has information about next terrorist plot, terrorist is tortured and lies, terror attack goes on and may even be slightly more deadly, thousands of lives lost.

No

[MsGeek]

Dubya is Sven Hoek.

"Daaah, he is Ole, you are Sven...He is Ole, you are Svaaaaaan..."

Re:No

[bckrispi]

Wheeeeeeeeee!!! Ahhhhhhhhhhh!!!

Ahem, that's super-hero ®

[Anonymous Coward]

DC and Marvel have jointly trademarked the term super-hero. You can expect a letter from their lawyers.

Re:Put down that comic and go to church.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, you're saying that I have to give the sky a blow job? Man, screw that. I'm perfectly happy with the ground, anyway.

Wrong!

[Locke2005]

George W. Bush isn't stimpy's cousin. He is obviously closely related to this other George. In fact, the family resemblance is astounding!

RED SKULL!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I still say the Red Skull was just a metaphor for Communism, even if he was a red-faced Nazi. Red Skull == Red Menace, something that Captain America, or his faithful followers, must deal with.

Re:RED SKULL!!!

[flyneye]

I always got that about Red Skull too.
Older,wiser now I look back over the years and see loads of political agendas pushed on kids in comix. Diff is that I paid from $.10 to $1.25 for my dose of political correctness then.How much are chumps paying now?

According to Geneva Convention they have NO rights

[Anonymous Coward]

Without uniforms, they have no rights. Actually, the Geneva Convention allows for a summary trial & execution in cases like this. You personally may want to award them rights, but your your assertion about "no third category" is purely your own invention.

One word:

[freeweed]

Sentinels.

The issue of regular humans attempting to contorl the behaviour of superheroes has been covered dozens of times over the past 40 years, very prominently in one of the most popluar comic series of all time, the X-Men.

As another poster already commented, I'm such a geek.

Re:One word:

[Scudsucker]

Sentinels. The issue of regular humans attempting to contorl the behaviour of superheroes has been covered dozens of times over the past 40 years, very prominently in one of the most popluar comic series of all time, the X-Men.

Yup. They "hate and fear" mutants for having powers that normal people don't have, so they build a big army of war robots, which normal people wont have. They have to become what they hate.

Actually, I describe it as...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Yesterday, Marvel Comics released the first in its miniseries Civil War, which can only be described as a gutsy comic-book series focusing on the whole debate over homeland security and tighter government controls in the name of public safety."

Actually, I describe it as a lame marketing gimmick to drive short-term sales. It will interfere with every other storyline currently running in a Marvel book and have no more lasting impact on the Marvel Universe than the ill-conceived Secret Wars or last years' House of M, but will temporarilly boost the sales of less-well-known books that tie in to it.

I've told my local comics shop to cancel my subscription to any books that tie in to this mess, not because I disapprove of its message, but because as a comics fan I'm sick of fake "events" like these.

Stan Lee != Marvel Comics

[freeweed]

Stan had nothing to do with Venom, which was a character created over a decade after he got out of the creative side of Marvel comics. He didn't even have anything to do with the black suit of Spider-Man's that was Venom's origin - that was Jim Shooter trying to change everything that Stan, Jack and Steve had created, and make Marvel his own.

I think I'm actually getting geekier by the post with this story :(

"Debate" is a hoax

[menace3society]

Anytime you say you want to have a debate about military prisons, secret interrogations, or the general reduction of freedom in the name of public safety and security, you're coming down against it. The very idea of debating in order to decide which is right takes the side that democratic processes and freedoms are more important than strict safety and security: since public discussion is a democratic process, the notion that a public discussion should determine whether or not true democratic process is more important than security is preternaturally determined to come down in favor of democratic processes. If it doesn't, the people involved are idiots.

Re:"Debate" is a hoax

[tinkerghost]

If it doesn't, the people involved are idiots.
This would be strange how?

Re:Put down that comic and go to church.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would he want to beat them?

Who's going to explain this comic to

[alfredo]

bush? You can't hide the comics from him, he gets real angry when they do that.

Re:Who's going to explain this comic to

[yellowjacket03]

You wouldn't like him when he's angry...

Testament

[crossmr]

http://www.dccomics.com/comics/?cm=5284

#6, I couldn't find a quick link to the series itself. Rushkoff has been doing a series about this through Vertigo since December, and its quite impressive. One of the best comics I've read in a long time.

http://www.rushkoff.com/comics.html?PHPSESSID=e37a e111faea64e93e76e9c2c57d8bf6

his more ties in with the bible, but its very much about the government and the things going on here.

I'm a bigger nerd

[grudgelord]

What's frightening is that I don't have to look up GENOSHA. I remember that plotline.

I'm so going to nerd hell!

The average age is 24.

[Intellectual Elitist]

As of 2002, the average age of the U.S. comic book reader was 24.

Try reading the Watchmen again

[GunFodder]

I recently read the Watchmen again. It nicely captured the sense of impending nuclear holocaust that was a staple of the Cold War era. The Cold War ended along with the Soviet Union back in '91.

In the Watchmen the Soviet Union invades Afghanistan and threatens Pakistan, which nearly provokes World War III. Nowadays we invade Afghanistan and Iran, and no one does anything except quietly complain about American imperialism. It just isn't the same without another nuclear superpower.

Re:Try reading the Watchmen again

[Sigg3.net]

It just isn't the same without another nuclear superpower.

So what, exactly, are you suggesting here?

Re:Try reading the Watchmen again

[Anonymous Coward]

He/She's suggesting that it just isn't the same without another nuclear superpower.

Looks cool

[camelmix]

Damn people stop ripping on this, I think this will be pretty interesting. I'm going to pick it up tomorrow probably.

I'm sorry but...

[caitsith01]

I'm sorry but if your default position was to believe the CIA and not Amnesty International then it's going to take more than superheroes to help you.

Re:I'm sorry but...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, but if AI says Washington is running a gulag, they kill their own credibility. The CIA has doubtless done some pretty evil and pretty stupid things. Nothing it has ever done, however, even remotely compares to the gulag. Read Solzhenitsyn's "Gulag Archipelago." You'll learn what torture really is---not having someone sit in an uncomfortable position for a day---but things like having your dick slowly squished under the boot of the interrogator until you confess that you're an American spy, and for a while after that as well.

And CIA's network of "secret prisons" is a chain of vacation resorts compared to the labor camps in Siberia where you had a 50% chance of freezing or starving to death during your 25 year sentence (and where millions--no one really knows how many--did die).

I'm not saying that what the CIA is doing is in any way excusable--and their illegal actions should be fought, but when AI makes sensationalist comparisons, they are like the boy crying wolf.

Re:The third way

[Anonymous Coward]

They also do not get their day in court because they are not American citizens.
Non-citizens are tried in court as well. Otherwise what stops the government from simply declaring YOU a non-citizen, and deporting or torturing you without trial? How else would you legally defend yourself from such an accusation, except in court?

New motto of the Republican Party

[Aexia]

The "good" guys will NOT perform certain actions, regardless of the circumstances. Anyone who argues any other way would be a great follower of Saddam, if you were born in Iraq instead of here.

"It's not fascism when *we* do it!"

I've been waiting...

[Anonymous Coward]

... for Cap to take this type of stand. Dare I hope that they breathe some classic American patriotism(not this neo-commie bullshit that passes as patriotism nowadays) back into Captain America? I think many of us are ready for that. I know I am.

Redskull would be a neo-con in today's America. He'd fit right in with them with very little character modification.

Re:I've been waiting...

[Dehumanizer]

He already did. Google for "Dell Rusk" (incidentally, an anagram of "red skull").

Read Rising Stars by J. Michael Straczynski

[Tempest451]

It's a look at how the real world (ish) response to the emergance of people with superpowers.

Their rights

[Anonymous Coward]

If they are the latter, ok they may not have Constitutional rights that an American would have,

Just to be nitpicky (I don't think you're contending otherwise), even if they're not American citizens several constitutional clauses (i.e. 5th for due process) still apply because they are written "no person" or "all persons", etc.

Captain America should act LAST

[aeschenkarnos]

I've yet to read the story, but it's not how I would have done it. Captain America, above all others, is the zeitgeist of the USA. As such, he needs to be the last to firmly make up his mind about opposing forces, because what he does establishes the right thing to do and thereby ends the story. He OUGHT to be paralyzed with indecision. He OUGHT to spend this conflict of ideologies being shown for a single frame about every second page: Sitting on his fattening ass eating cheetos. Watching TV. Playing a computer game. Jacking off in the bathroom. Lying in bed shivering, unable to decide whether or not to get up. Et cetera.

Re:Captain America should act LAST

[Dehumanizer]

Actually, no. Captain America, as past stories have shown, was always about the American Dream, and values. Not about obeying the government. Unlike what most neocons think, there's a huge difference.

Cap has already quit his identity twice - once in disgust over the Marvel version of Watergate, and the other time when the government (late 80s or early 90s, I think) tried to force him to work for them.

City of Heroes

[Spad]

The City of Heroes backstory timeline has covered a few similar events, notably the Might for Right Act, which "proclaimed super-powered individuals and vigilante heroes a valuable national resource subject to draft without notice into the service of the United States government."

Wallcrawler!

[Anonymous Coward]

or, more likely, some dirt would've been dumped on him to have the media label him the greatest threat to humanity since Saddam, then he'd been hunted down 'til he's dead.

You mean J.J. Jameson's editorials on the Daily Bugle?

"Debate" is not a hoax

[Dobeln]

This assertion is of course also BS. No society in existance maximizes individual liberty while completely foregoing public safety and security. It's often a tradeoff, and most societies settle on a balance dictated by the circumstances. Those who say otherwise are just sloganeering.

Slashdot heroes and villains

[Aceticon]

Aceticon's list of /. heroes and villains:

Heroes:
- First Poster
- Insightfull Man
- Super Funny
- Anonymous Coward
- Cmdr Taco

Villains:
- Grammar Nazi
- Insensitive Clod
- Mega Troll
- Anonymous Coward's Evil Twin

Re:Slashdot heroes and villains

[Dr Damage I]

wtf is first poster doing in the heroes list?

Re:Slashdot heroes and villains

[vjmurphy]

Where do

- ???

and

- Profit

Fit in? Hmm, or are they a team, like Batman and Robin: ??? and Profit!

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[Yvanhoe]

Wrong. Read it in the text (http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm):

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.

[...]

6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

[...]

Article 5

The present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation.

Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.

You just don't get it

[TheConfusedOne]

If they're fighting out of uniform then they're illegal combatants.

The Geneva Convention is actually quite specific in which people enjoy the protection of the Convention. The main reason for this was to try to minimize casualties in the civilian population. If people choose to ignore the restrictions of the Conventions then they don't get the protection of the Conventions.

By those Conventions, summary execustion of non-uniformed combatants and spies is perfectly legal.

Re:You just don't get it

[nosferatu1001]

Not if they are operaitng IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY AT THE TIME - they are not acting as spies then!

if you as an invader are attacked by citizens with guns, then you have to treat any subsequent prisoners as POWS - in fact any and ALL prisoners have to be treated as POWS under article 4 until proven otherwise

"illegial combatants" is a term made up by the current administration that doesnt even make sense...

Re:You just don't get it

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

If they're fighting out of uniform then they're illegal combatants.

Trouble is, most of the people in Guantanamo, weren't actually fighting at all.

Re:You just don't get it

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that the Geneva Convention assumes people are innocent until proven guilty: i.e. there has to be some sort of trial (military tribunal is okay) to prove they are illegal combatants. Ths US has not followed this

Think about it: if it was perfectly okay, why did they station the prisoners in Guantanamo, a non-place where no international laws apply (as the ownership of the territory is disputed). Surely if everything was okay, it would make more sense to station them on the mainland

Re:You just don't get it

[Khammurabi]

By those Conventions, summary execustion of non-uniformed combatants and spies is perfectly legal.

And are we simply supposed to accept someone's seemingly arbitrary judgement as to whom is deemed to be a "spy" or "enemy combatant"? If I fly over to Macedonia, pick someone off the street and call them either a "spy" or an "enemy combatant", can I then shoot them? There are some rules to this game, and the US seems to be bending them.

Re:You just don't get it

[elrous0]

If they're fighting out of uniform then they're illegal combatants.

So all CIA, DIA, and special forces troops fighting in the warzone out of uniform are illegal combatants?

-Eric

Re:You just don't get it

[crabpeople]

"If people choose to ignore the restrictions of the Conventions then they don't get the protection of the Conventions."

well basically, statements like this are why i have no problem with "terrorists" torturing americans and im sure many people in the world are agreeing with me. better start seeing all your favourite old world countries while you still can. itll be open season soon...

Re:You just don't get it

[Nephilium]

Yep... and they do not get protected by the Geneva Convention rules either...

Nephilium

Why "gutsy"

[TheConfusedOne]

I mean really, does criticizing the US really require such moral fortitude and personal risk?

The last actual gutsy cartoon we had was the Norwegian political cartoons of Mohammed. Just about the entire US media horribly failed their "guts check" after that one came out and people were threatened.

I suppose next we'll all be regaled with the old "speaking truth to power" line.

Re:Why "gutsy"

[hey!]

I mean really, does criticizing the US really require such moral fortitude and personal risk?

Sure. When it comes with the risk of financial losses.

People, and the organizations we create, have a remarkable capacity for adapting to the status quo. Formulas for easy success, even small successes, are to the businessman what crack is to an addict.

It's artists who want to do something different, even he's working in the framework of an old formula. To the businessman, originality has utility, but isn't a value itself. If he's in an art oriented business, he wants just enough originality to make marketing the product easy, but not enough to undermine the security of a proven money making recipe.

I was reading recently about Richard Williams, the animator who did the titles for the old Pink Panther movies, and was the supervising animator on Roger Rabbit. He'd been working on a film, The Thief and the Cobbler off an on for years, and after his Roger Rabbit Oscar, he got investment funding to complete it. Now by bad luck, around this time Disney released Aladdin, which was a huge hit. The Thief and the Cobbler, which was close to completion at the time, also had a middle eastern theme, which conjured up the prospect of big bucks for the investors. But when they saw the working prints, the film was nothing like Aladdin. It was different, almost experimental. So faced with a risky experimental film on one hand, and what looked like a sure fire formula on the other, the investors (Warner Bros) did the obvious thing. Even though there was less than ten minutes of animation left to complete the film, they had the Completion Bond Company sieze the film and send it of to Korea, where it was not completed, but entirely reworked into the nearest thing to an Aladdin clone they could manage on a shoestring budget and a schedule tight enough to capture some marketing rebound from Aladdin. The result was released and fell into obscurity within a few weeks of opening.

Re:Why "gutsy"

[Hektor_Troy]

The last actual gutsy cartoon we had was the Norwegian political cartoons of Mohammed.

Uhm ... no. There were no Norwegian political cartoons of Mohammed. They only reprinted some of the Danish cartoons of Mohammed.

Re:Why "gutsy"

[TheConfusedOne]

Whoops. Norway, Denmark, they're the same thing right? :-D

Well we do have to thank those courageous people who are responsible for making the Eggo waffle after all...

Bad examples

[GuloGulo2]

Kingdom Come is a better example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_Come_(comic)

Overreaction to societal problems, tyranny in the guise of security, they even have a gulag.

By who?

[GuloGulo2]

"I don't know what you mean by "hard" evidence but we know for sure people have been waterboarded there and that's classified as torture."

I looked a lot, and the only source I could find that agrees with this statement is Human Rights Watch.

So, what is your source for the assertion that it is torture? Why are you making it appear as though there is any kind of consensus on the subject? I guarante I can find more sources that disagree with you than agree.

But even that wasn't my point. Why is it that people like you, instead of presenting eveidence, give arrogant self assured procalamations as though you know what the facts are, especially in cases like this where the facts are highly in dispute?

I get so tired of reading declaration after declaration that insists they have THE correct opinion on the subject, when in reality it's just another guy shooting his mouth of about what he thinks.

Re:By who?

[professionalfurryele]

Probably because the camp is so secretive. If they don't have anything to hide, why are they being so secretive about it? Bottom line is citizens may have a right to privacy, government have no such right and should only conceal things when there is a very good reason to.

Book: Brave Men Run

[mo26101]

There is a very good book that addresses people with "super powers" and how the government reacts: Brave Men Run. The audio version of the book is available for free as a podcast.

NO ONE can fight the Patriot Act!

[cthellis]

Galactus tried, but his hunger could not find foothole. The Watcher watched and wept.

Excelsior!

The Hulk was launched into space

[GuloGulo2]

Needless to say, it was very convenient timing.

Oh please

[GuloGulo2]

"Either way it's somewhat of an old storyline that while a good one, seems to be a publicity stunt."

How DARE they? The unmitigated gall of actually trying to get publicity, those evil fuckers.

"Leave it to Marvel to sellout for the all mighty $"

Yes, god forbid a company in the business of telling stories actually focus on telling a story people will buy. WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THEM!!!

Obligatory quote

[GuloGulo2]

"Worst post ever"

Wish I Had Moderation Points

[buzzcutbuddha]

Khasim, I wish had moderation points to heap on your article, but I don't, so I just wanted to say kudos. I wish there were more sane and rational posts like yours. My hat's off to you.

in Issue #1

[WormholeFiend]

of Jihad Joe, he blows himself up at the end.

Shortest. Series. Ever.

Nope

[GuloGulo2]

"Listen, everyone complains when the Slashvertisements come down from above and aren't denoted as such."

I don't.

"The thinly veiled ads that are presented as stories are insulting to readers and undermine the credibility of Slashdot."

Credibility of Slashdot... What an interesting theoretical concept.

You don't think it undermines the credibility of Slashdot to have half-wit trolls sounding off about their opinion as though it were representative of the community, like you did there?

"In the same way, a comment that contains an advertisement undermines the validity of the comment and have no place here."

How so? If the comment is valid, it's valid. It would be exactly the same comment regardless of referrals. Look up ad hominem, and you'll realize why you should have kept that particual opinion to yourself.

"So call me a troll if you want"

No need, you wear it on your sleeve.

"I've made my point"

Well the only point you've made is that you post useless shit.

Do yourself a favor, stop acting like your opinion is representative of anyone but you.

I can't believe...

[e40]

that Captain America, aka Randy Couture, would do this! Say it's not true!

Financial risk?

[TheConfusedOne]

Obviously Marvel doesn't see any financial risk in this based on their large PR push for the series in question. They fact that they go to the "we're not trying to take any sides..." weasel words means that they don't have much courage behind those convictions.

Any work takes a financial risk, controversial or not. Your example only goes towards the fact that Hollywood is risk averse even when there's no political element in things, not that some artist is "gutsy" or taking a risk.

No, the media had a recent chance to show how gutsy they are and they blew it horribly. This "Civil Wars" thing is not gutsy at all.

Not simply spies

[TheConfusedOne]

Fighting out of uniform, in your country or someone else's is a violation of the Convention.

The whole idea behind the Geneva Conventions was to reduce civilian casualties. If one side refuses to identify themselves and actively use the civilian population as shields then they're in violation and thus not given its protections.

I also find it quite funny that we're sitting here agonizing over our treatment of enemy combatants that goes above and beyond what we're required to do while the other side is busy sawing off heads of both combatants AND civilians with wanton disregard.

Re:Not simply spies

[greylouser]

I also find it quite funny that we're sitting here agonizing over our treatment of enemy combatants that goes above and beyond what we're required to do while the other side is busy sawing off heads of both combatants AND civilians with wanton disregard.

You're arguing here about the things you disagree about. Every sane person agrees that sawing off heads is wrong, and those who do it should be punished - severely, one hopes. What you're disagreeing about is how you should establish whether people currently in Gitmo fought Americans in Afghanistan. Should you assume that if someone is in Gitmo, they must have fought Americans (while disguised as civilians), or should you ask for more disclosure from the government? In addition, there's a question of how someone in Gitmo should be treated while they await a decision (and, of course, how long they should have to wait).

It's also worth noting that there's a weird metaphor in the phrase "the other side," which implies that the people in Gitmo are on the same side as those cutting off heads. If they are, then I'm in your camp, but if they aren't, I'd rather know what it was they did before we punish them for their actions. I suspect that many of them may not be on the same side, since many have suggested they may have been turned in by bounty hunters for cash.

Re:Not simply spies

[Anonymous Coward]

Fighting out of uniform, in your country...

I'm not a soldier, I don't have a uniform, if someone invaded my country I'd fight them. What does that make me then? A candidate for gitmo, because I'm a patriot?

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[dfjghsk]

6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

Terrorists do not respect the laws or customs of war. They regularly kidnap civilians, carry out executions of civilians, etc, etc, etc.

But lets say you are right.. they are still classified as prisoners of war.

If the terrorists are legitimate soldiers, then the war is not over. We are still fighting those "soldiers" in Iraq and in Afghanistan. Therefore the conflict is not over, and those "soldiers" cannot be returned to the country or released. They must be detained until the conflict has ended.

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[AoT]

Terrorists are not legitimate soldiers, but these guys aren't terrrorists. They were captured on the field of battle in Afghanistan.

Who do you think is in Gitmo?

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[dfjghsk]

They were captured on the field of battle in Afghanistan.

Yes, they were captured in Afghanistan, where we are still fighting ununiformed soldiers, who pledge allegiance to the same groups that these captured soldiers pledged allegiance to.

Therefore, we are still fighting the same group these captured soldiers belong to, and they cannot be released until the war is over.

Sorry

[StarKruzr]

You have failed to address how referer links make Slashdot a worse place.

You fail at flaming.

Read Supreme Power

[Goldrush]

It had very similar ideas.

Pay attention to your spelling!

[tomzyk]

Details in spelling make a big difference (as in the "man" in "Superman" and "Spider-Man").

It's "CmdrTaco"... not "Cmdr Taco".

-Grammar Nazi

Re:Pay attention to your spelling!

[Aceticon]

I was aiming for a Captain America effect you insensitive clod ;)

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[AoT]

The point is that they must be treated as prisoners of war.

How can so many people miss this?

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[dfjghsk]

In order to be considered prisoners of war, they must "respect the laws and customs of war". It doesn't matter if they were captured on the battlefield if they do not respect the laws and customs of war.

Are seriously suggesting suicide bombings, civilian kidnappings, etc are part of the normal customs of war?

It's called 'Judge Dread'

[geekoid]

Read one.

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[Anonymous Coward]

They're criminal offenses that should be handled by the civil courts with jurisdiction over the regions where they occurred.

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[dfjghsk]

you're just making up international law. They were caught on the battle field resisting a foreign military. They are not PoWs because they don't follow the general rules and customs of war.. They are not civilians because they were caught fighting during the war. They don't get access to courts just because you say so.

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[Yvanhoe]

3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.

I think the talibans would rather be classified under this clause. "The laws and customs of war" is something so vague we can find a definition the taliban's behavior would fulfill and another that US soldier would not.

The war is over. The war was with Afghanistan. You have won the war, now you can restitute prisonners to the new stable and democratic government in Kabul (yes I am sarcastic) in order for them to be judged.
A war begins with a declaration of war and ends with an armistice or a peace treaty. War has been declared over Afghanistan (now it is over) and in Iraq (well, I think now everyone agrees it is not over there). "Terrorism" is not a nation, an organized force or an army, you don't fight it with soldiers. You fight Talibans, you fight Baasists, all of them having a leader, an organization. But you can't have a "war on an abstract concept". I have to tell you, from EU, this whole "war on terrorism" sounds like a politic slogan, but nobody considers it seriously as a real war.

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[Yvanhoe]

Anyway, screw treaties that the UN doesn't have the guts to enforce.

U.S. is doing this on its own. I mean, one can debate about whether or not they are allowed to do that by treaties, one thing is sure : no treaty forces them to act this way. So here you go, they made prisonners, some soldiers gave their words that these were terrorists, they were locked up without the opportunity to defend their case (how many of them do even speak english ?) And they were kept in a camp in a foreign country known for his infamous human right records, because the administration jurists were not sure they could keep them on american ground.

I mean, screw the written laws. They are doing THIS. Jailing people like cattle without trial for 5 years. Because there have been bombings, because there have hijackings, americans feel they have the right to regress and to commit injustices (and some say tortures) in the name of justice. No. In the name of vengeance. As a voter, ask you this : do you feel more secure, because 400 afghans are jailed in Cuba with no trial ? If you answered yes, do you feel secure, even knowing that 400 families out there miss someone and blame US for this ?

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not a matter of being "international law", it's basic local law everywhere in the world. Criminals are handled by local judicial systems.
You don't get to make up classes of persons, fighters in a war are combatants, persons involved in crimes are a matter of civil law.
Try reading the Geneva Convention, the persons who wrote it made sure everyone would be accounted for, there are no cracks where one can fall.

The case you just presented "They were caught on the battle field resisting a foreign military." is more than enough to entitle them the status of POW. And if any doubt exists they're awarded the status till it's clearly defined by a court, and if the court decides they're not POWs they should be handed over to the civil court with jurisdiction over their cases.
Just check article 5, it doesn't get more simple than that.

Re:According to Geneva Convention they have NO rig

[AoT]

You have no idea who is in Gitmo.

In fact, there were civilians, which means that the US is guilty of civilian kidnapping. So by your rationale it's ok to torture american soldiers.

Re:Bibleman cross over

[Anonymous Coward]

What a bunch of liberal paranoia crap.

What we need is a superhero to fight the secularists who won't let kids pray in schools. A superhero who goes after abortionists and takes their money and uses it to pay for private schooling for suburban kids. We need a superhero who will protect people who drive SUVs, and shop at wal-mart, and maybe he will draw his super powers from ten commandment monuments on courthouse lawns. He will protect the truly weak amongst us...the oil companies. ...and his arch nemesis will be the oppressive taxes of the IRS, because he will be one of those pulled-up-from-the-bootstraps types who made his own way and is incredibly rich but has to pay an unfair share, therefore making him work even harder. The IRS will team up with the HollyWood Elites to create propoganda videos about how much the love taxes and hate businesses and money...

I don't know, I still haven't quite fleshed out all the ideas yet. What do you guys think?

If I was from Kryton...

[surelyserious]

...i'd go naked everywhere. Fuck 'em. I'd be naked as soon as I realized I was invulnerable and can fly. I'd be the nakest superhero alive. Spandex? That's for aerobics. I have a planet to save, I look good, and everyone can kiss my bullet-proof ass if they have a problem with my bullet-proof balls.