Slashdot Mirror
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."
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.
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.
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).
Uttering logically derived and empirically supported truths to the disciples of the orthodox establishment.
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.)
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.
"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.
evil is as evil does
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.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
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.
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).
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/
http://www.genevaconventions.org/ You won't find that stated as such in there.
What you will find is that
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.
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?
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.
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 $
Aw Frell this
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.
Sometimes my arms bend back.
But they have rights. Like food, medical attention, and no waterboarding. And you release them after the war is over.
Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
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.
"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.
evil is as evil does
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?
evil is as evil does
Ah, slashdot. Where your pet issues are the only important, meaningful ones.
And the l33t shall inherit the 34r7h.
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.
Read Pynchon.
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.
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...
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.
May the Maths Be with you!
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.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.