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."

16 of 303 comments (clear)

  1. lol, wut? by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:lol, wut? by GreyKnight · · Score: 3, Insightful
      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...
  2. Re:Right subjects, wrong audience by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.)

  3. Re:Been there, done that by Count+Fenring · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  4. Re:Future issues with issues by killjoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "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
  5. Was already wondering when this is gonna come by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  6. CIA Secret Prisons vs. Amnesty International by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful
    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.

  7. Re:Future issues with issues by PostItNote · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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).

  8. And someone mod'ed that "insightful". by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful
    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.
    1. Re:And someone mod'ed that "insightful". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:And someone mod'ed that "insightful". by grimJester · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

  9. Re:Been there, done that by snuf23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  10. Re:Future issues with issues by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  11. Re:Um... by pseudochaotic · · Score: 4, Insightful

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

    --
    And the l33t shall inherit the 34r7h.
  12. I'm sorry but... by caitsith01 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  13. Re:You just don't get it by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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...