Guantanamo: the American Gulag - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-29-2005, 03:10 PM   #76
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 07:41 PM
I guess we can agree to disagree.

They will get their day in court. Until then, they should be thankful that we are not giving them the justice given to the civilians on 9/11
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 03:29 PM   #77
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


They will get their day in court.
I hope you're right.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 08:18 PM   #78
Acrobat
 
echo0001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: WV-USA
Posts: 349
Local Time: 07:41 PM
Major Question:

WHEN?

Hmmm? When the almighty US judicial system gets its collective head out of its collective butt? Oh, and that will be toot-sweet, I expect.

Yeah, right, in what reality....Right now, those people are in limbo, and their status is going to be dictated at the speed of bureaucracy, which approximately equals the speed of molasses in January.

Wasn't there something in our Constitution about the right to a speedy trial? Somewhere....in there...we do have a Constitution don't we...I didn't just dream that?
__________________
echo0001 is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 10:16 PM   #79
Refugee
 
ImOuttaControl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 1,340
Local Time: 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by echo0001


Wasn't there something in our Constitution about the right to a speedy trial? Somewhere....in there...we do have a Constitution don't we...I didn't just dream that?

Does our constitution apply to non-Americans?
__________________
ImOuttaControl is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 10:26 PM   #80
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ImOuttaControl



Does our constitution apply to non-Americans?
This here is where the problem lies. The constitution doesn't apply to them, but now with this adminstration's new definition of enemy combatants the Geneva code doesn't apply either. So nothing applies to them and I haven't seen any movement by this administration to define anything that does. Therefore they will probably rot without any protection and those that were merely at the wrong place at the wrong time will die innocently in prison and this adminstration will have to answer, if not in this life definately another.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-30-2005, 12:22 AM   #81
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


So nothing applies to them and I haven't seen any movement by this administration to define anything that does. Therefore they will probably rot without any protection and those that were merely at the wrong place at the wrong time will die innocently in prison and this adminstration will have to answer, if not in this life definately another.
I quoted you, but it's just a broad general response to the whole thread.

What protection does an individual deserve who can't differentiate himself from a terrorist?

"Wrong place and wrong time" detainees, assumes that our soldiers and intelligent officials are either dumbasses or have evil intent. We have already released, what? 200 of them.

I mean, if I were being held for three years and I wasn't a terrorist supporter or sympathizer, I would be denouncing Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda at the top of my lungs every day, making sure that the American soldiers heard me.

Something tells me they aren't doing that.

Something tells me that a good honest American soldier, would hear that and try to get that person at least heard, if not some sort of interview or "trial". Are we to assume that these cries are being ignored? I am not buying it.

Maybe it's just not happening because these detainees actually do sympathize with Al Qaeda. And if that's the case then they gave up any protection or rights they had long ago.

Oh, I am all for basic human rights for anyone who doesn't cowardly and actively participate or at least attempt mass murder of innocent people. I am all for the Geneva code for proud men who wear uniforms and even if they try to kill me, they have the dignity to kill opposing soldiers and not innocent men, women and children.

Somehow the sympathy inside me is vacant for these Gitmo detainees. And it doesn't take some video footage of smoldering twin towers to remind me that the only difference between the terrorists in the camp and the terrorists on the plane was sheer opportunity.

I think about human rights violations in Sudan, and I think we are bogged down in Iraq when we could be helping them. That is something that rings true to me. Not sympathy for terrorists. I don't beleive that our American soldiers knowingly detain innocent people and defy the basic will and rights of an individual. I think they have basically figured out that these guys are bad bad people. If not, you explain to me why we would detain someone knowingly and willfully when it is not just. We've made mistakes, I think they have been admitted, we have released detainees already and there may be more.

While I think Bush and his cabinet are more or less incompetent idealistic fools, I don't think there is some evil dark hand telling them to torture innocent people down in Cuba. I think there are evil men down at Gitmo, that the rules simply don't and shouldn't apply to. Charge them with a crime, give them a trial, let them rot in a cell, all the same to me. Because at some point and time you have to choose to beleive that the American soldiers are doing what needs to be done down there. And if you don't, you probably choose to believe they are up to bad things, ill-intentioned mechanisms of torture against innocent people.

Do you really beleive any good person, much less well trained American soldiers, but just a good person with a good soul, would do this? Or would it be a lot easier to beleive that maybe it happens, but it is happening to the fucking scum of the earth?
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 05-30-2005, 01:59 AM   #82
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2DMfan


I quoted you, but it's just a broad general response to the whole thread.

What protection does an individual deserve who can't differentiate himself from a terrorist?

"Wrong place and wrong time" detainees, assumes that our soldiers and intelligent officials are either dumbasses or have evil intent. We have already released, what? 200 of them.

I mean, if I were being held for three years and I wasn't a terrorist supporter or sympathizer, I would be denouncing Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda at the top of my lungs every day, making sure that the American soldiers heard me.

Something tells me they aren't doing that.

Something tells me that a good honest American soldier, would hear that and try to get that person at least heard, if not some sort of interview or "trial". Are we to assume that these cries are being ignored? I am not buying it.

Maybe it's just not happening because these detainees actually do sympathize with Al Qaeda. And if that's the case then they gave up any protection or rights they had long ago.

Oh, I am all for basic human rights for anyone who doesn't cowardly and actively participate or at least attempt mass murder of innocent people. I am all for the Geneva code for proud men who wear uniforms and even if they try to kill me, they have the dignity to kill opposing soldiers and not innocent men, women and children.

Somehow the sympathy inside me is vacant for these Gitmo detainees. And it doesn't take some video footage of smoldering twin towers to remind me that the only difference between the terrorists in the camp and the terrorists on the plane was sheer opportunity.

I think about human rights violations in Sudan, and I think we are bogged down in Iraq when we could be helping them. That is something that rings true to me. Not sympathy for terrorists. I don't beleive that our American soldiers knowingly detain innocent people and defy the basic will and rights of an individual. I think they have basically figured out that these guys are bad bad people. If not, you explain to me why we would detain someone knowingly and willfully when it is not just. We've made mistakes, I think they have been admitted, we have released detainees already and there may be more.

While I think Bush and his cabinet are more or less incompetent idealistic fools, I don't think there is some evil dark hand telling them to torture innocent people down in Cuba. I think there are evil men down at Gitmo, that the rules simply don't and shouldn't apply to. Charge them with a crime, give them a trial, let them rot in a cell, all the same to me. Because at some point and time you have to choose to beleive that the American soldiers are doing what needs to be done down there. And if you don't, you probably choose to believe they are up to bad things, ill-intentioned mechanisms of torture against innocent people.

Do you really beleive any good person, much less well trained American soldiers, but just a good person with a good soul, would do this? Or would it be a lot easier to beleive that maybe it happens, but it is happening to the fucking scum of the earth?
How are you to differentiate yourself from terrorist when proof hasn't been or doesn't need to be given? I mean come on!!!

There were children under the age of 14 being held prisoner for a time, so yes I do believe our well intention soldiers would hold innocent beings. Not because they wanted to, not because they could, maybe not out of malice but because the definition of who or who is not a terrorist is about as clear as mud.

Do terrorist hold a membership card? Do they have a certain haircut? How is it you determine?

Maybe you had evidence this person was part of a certain terrorist group. Well then damnitt use this evidence to put them on trial. If you have no such evidence, then sorry you have no fucking reason to hold these individuals prisoner. Why is this so hard to realize?
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-30-2005, 02:06 AM   #83
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:41 AM
They are not entitled to the same rights as US citizens or POW's, the simple reason being that they were violating the rules of war and they are often associated with terrorist organisations.

Trials take time on all levels, firstly there is gathering evidence to go to trial with, then there is the legal challenges to the admissibility of that evidence, then there is the structure of the trial (apparently the US millitary court which worked perfectly well in the past is unsuitable for mixed up Muslim men who decided to bacpack with the Taliban using Kalashnikovs in December 2001), then the legal challenges to get the rights of appeal sorted out.

In the meantime, however many years that may be many of these men will be in limbo in Guantanamo, some will be released or handed over to their home countries. Considering the risk posed by Islamist terrorists and the circumstances that these men were caught under I think that keeping them locked up until their nature can be found is the best course of action. If this administration released all who are in Guantanamo that could not be procecuted with the evidence at hand then they really would be responsible for the damage done.

No quarter for Jihadists.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-30-2005, 02:43 AM   #84
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
They are not entitled to the same rights as US citizens or POW's, the simple reason being that they were violating the rules of war and they are often associated with terrorist organisations.
See but you are blinded. Without evidence how are we to prove that these individuals were apprehended under the fact that they did anything that violated rules of war or that they were associated with a terrorist group? See it's the same shit over and over, I ask this question, they pocess no membership card, yet since the US administration found them guilty then they are. It's BULLSHIT!

You nor the government has given any reason as to why these individuals are being held.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-30-2005, 02:45 AM   #85
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer


No quarter for Jihadists.
You say that and I say no power to those who can't send prisoners to trial.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-30-2005, 02:57 AM   #86
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


See but you are blinded. Without evidence how are we to prove that these individuals were apprehended under the fact that they did anything that violated rules of war or that they were associated with a terrorist group? See it's the same shit over and over, I ask this question, they pocess no membership card, yet since the US administration found them guilty then they are. It's BULLSHIT!

You nor the government has given any reason as to why these individuals are being held.
They have not found them guilty, they have not gone to trial yet and their guilt or innocence in regards to fighting against the US and it's allies without uniforms and with concealed arms or their association to Islamist terrorist networks is not yet ascertained.

Of course they could be presumed innocent until proven guilty and let go, but is that the best course of action considering the ideology of the groups that they may have been associating with and the documented history of Afghanistan as a base for Al Qaeda operatives.

What of those who were captured during operations while bearing arms? if their actions in Afghanistan prior to capture cannot be properly reconstructed should they be let go?
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-30-2005, 03:16 AM   #87
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
They have not found them guilty, they have not gone to trial yet and their guilt or innocence in regards to fighting against the US and it's allies without uniforms and with concealed arms or their association to Islamist terrorist networks is not yet ascertained.
And after almost 4 years that's just sad and pathetic for a developed country that feels privelaged enough to spread democracy.
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer

Of course they could be presumed innocent until proven guilty and let go, but is that the best course of action considering the ideology of the groups that they may have been associating with and the documented history of Afghanistan as a base for Al Qaeda operatives.
Why speak in idiotic presumptions? They were presumed guilty from the beginning. You only inprison someone based on evidence. Why hasn't this evidence shown up in a court? Because of idealogy, if that's the case half of this planet needs to imprisoned. Where do you suggest we start?
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer

What of those who were captured during operations while bearing arms? if their actions in Afghanistan prior to capture cannot be properly reconstructed should they be let go?
How is it that you capture them with arms(improper) without documentation? Please tell me how the US army of today can do that, please.

If there actions prior to capture are in question then there needs to be evidence of that behavior. Obviously you had enough to tip you off then get enough to put on trial. It seems pretty easy to me.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-30-2005, 11:24 AM   #88
Acrobat
 
echo0001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: WV-USA
Posts: 349
Local Time: 07:41 PM
If you happen to be a foreign national, a tourist in the good ol' US, and you are accused of committing a crime, arrested, etc., you have the right to a fair and speedy trial by jury.

Why do we not apply the same standard to the people being held at Gitmo?

Why can we not practice what we preach?

Why do we have to be such f***ing hypocrites?

And please DON'T tell me that it is all right to treat people that way because they were not in fact on US soil when they were taken into custody.

Okay, I'm getting a little ticked (well, more than a little, and more than 'ticked') at people who think it's all right to think that OUR common standards don't have to be applied by OURSELVES to anybody we don't want them to. THAT is hypocracy.

And yes, I am SHOUTING! Sorry, little frustated here....
__________________
echo0001 is offline  
Old 05-30-2005, 03:55 PM   #89
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 02:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar

And after almost 4 years that's just sad and pathetic for a developed country that feels privelaged enough to spread democracy.

Why speak in idiotic presumptions? They were presumed guilty from the beginning. You only inprison someone based on evidence. Why hasn't this evidence shown up in a court? Because of idealogy, if that's the case half of this planet needs to imprisoned. Where do you suggest we start?

How is it that you capture them with arms(improper) without documentation? Please tell me how the US army of today can do that, please.

If there actions prior to capture are in question then there needs to be evidence of that behavior. Obviously you had enough to tip you off then get enough to put on trial. It seems pretty easy to me.
Very well thought and said, Bono Supastar.

A_Wanderer: think logically. You can´t presume someone is terrorist if you have no evidence. If you have evidence or can prove it, you go in front of a court. It´s very simple - they are not, so there is no public evidence. That´s also what AI is lobbying for. Tell me everyone in Guantanamo is a top terrorist - no problem. But the US administation and army don´t give any specific information.

Anyway, since Rumsfeld, Bush and Blair LIED about the EVIDENCE re: nuclear arms in Iraq, no one with HALF a brain trusts that group of governmental gangsters.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 05-30-2005, 04:16 PM   #90
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 12:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars


Very well thought and said, Bono Supastar.

A_Wanderer: think logically. You can´t presume someone is terrorist if you have no evidence. If you have evidence or can prove it, you go in front of a court. It´s very simple - they are not, so there is no public evidence. That´s also what AI is lobbying for. Tell me everyone in Guantanamo is a top terrorist - no problem. But the US administation and army don´t give any specific information.

Anyway, since Rumsfeld, Bush and Blair LIED about the EVIDENCE re: nuclear arms in Iraq, no one with HALF a brain trusts that group of governmental gangsters.
No one lied about ANYTHING. SADDAM was required to Verifiably Disarm of all WMD and he didn't. Multiple UN resolutions authorized the use of force if Saddam failed to comply with the resolutions and ceacefire agreement that occured as a result of Saddam's illegal and brutal occupation of Kuwait.

In a war, one does not have to go in front of a court when the enemy is captured. It would be a waste of resources to simply detain people who have nothing to do with terrorism. Mistakes are made for sure because nothing is 100% fool proof, but the vast majority of people in Guantanamo are terrorist and the military has vital mission of getting as much intelligence information out of them as this intelligence has the potential to save thousands of lives.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com