Guant?namo Prison - the dark side of the "free world"

[Dreadsox]

Allow me to throw in the appropriate clap for your post:

 

[Dreadsox]

One thing, the fact that the government has been releasing detainees would lead me to believe that they are and have been working hard to make certain that they have the correct people being held prisoner.

I do feel badly that some people have been held and released. I also think there needs to be compensation for this.

 

[Angela Harlem]

Are you mocking me with that clap?


Even looking at it as you do, I'd still think there would be urgency in getting these people sentenced. Dont get me wrong, I feel no sympathy for anyone who is guilty and any that are can cheerfully rot for all I care. Which is kinda another point. What happened to punishment and justice etc? Why is there no hurry to get this sorted out? I know no one is really sparing a thought for any who are guilty, but they aren't all guilty are they. Actually none of us really know because they aren't even allowed lawyers.

And as for your point that there are no clear rules, I agree, but firstly there is no time like the present - after all I am all for people suffering for their sins/crimes/actions - and secondly, it moots your Nazi comparison

 

[Angela Harlem]

One thing, the fact that the government has been releasing detainees would lead me to believe that they are and have been working hard to make certain that they have the correct people being held prisoner.

I do feel badly that some people have been held and released. I also think there needs to be compensation for this.

"working hard" is debatable and not really productive to do so, but yes. Compensation would be a start. I agree.

It is a shame it comes to this.

 

[Dreadsox]

Are you mocking me with that clap?


Even looking at it as you do, I'd still think there would be urgency in getting these people sentenced. Dont get me wrong, I feel no sympathy for anyone who is guilty and any that are can cheerfully rot for all I care. Which is kinda another point. What happened to punishment and justice etc? Why is there no hurry to get this sorted out? I know no one is really sparing a thought for any who are guilty, but they aren't all guilty are they. Actually none of us really know because they aren't even allowed lawyers.

And as for your point that there are no clear rules, I agree, but firstly there is no time like the present - after all I am all for people suffering for their sins/crimes/actions - and secondly, it moots your Nazi comparison

You do not sentence people captured during a war.

I am not mocking you....I am just figuring someone would clap. Might as well be me.

 

[Angela Harlem]

Why not? Sentence them I mean. Do you mean this because it hasn't happened in the past, or is there something I am not thinking of? Sincerely asking.

I know you weren't mocking me seriously. But on the same token, I dont know if someone will give you a hug today Dread, so allow me:

 

[Popmartijn]

Others here may not view it as a war, however, shall I list the number of attacks committed by Al-Qaeda over the last ten years. It is indeed a war in my mind. They are indeed POW's until the Supreme Court declares otherwise.

Then why doesn't the USA treat them as POW's? POW's have rights too (as described in the Geneva Convention), but those in Guantanamo Bay are not treated as such. So if you want them to be POW's and held indefinately until the War On Terror ends, fine. But then treat them as POW's too and do not start saying you can do everything you want with them because you don't consider them POW's. You can't have it both ways.



Marty

 

[A_Wanderer]

They are not POW's and those within guantanamo are not being treated as such. In most cases they were alleged to be attatched to Al Qaeda in some way and did not fight for a reciognized governent within the framework of a chain of command. This also means that they should be tried for their own actions in the framework of a real court and then be locked away in a nice and legal way.

The following is taken from Wikipedia to define what requirements are needed to be granted Prisoner of War status under the Geneva Convention.

To be entitled to prisoner of war status, the combatant must conduct operations according to the laws and customs of war, e.g. be part of a chain of command, wear a uniform and bear arms openly. Thus, franc-tireurs, terrorists and spies are excluded. It also does not include unarmed non-combatants who are captured in time of war; they are protected by the Fourth Geneva Convention rather than the Third Geneva Convention.

 

[nbcrusader]

This is exactly the reason for the different treatment. Society accords rights to POWs because the wear a uniform and hold themselves out to be different than civilians.

For all the sorrow expressed about the loss of civilian lives, we fail to realize that combatants who do not wear uniforms lead to the death of civilians.

 

[BVS]

This is exactly the reason for the different treatment. Society accords rights to POWs because the wear a uniform and hold themselves out to be different than civilians.

For all the sorrow expressed about the loss of civilian lives, we fail to realize that combatants who do not wear uniforms lead to the death of civilians.

But then by what means and by what standards are people being detained? Location? Color of skin? Or do they hold their Al Quaeda membership card?

We have these men and children detained and we don't know why? We do know that there have been those that were at the wrong place at the wrong time, who were held for over 2 years. This leads me to doubt the evidence in which these "combatants" were detained.

I'm glad some of you can sit back in the comfort of your home and support this kind of action being taken by your country but I can't.

 

[nbcrusader]

This touches on the larger issue of the exent of our rights as citizens to know and provide input on what goes on in the workings of government. There are many specific activites conducted by defense and security departments that, to be effective, should not be opened to public debate.

I can understand that there are many who do not trust the GWB administration or the military in general.

We can sit in the comfort of our homes because we choose to live by the laws of society. If you or I would take up arms in a foreign country unaffiliated with any army or nation, I doubt either of us would expect treatment according to US criminal justice standards.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

I'm glad some of you can sit back in the comfort of your home and support this kind of action being taken by your country but I can't.

I can't sit back in comfort either. Once all these al Qaeda S.O.B.'s are locked away or dead, then and only then will I sit in comfort.

The people locked away down there aren't your every day common criminal... but then, they're not prisoners of war as defined by Geneva. They are fighters in a war, but they wave no flag. This is new for all of us. There is no right or wrong way to handle it, because there's never been a situation like it before. These people have been in a state of war with us, and it took an event like 9/11 to finally realize this. Dread is right... keep the prisoners locked away until the world as a whole can write up a new set of rules that apply to terrorist organizations as opposed to nation-states.

And it sickens me that we're talking about the rights of terrorists as the news of Pat Tillman comes across the radio.

 

[Mullen-Girl]

They just need to try these people ASAP, free the innocent and throw the key away to the guilty. They do need to treat them like humans tho.

 

[BVS]

We can sit in the comfort of our homes because we choose to live by the laws of society. If you or I would take up arms in a foreign country unaffiliated with any army or nation, I doubt either of us would expect treatment according to US criminal justice standards.

Ok but once again you are assuming all these men and children did this and that is not the case.

If you or I were sitting in the comfort of our own homes, but living in another country and someone had declared war on terrorism and we were taken up out of our homes for no reason except the fact that our neighbors were terrorist, or we had the wrong religion, etc. you would want someone out there fighting(not in the violent sence) for your justice, you'd want representation, you'd want to know why, you want to know how they can hold you for this long and when if ever will I ever get out of here. How would you like to be held without evidence, without a charge. Honestly I'd rather be held with false evidence then to rot without ever being charged because then you could fight to prove them wrong there is nothing to fight for the innocent.

 

[BVS]

I can't sit back in comfort either. Once all these al Qaeda S.O.B.'s are locked away or dead, then and only then will I sit in comfort.

The people locked away down there aren't your every day common criminal... but then, they're not prisoners of war as defined by Geneva. They are fighters in a war, but they wave no flag. This is new for all of us. There is no right or wrong way to handle it, because there's never been a situation like it before. These people have been in a state of war with us, and it took an event like 9/11 to finally realize this. Dread is right... keep the prisoners locked away until the world as a whole can write up a new set of rules that apply to terrorist organizations as opposed to nation-states.

And it sickens me that we're talking about the rights of terrorists as the news of Pat Tillman comes across the radio.

Fact: Innocent people have been detained and some have been finally released.

Fact: Not one person has been charged with terrorism.

You can be sickened all you want, but no one is talking about the rights of terrorists. Unless you have evidence against someone stating what they were doing against our country how the hell do you know you have a terrorist?

There is always a right or wrong way. A change in the environment is never excuse to throw out right and wrong.

If you're letting innocent young men and children rot in these conditions because you can't find the means to which define the guilty then you're in the wrong, period

 

[BluberryPoptart]

I reeeeaaaally doubt these people are being held for no good reason. I don't care what you all think of Bush or the Gov't they just don't go around detaining people for nothing. I would guess the real story behind this is they ARE dangerous terrorists, and we know it, but there is no way to PROVE it because they will not rat each other out and there is nothing on paper. But they are too dangerous to be released. Again, you who care so much for them should just be glad they are alive and have hope and didn't 'disappear' as they would in many places at many times. They can't play by the rules when the game has changed. I'm sure they know what they're doing and it will all come out someday and you'll see. There is more to this than we know.

 

[BVS]

I reeeeaaaally doubt these people are being held for no good reason. I don't care what you all think of Bush or the Gov't they just don't go around detaining people for nothing. I would guess the real story behind this is they ARE dangerous terrorists, and we know it, but there is no way to PROVE it because they will not rat each other out and there is nothing on paper. But they are too dangerous to be released. Again, you who care so much for them should just be glad they are alive and have hope and didn't 'disappear' as they would in many places at many times. They can't play by the rules when the game has changed. I'm sure they know what they're doing and it will all come out someday and you'll see. There is more to this than we know.

Once again the only fact that we know so far is that there have been innocent people held there as long as 2 years, who knows if there are anymore. These individuals were detained because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, that doesn't seem like a good reason. I'm not saying everyone was obtained this way, but obviously there are some major flaws. To deny a means of justice in such a flawed system is wrong.

 

[ThatGuy]

I reeeeaaaally doubt these people are being held for no good reason. I don't care what you all think of Bush or the Gov't they just don't go around detaining people for nothing. I would guess the real story behind this is they ARE dangerous terrorists, and we know it, but there is no way to PROVE it because they will not rat each other out and there is nothing on paper. But they are too dangerous to be released. Again, you who care so much for them should just be glad they are alive and have hope and didn't 'disappear' as they would in many places at many times. They can't play by the rules when the game has changed. I'm sure they know what they're doing and it will all come out someday and you'll see. There is more to this than we know.

No, I'm sure you're right, the government of the United States has never just detained people for questionable reasons, denying them access to an attorney, or a trial. Nope, never happened.

http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/9018567p-9944490c.html

I do agree with you in that I hope the truth about the reasoning behind the imprisonment at Guantanamo comes out someday so we can see.

 

[BluberryPoptart]

I knew what that was going to be before I ever clicked on it. They did worse to the Indians back in the 1800's too. I'm talking about NOW, recently, in a time of media and internet and people like us looking into everything. And remember (sssshh) Roosevelt was a DEMOCRAT!

But there is a difference between those innocent families being rounded up out of their homes and a group of dangerous terrorists with tactics never before seen. I am still sure there is a good reason to hold them, but a real American style trial does not fit the situation here. They don't even know what the hell that is so I'm sure they don't feel deprived. These are not civilized honoroable soldiers here. I am also sure a big part of what is hurting their release is that they refuse to talk or tell anything on each other. But because they don't, they remain dangerous and suspicious. I feel a lot safer with them locked up and I don't care who hates me for saying that.

 

[ThatGuy]

I really don't careif Roosevelt was a purple alien. I'm not defending his actions, and never mentioned him.

I knew I'd get the "but these times are different" response, but I was really only addressing the "head in the sand, shut up I'm sure they have their reasons" attitude you were expressing in your earlier post. Sure, times are different, but those that forget the past are doomed to repeat it. You're making a lot of assmuptions on the guilt of those being held and those that have been released. If you feel safer with them being locked up, I'm not going to change your mind. But I don't hate you.

 

[BluberryPoptart]

Yes, I am making assumptions about their guilt and I honestly believe everything I said in the other posts. I feel some of you are giving them too much of the benefit of the doubt, and holding them to a standard they know nothing about. But I'm glad you don't hate me.

 

[ThatGuy]

But you're not giving them a benefit of the doubt at all. You have no doubt that they're guilty and need to be locked up. All I want are trials to prove it either way.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

like dread already said... since when have we had trials for war cimminals in the middle of a war? when the war on terrorism is over, then they can have their trial.

 

[BVS]

I feel some of you are giving them too much of the benefit of the doubt, and holding them to a standard they know nothing about.

Well I don't have to remind you what they say about people who assume.

A standard they know nothing about? That's classic. I'm sure the innocent would love to hear that. I'm glad we've gotten to the point where we can treat other humans like animals again. Why is everyone scared to let a justice system judge their innocence? Why are we so sold on our obviously faulty intelligence? This scares me.

 

[ThatGuy]

when the war on terrorism is over, then they can have their trial.

And when will that be, realistically? Hopefully it will go better than the "war on drugs."

 

[BluberryPoptart]

Also how can you 'try' somebody when the only solid evidence (by US justice standards) is the testimony of each other and they will not give that? They'd rather die than cooperate with us. They don't even know what a US trial is like so they have no idea they are not getting one anyway. If they weren't dangerous terrorists they would have begged for mercy and done anything they could to get back home to their families. So they must be, and not talking is part of what makes them look suspicious. But a real old fashioned American style hometown trial does not suit this situation so let's leave it to those who know the whole story.

 

[ThatGuy]

Assume, assume, assume ...

 

[BVS]

like dread already said... since when have we had trials for war cimminals in the middle of a war? when the war on terrorism is over, then they can have their trial.

You need to make up your mind. Are they prisoners of war or not? You can't debate the argument both ways.

Don't kid yourself the war on terrorism just like the war on drugs will never be over.

 

[BVS]

Also how can you 'try' somebody when the only solid evidence (by US justice standards) is the testimony of each other and they will not give that? They'd rather die than cooperate with us. They don't even know what a US trial is like so they have no idea they are not getting one anyway. If they weren't dangerous terrorists they would have begged for mercy and done anything they could to get back home to their families. So they must be, and not talking is part of what makes them look suspicious. But a real old fashioned American style hometown trial does not suit this situation so let's leave it to those who know the whole story.

Honestly what the f##k are you talking about? The only evidence is testimony of another, then how the hell did they detain them, their mother's ratted them out? I sure hope their reasoning is better than this logic.

If they weren't dangerous they would have begged for mercy?
So that's all they needed to do? Well I'm sure glad they aren't bright enough to beg for mercy because then we'd have a lot of free terrorist running around who are pissed off at their moms.

 

[nbcrusader]

Once again the only fact that we know so far is that there have been innocent people held there as long as 2 years

Which ones are you referring to?

They released the British citizens as a political gesture for Blair.