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

[FizzingWhizzbees]

Which ones are you referring to?

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

Does that mean you don't think the people were released were innocent?

 

[Dreadsox]

Hard to tell there was no trial.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

Dread,
Do you think the Bush administration were wrong to release those British prisoners?

 

[BVS]

Why let them go rather then place them in someone else's detainment if it was just political?

 

[nbcrusader]

Dread,
Do you think the Bush administration were wrong to release those British prisoners?

Sorry, I know this was addressed to you Dread, but I seem to remember an article that said the military disagreed with their release and wanted to continue collecting information from them.

From all accounts, they did not appear to be British citizens on holiday when their tour bus took a wrong turn.....

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

So I take it from that that you don't believe the people released were innocent. As you stated before that you believe they were released as a "political gesture" does it concern you that the adminstration would be willing to release people they suspected of being terrorists for political gain?

 

[nbcrusader]

It bothers me that enemy combatants are released - even for political reasons. But politics is a complicated game.

 

[Dreadsox]

It bothers me that enemy combatants are released - even for political reasons. But politics is a complicated game.

This I agree with.......and I have a hard time believing that foreign nationals in Afghanistan were just there to see the countryside.

I was not there, I do not know why they were jailed, but I have faith in the soldiers that are there that they are doing their best to take into custody the right people.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

It bothers me that enemy combatants are released - even for political reasons. But politics is a complicated game.

Surely even the complexity of politics isn't sufficient justification for the release of people you consider to be guilty of terrorism?

It seems to me that there are two ways of looking at the released of the British prisoners:

Either you believe they were innocent and therefore should have been released, in which case you need to consider whether it was right for them to have been imprisoned for two years for no reason, and whether there may be other innocent prisoners being detained without just cause.

Or alternatively you believe that the prisoners weren't innocent and that their release was simply political manoeuvring on the part of the Bush administration, in which case, questions are raised about the integrity of an administration which would release people it believed to be dangerous simply because it was politically expedient.

 

[nbcrusader]

Or alternatively you believe that the prisoners weren't innocent and that their release was simply political manoeuvring on the part of the Bush administration, in which case, questions are raised about the integrity of an administration which would release people it believed to be dangerous simply because it was politically expedient.

From what I've read, they shouldn't have been released and the gesture was for Blair's benefit, not GWB's. You want to give them back?

 

[BVS]

Either you believe they were innocent and therefore should have been released, in which case you need to consider whether it was right for them to have been imprisoned for two years for no reason, and whether there may be other innocent prisoners being detained without just cause.

Or alternatively you believe that the prisoners weren't innocent and that their release was simply political manoeuvring on the part of the Bush administration, in which case, questions are raised about the integrity of an administration which would release people it believed to be dangerous simply because it was politically expedient.

Either way it should make one raise eyebrows at this administrations actions. If our beloved president is so hell bent on ending terrorism I believe I would lose all respect if I thought he released what I believed to be terrorists due to political gain.

 

[BVS]

From what I've read, they shouldn't have been released and the gesture was for Blair's benefit, not GWB's.

For Blair's benefit? So then GW is just weak.

Here's a man I want to keep in office

 

[nbcrusader]

Like this played into your evaluation....

 

[BVS]

Like this played into your evaluation....

No it didn't, I had already made my decision, but if I was a supporter of his I think something as heavy as this would definatley be a factor in my thinking.

 

[AcrobatMan]

i dont understand why people want them released.. they are dangerous people - and the whole world is safer if they are inside jails.

they cant be treated like other POWs...they are very different...and exciting ( in the wrong way of course)

 

[Angela Harlem]

this is the most frustrating misconception, in my view. i cant speak for anyone else in here or anywhere who has shared my view, but it is not the wanting of guilty people released. it is knowing and finding out for sure, through trial etc that they are guilty.

if they're all given trials and every single one of them is guilty of something, let them pay their dues. it is simply wrong to not know or find out first.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

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.

I believe I did make up my mind, but I guess I didn't make it clear enough for you.

They ARE prisoners of war, because we are at war. But this is not a type of war that is covered under Genega, therefore those rules do not apply. Again... what the world community needs to do is get together and make a new set of rules... either as an addendum to Geneva, or as en entirely different set of rules all together, regarding warriors who do not serve any one nation. there is no legal precedent for this... so let's get together and make the rules. until that point, keep them locked away.

 

[BluberryPoptart]

I believe I did make up my mind, but I guess I didn't make it clear enough for you.

They ARE prisoners of war, because we are at war. But this is not a type of war that is covered under Genega, therefore those rules do not apply. Again... what the world community needs to do is get together and make a new set of rules... either as an addendum to Geneva, or as en entirely different set of rules all together, regarding warriors who do not serve any one nation. there is no legal precedent for this... so let's get together and make the rules. until that point, keep them locked away.

Right!

For all you who keep going trial, trial, trial, I still say, HOW?? You cannot have a traditional trial with people like this in this situation. Who would the witnesses be? It would not work Headache is right, that's what I've always said, the old rules do not apply here, we have to make new ones!

 

[Klaus]

i dont understand why people want them released.. they are dangerous people - and the whole world is safer if they are inside jails.

I don't want them to be released i'd prefer that they are treated a way we treat criminals. I don't see any reason why there are hundreds of people where we don't know if they are guilty or not and they don't have any rights.
Some of them are released after almost 2 years but no court - nothing - nada.
I want justice, not a superpowercountry who treats people like non-human beengs.

 

[Salome]

Headache is right, that's what I've always said, the old rules do not apply here, we have to make new ones!

umm, I don't think Bush and his administration are the ones who get to decide when the rules of the Geneva Convention are not applicable

neither is it a decision I get to make, nor the queen of Sweden nor Nelson Mandela

 

[deep]

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.

What is the differece between blind trust and ignorace?

Senators Call for Probe of Army Chaplain Spy Case
From Reuters

April 24, 2004

WASHINGTON ? Two Democratic members of the Senate Armed Services Committee called Friday for the Pentagon to conduct an investigation into its treatment of a Muslim Army chaplain who was suspected of spying, detained for months and then quietly released.

Sens. Carl Levin of Michigan, senior Democrat on the committee, and Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts said the manner in which Capt. James Joseph Yee was detained and prosecuted "raises serious questions about the fair and effective administration of military justice."

They urged Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld in a letter "to give this issue your immediate attention."

The military initially held Yee, 36, on suspicion of espionage at the Guantanamo Bay detention center in Cuba, where he was a Muslim chaplain ministering to terrorism suspects.

He was arrested in September and placed in solitary confinement for 76 days.

When the military finally brought charges, Yee was accused of "mishandling classified documents," not espionage. Then, earlier this year, that charge and all other criminal counts against Yee were dropped and he was released.

In a noncriminal hearing in March, Yee was found guilty on lesser charges of adultery and possessing pornography and received a written reprimand from the Army.

The senators said the Pentagon should investigate the Army's handling of the case, "including whether the extensive pre-trial confinement and the charges against the chaplain were supported by the evidence."

They said the probe should look into "how and why information in the case was released to the press," noting that media reports had cited anonymous government sources saying Yee was suspected of espionage, aiding the enemy and treason.

 

[STING2]

I don't want them to be released i'd prefer that they are treated a way we treat criminals. I don't see any reason why there are hundreds of people where we don't know if they are guilty or not and they don't have any rights.
Some of them are released after almost 2 years but no court - nothing - nada.
I want justice, not a superpowercountry who treats people like non-human beengs.

I don't recall prisoners in World War II being treated like criminals and being given the opportunity to have a trial and be set free. This is a war, and the obvious security needs far outweigh these other concerns.

 

[deep]

I don't recall prisoners in World War II being treated like criminals and being given the opportunity to have a trial and be set free. This is a war, and the obvious security needs far outweigh these other concerns.

So like WWII you want Geneva Convention applied to these prisoners?

 

[STING2]

So like WWII you want Geneva Convention applied to these prisoners?

Unless it compromises security given the unique threat this terrorism poses, yes. The Terrorist have been treated very well given the circumstances, far better than most prisoners around the world, despite what others claim.

 

[BVS]

Ok to all of you who keep saying "this is war" and "they are prisoners of war" then what's keeping them from just locking up the whole Middle East until they decide on the rules? Obviously they didn't catch most of these people with gun in hand aiming at us, or waving some flag. So why not just lock up the whole damn place until we figure these things out cause honestly they really don't have to have a reason to be locked up, that's what all of you are saying. They don't need one f##king reason.

If they did have a reason to lock these people up then come forth and prove your case and let the innocent free. How hard is this to understand. You don't throw out all logic because the environment of this so called "war" changes.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

well i'm still going to believe that we wouldn't lock these people up for no reason... that there must be a reason why they are there, and why they were taken into custody... maybe i'm being naive, or maybe your hatred for this administration has overwellmed your thought. i dunno... i've said all i have to say on the issue.

 

[deep]

What is the differece between blind trust and ignorace?

 

[BVS]

well i'm still going to believe that we wouldn't lock these people up for no reason... that there must be a reason why they are there, and why they were taken into custody... maybe i'm being naive, or maybe your hatred for this administration has overwellmed your thought. i dunno... i've said all i have to say on the issue.

Yes it must always be hatred when one questions the very questionable actions of this government such as locking up children and holding people for up to two years without one single charge. Yes I just must be a person of blind hate to think this is questionable activity.

 

[deep]

1. maybe i'm being naive

well i'm still going to believe that we wouldn't lock these people up for no reason... that there must be a reason why they are there, and why they were taken into custody... maybe i'm being naive

or

2. maybe your hatred for this administration has overwellmed your thought

maybe your hatred for this administration has overwellmed your thought. i dunno... i've said all i have to say on the issue.

sorry headache,

since you made it an "either or" question

number 1 is most correct.

 

[najeena]

The irony of imprisoning people indefinitely without trail while we 'bring freedom' to their country... breathtaking.