US Has Now Lost 75% of Guantanamo Cases

[BioDefenseGrad]

No way, whacko. What, do you listen to Alex Jones or something? Everybody knows that Uncle Sam is clear and present and plays it by the book. What next, are you going to suggest that Congress sneaks shit into giant, unreadable bills?

Whackjob!

I know you're joking, but why should the U.S. "play it by the book" in a war?

 

[BioDefenseGrad]

If only it were that simple. But every time Obama brings up quagmire and attempts to fix it--the Republicans shit bricks and whip out their filibusters.

Bush and Cheney grabbed some list of (alleged) bad guys off of somebody's desk and essentially rounded up randoms off the streets to throw in Rendition Camps. Yes, some are bad. But Bush/Cheney didn't have a fookin clue what half of these detainees did or were planning. It was basically a giant grin and grab ass for the cameras/press back in 2004. Another phony Mission Accomplished--"Lookee America, we got all these baddies locked up YAY!"

"Oops, they didn't actually commit any crimes? Huh? Well, better leave this pooch screw for the next president to cleanup"

Obama should move these detainees to the Capitol, try them in a court with UN Supervision, and release anyone with an empty manilla folder. Kinda like a realization of Habeas Corpus :dunno:

We should not be a country that fears itself into locking up people without hard evidence. We're better than that.

"yes some are bad' nah quite a bit. How DO YOU KNOW that we didn't have a clue what they were up to? Do you know how some of these folks came into our posession? They were already being watched in their home countries before going to Afghanistan/Pakistan or terrorist hotspots around the world.

We are not better than that, nobody is. You fools don't understand this isn't an academic exercise, it's not a test of how liberal you are.

 

[emceeemcee]

I know you're joking, but why should the U.S. "play it by the book" in a war?

something to do with the geneva conventions, civilized behaviour, enlightment values, higher moral ground etc....

 

[vodkazvictim]

Let us not forget they did not just spend time in prison, they were massively abused and many if not most repeatedly waterboarded etc.

Whithout being given at least the rights of prisoners of war.

The Bush government created this, now Obama as to bear it.

If possible, the Bush family, Cheney and all the other cronies should be held personally responsible in the trials, and their wealth should be used to at least start to compensate for this. Of course, such abuse can't really be fully compensated, but it would be a start.

They will anti-american organisations, now?

Can you blame them?

Agree

no surprising, since most of the men in Guantanamo wasn't an....what that word....Ummmm i'm not gonna even say it.

What a waste of my fucking tax dollars Bush...I hope you rot in hell some day.:cussing:

Yep. Still, at least he didn't have any hurricane-wrecked cities that needed the funding, so it's not like it was a total waste of cash...

No way, whacko. What, do you listen to Alex Jones or something? Everybody knows that Uncle Sam is clear and present and plays it by the book. What next, are you going to suggest that Congress sneaks shit into giant, unreadable bills?

Whackjob!

Then refuse to answer the questions of their petitioners even though it's constitutionally guaranteed?

I know you're joking, but why should the U.S. "play it by the book" in a war?

Because if they don't then there will be much controversy, americans may may lose their fath in america and lose motivation to fight for her.
http://original.antiwar.com/engelhardt/2009/06/30/a-secret-history-of-dissent/

Because other countries will recognise these human rights abuses and distance themselves from america, depriving her of valuable allies.
Because if civilians learn they will be targetted, killed and tortured anyway, they will take up arms and form a resistance, starting a counter-insurgency campaign like the one faced in Vietnam.

Luckily, since america is well know to have played by the rules, these things won't come to pass... OH WAIT!

 

[Terry Sleeper]

Korea . . . . . Vietnam . . . . Guantanamo . . . . Iraq (very soon) . . . . the list just goes on and on.

"Deserta faciunt et pacem appellant."

Seems Tacitus had it right a long time ago.

 

[Boothbabe]

these "innocent" men are not citizens and I find it extremely difficult to believe they were just picked up off the street for no reason... I just don't buy it. TO apply our flawed court system to this issue is to suggest our court system works, and it doesn't

Why are they not citizens? Because you say so? Because the US government says so? Bending the law to suit your agenda is not how it works and once you do it the law is just some letters in some book. You either uphold the law in it's entirety or you don't. There is no middle ground.

As to the question of them being guilty....the fact that the US has lost 75% of the cases against people they are illegally detaining should be a clear indication to you a lot of them were indeed picked up off the street for no reason. @ the time the US government was under a lot of pressure to produce results. The US as a nation demanded results and didn't give a damn how they were obtained. You wanted a bad guy to place blame on and that's what they gave you. Some if you still need a bad guy instead of the truth.

 

[PlumpRump]

Why are they not citizens? Because you say so? Because the US government says so? Bending the law to suit your agenda is not how it works and once you do it the law is just some letters in some book. You either uphold the law in it's entirety or you don't. There is no middle ground.

As to the question of them being guilty....the fact that the US has lost 75% of the cases against people they are illegally detaining should be a clear indication to you a lot of them were indeed picked up off the street for no reason.

... What are you talking about? They are, by definition, not citizens... I don't really understand the confusion on this one, and we're not even talking birthright citizenship here. You're right, though. On this one, there is no middle ground: Foreign nationals, born in a foreign country, not living in the US, and not having citizenship or even residency in the US clearly makes them "not citizens."

And simply because a percentage of these prisoners were released says absolutely nothing about their status as "guilty or innocent," it simply makes a statement towards the concept that they had been improperly detained. And simply because someone has been improperly detained has nothing to do with the reasons why they were apprehended in the first place. There are several cases where suspicion that leads to detention does not ultimately lead to conviction. These individuals that have been released thus far may, or may not be innocent of crimes, but simply because there is no evidence to the contrary has no bearing on whether or not they are actually innocent or not.

Simply because a person has been "unlawfully detained," does not speak to innocence or guilt, it simply means that the evidence provided by the prosecution was not compelling enough to warrant further detention. Its all up to interpretation by the specific judge ruling over each specific case. And in a percentage of these cases, the judges were not compelled enough by the arguments made by the prosecution to further detain the individuals. It doesn't mean that they were/are innocent, it just means that there wasn't enough evidence to find that they were guilty. Google OJ Simpson, Sam Sheppard, or the murder of Jessica Lall. Just because a person is found "not guilty," doesn't at all mean they are "innocent."

 

[Crazy4theBrat]

Why is Guantanamo Bay still open? Wasn't Barrack Hussein Obama going to close it down very quickly after being elected? Is this yet another campaign Promise on which he has failed to follow through?

 

[Hot Mega]

Why is Guantanamo Bay still open? Wasn't Barrack Hussein Obama going to close it down very quickly after being elected? Is this yet another campaign promise on which he has failed to follow through?

Well, he's done what's necessary on his part. The ball is in congress' court now on funding.

But no question I am disappointed he couldn't make this happen since there was a consensus in his favor and he allowed a shrill minority to bluster it into a stalled policy.

But at the same time I recognize he's had bigger fish to fry...insomuch as he's done his part and the American people aren't holding congress accountable for doing their part.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Well, he's done what's necessary on his part. The ball is in congress' court now on funding.

But no question I am disappointed he couldn't make this happen since there was a consensus in his favor and he allowed a shrill minority to bluster it into a stalled policy.

But at the same time I recognize he's had bigger fish to fry...insomuch as he's done his part and the American people aren't holding congress accountable for doing their part.

Are you Muslim? Cause you sound like their advocate. No matter what the situation you are always firmly in their corner. Just asking.

 

[Facial_King]

Are you Muslim? Cause you sound like their advocate. No matter what the situation you are always firmly in their corner. Just asking.

Spare us your vulgar McCarthyism.

Wrap your head around this - one can be an "advocate" for Muslims to get their constitutional rights, along with everyone else! Does everything have to be an us-them, home-team or away-team kind of juvenile thing for you????

I'm a committed agnostic, and often annoyed by Muslims as much as I am Christians. Nonetheless....

 

[max0rz]

Why is Guantanamo Bay still open? Wasn't Barrack Hussein Obama going to close it down very quickly after being elected? Is this yet another campaign promise on which he has failed to follow through?

change the subject much?

Are you Muslim? Cause you sound like their advocate. No matter what the situation you are always firmly in their corner. Just asking.

Well that's a rather strange thing to ask.
What's being Muslim got to do with HM going to bat for Obamas weak stance on the Gitmo issue?

Mind you, considering some of the quite vile and disgusting things said about Muslims here, it's good that they have someone speaking up.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Spare us your vulgar McCarthyism.

Wrap your head around this - one can be an "advocate" for Muslims to get their constitutional rights, along with everyone else! Does everything have to be an us-them, home-team or away-team kind of juvenile thing for you????

I'm a committed agnostic, and often annoyed by Muslims as much as I am Christians. Nonetheless....

What constitutional rights? They're enemy combatants. You towel head lovers always have to resort to that shit followed by some snide remark like juvenile.

change the subject much?

Well that's a rather strange thing to ask.
What's being Muslim got to do with HM going to bat for Obamas weak stance on the Gitmo issue?

Not if you've read all his other posts.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

I just love these assholes that make their horseshit inflammatory post then log off.

 

[Hot Mega]

Are you Muslim? Cause you sound like their advocate. No matter what the situation you are always firmly in their corner. Just asking.

No. Neither is Colin Powell nor Lindsey Graham...(two other Americans who support closing GiTMO). And if you only believe someone need have a vested interest in an issue in order to make a practical, academic or objective point on it based on the facts..you have a little more growing up to do IMO.

There are people on this forum who thought I was an advocate for drinking and driving simply because I made objective, academic counterpoints to their emotional, kneejerk points.

It is possible for a person to simply discuss an issue and make a point without having a dog in the fight.

I suppose I should have supported the Muslim girl in another thread who sued Disney for the right to where her Muslim garb according to you right???

 

[Hot Mega]

I am so fucking sick of you rag head loving mother fuckers telling me to grow up. Ban me!

Just cause I don't agree with your bleeding heart crusade for everything Islam doesn't fucking mean I have to grow up. You grow the fuck up. The only reason we haven't been attacked again is because of the vigilance of our intelligence community, and keeping these pieces of human shit right where we can see them. That's life today, that's the real world. So fucking naive.

If you reread what I wrote, I didn't suggest you needed to grow up because you disagree with me.

I said it because you seem to think a person's position on an issue must have something to do with them personally.

There are thousands of issues a mature person can have a position on but have nothing to do with their personal interests. They can separate whatever personal feeling they have on an issue from a simple, objective position based on the facts.:2 cents:

And the amount of times we have been attacked since 9/11 is countless...why do you think there are so many dead Americans coming back home from the middle east?

 

[BioDefenseGrad]

something to do with the geneva conventions, civilized behaviour, enlightment values, higher moral ground etc....

Oh please don't even start with that garbage. What moral high ground do you take in asymmetric warfare?

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

If you reread what I wrote, I didn't suggest you needed to grow up because you disagree with me.

I said it because you seem to think a person's position on an issue must have something to do with them personally.

There are thousands of issues a mature person can have a position on but have nothing to do with their personal interests. They can separate whatever personal feeling they have on an issue from a simple, objective position based on the facts.:2 cents:

And the amount of times we have been attacked since 9/11 is countless...why do you think there are so many dead Americans coming back home from the middle east?

What does that have to do with telling a grown man he's juvenile or needs to grow up. I honestly think doing that is the most demeaning thing one man can say to another, and I'm not just talking about you.

You know very well I was inferring on American soil.

 

[Hot Mega]

What does that have to do with telling a grown man he's juvenile or needs to grow up.

Because I think it is a sign of immaturity for someone to accuse you of being a this or that lover just because you make an objective point.

I honestly think doing that is the most demeaning thing one man can say to another, and I'm not just talking about you.

Well, if it's that offensive to you I have no problem taking it back but my point still stands...it's not really mature to assume someone is something or a lover of it just because they look at things objectively.

You know very well I was inferring on American soil.

Since the USS Cole and the our embassies are considered "American soil" too...every base we've established in Iraq and Afghanistan are considered "American soil" too.

If you want to discount those...then we weren't attacked on the CONUS under Clinton in 8 plus years.

Point is, terrorists don't give a shit where they dead up Americans. I suppose if it makes you feel better to distinguish Americans being killed there as opposed to here...that might be a point.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Because I think it is a sign of immaturity for someone to accuse you of being a this or that lover just because you make an objective point.

Well, if it's that offensive to you I have no problem taking it back but my point still stands...it's not really mature to assume someone is something or a lover of it just because they look at things objectively.

I apologize for this. Believe it or not I was trying to joke in a sarcastic manner in the original post. Bad taste and I didn't think about it before it was too late. No excuse.

Since the USS Cole and the our embassies are considered "American soil" too...every base we've established in Iraq and Afghanistan are considered "American soil" too.

If you want to discount those...then we weren't attacked on the CONUS under Clinton in 8 plus years.

Point is, terrorists don't give a shit where they dead up Americans. I suppose if it makes you feel better to distinguish Americans being killed there as opposed to here...that might be a point.

Now this is ridiculous, you must know I don't feel this way.