They could have been killed where they were found. Why do you resist inviting them into your own home as they are just mere accused petty criminals not worthy of your concern? Demonstrate your superior humanity for the rest of us to witness. Show us how it's done. Don't leave them in Gitmo when you could free them with a simple act of kindness. Post your address and a specific request. Do the right thing. Lead by example. Unless you count whining.
:wallbang: What don't you understand, they are going through the legal process, as defined by the G.C., and as out lined in the Geneva Convention. The Tribunals were given competency under Law by Congress, in the Military Commissions Act of 2006. The Tribunals are determining their status as POW, POW who has committed a crime, illegal combatant, or non-combatant. If you are taken on the field of battle you are under the jurisdiction of the military, and they are the Competent Authority for disposition of your status. That is the purpose of the Third Geneva Convention, to give a legal out line to the determination of status, and that competent tribunal's Military Tribunals have the status to determine such status. The Convention also gives the Military Tribunal the ability to Try, Render Judgement, and imposition of sentence on, those who have been adjudicated Guilty. Now a POW has several statuses's that he may be placed in........He maybe POW, He also can be charge for crimes committed on the Field of Battle, or for crimes committed as a POW, all fall under the Jurisdiction of Military Courts, and Tribunals. Also, Under the Regular Tribunals as authorized by the Military Commissions Act of 2006, he can be adjudicated as a illegal combatant, and charged for any crimes committed on the field of battle or against the civilian population, again as out lined by the Third Geneva Convention, Article 5, under competent authority, and that Authority for Tribunals, was given competence in the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and the Act, satisfies the 5 Article of the G.C. as to the Competency aspect of the Article.
Can we say "kangaroo court"? The Americans do not permit human rights organisations to interview the prisoners. They reframe suicide following torture and indefinite incarceration without charges as "manipulative self-injurious behaviors". These are not human beings, these are humbugs.
Most of the Gitmo captives were not taken on the field of battle by US soldiers, and it is not known for sure where and how, or why, they were captured. The bounty money was very generous. Meanwhile, all this fancy Tribunal stuff is years too late - the captives have already been tortured and abused for years, when they were supposed to have been treated as POWs until their status was determined by a competent Tribunal. All this violates Geneva, of course. Another impeachable offense, that could have had us a different administration by Katrina, had Congress a spine.
Wait a tick, but a number of the detainees were not taken within the field. Some for instance were simply sold like Murat Kurnaz, for instance. Or I remember a story of a number of Uighurs (an Chinese minority, which are usually moslems) detained for four years although their innocence had been established. The problem is that it is apparently unclear what one has to do to arouse enough suspicion to be detained. What is clear, however, is that the guidelines are not strict enough to only capture potential terrorists.
And the system found him innocent, and released him, and it probably could have done so earlier, except for the fact that the liberals went the route of the Supreme Court, which took months to decide the case, and then with that decision, forced the congress to authorize the tribunals, and then finally the tribunals were authorized, and could start sorting out who was who, then only then. How many months were lost to the liberal frontal assault. We are trying to release them, but we don't want to release them to the Chinese, for a 7.62mm re-education, To return them to China were they are classified as terrorist is to sentence them to death. About 20 countries -- including Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Turkey and a Latin American country -- have turned down U.S. overtures to give them asylum, and Other detainees cleared of terrorism charges have also languished for years at Guantanamo Bay, but all have been sent home or are in the process of being transferred. So why hasn't the rest of the world opened their countrie's borders? And just how do you go about capturing only terrorist? in a war there are a lot of things that are screwed up, but the fact is that with the U.S. your chances of coming out at the end of the process alive is a 1000% better than with most other countries around the world.
BS. The US was going to beat confessions out of them and hold them indefinitely, and was in the process of doing so. Had the Geneva Convention been respected, he would have been treated as a POW the whole time. They're afraid of them, and see no reason to take risks to bail out the US. They know how these guys have been treated, and they know most of them were innocent, or legitimate soldiers. They are now psychologically and physically shaky individuals. Already a couple releases who were innocent going in have found new callings and purposes for their lives in Islamic terrorist jihad after getting out.
James R.: Terrorism is the employment of attacks against a State by attacking their citizenry through such methods as car bombings, suicide bombings, hostage taking, street massacres, et cetera. As it is directed at the State, it differs from street crime. I was merely taking a commonly accepted evil practice. Would you care for a better definition? Okay. Evil can be defined as inherently inferior actions performed with malice and forethought.
BuffaloRoam: I would not hold my breath waiting for James R. to give better responses than those. That tends to be his habit in regards to responding to me and, from what I can tell, most other individuals.
Hypewaders: The Nazis knew how to wage war, that is for sure. It doesn't mean we have to adapt other Nazi strategies. One must simply look at things realistically and act without guilt.
iceaura: Pardon me? When did we ever "overmatch our enemy's lack of brutality"? If they were directing their focus on the State, as I described above to James R, then they are warriors indeed. No less worth of the electric chair, but still warriors. I have no problem killing a warrior anymore than I do killing a civilian who does something as bad. I have no worry that the US is going to start abducting regular citizens. We don't even do that when we ought to.
Asguard: See my definition of terrorism given to James R. above. That will refute your anti-law position that you seem to think I am advocating.
actually i dont see any difference. Lets take four examples. Guy walks into a bank, he is mentally disterbed (say suffering server depression because he caught his wife who works there screwing her boss). he holds the bank hostage and shoots a few people. The police arest him and he apears before the courts who then make a decision about wether he was mentally incapaciated or not and wether he comited the acts that he is acused of and IF FOUND GUILTY they decide what sentace is apropriate Second case, a group of people walk into a bank and shoot a few people in robing it, same sizge takes place and eventually they are arested. They face court, and then IF FOUND GUILTY they are sentaced by they courts Third case, a group of vetrans walk into a bank and hold it up because there services arnt acceptable to them. They are arested by the police. They fact court and if found guilty they are sentanced by the courts Fourth case, a group of muslims walk into a bank and hold it up. They are concidered "terriousts" and thrown into Gitmo. No trial, no habias corpus, no jury, no right to apeal ect. This is right acording to you?
Indeed. Of all the horrible things you hear about the Nazis, their lack of ability in waging war is never mentioned.
Yes, in violation of the rule of law, the rules of war, all notions of due process and decent human behaviour... If I had the power to free the Gitmo prisoners (or, more precisely, give them natural justice), don't you think I would have done it by now?
Buffalo Roam: So why haven't there been any charges or trials, after 5 years (excepting the Australian, David Hicks, who bargained his way out of Guantanamo)?
Remembering how U.S intel fucked up (!?!) the 911 and all the proofs around the WMDs in Iraq (!?!), It would be a safe bet that at least half of them are no terrorist.
most of the people in gitmo weren't caught on the field of battle. the were rounded up by wide sweeps after the states started to occupy Iraq. A large percentage were civilians rounded up simply because we didn't have enough people who speak the language, so they couldn't tell the troops who they were.
-And many were nobodies who were sold out for easy bounty money. The unlawful, knee-jerk post-9/11 gulag has greatly multiplied the bitter enemies of the USA.