Gitmo Detention Now Closed
- Thread starter sanjuro
- Start date
"You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here." It's like a bar after last call.
To be closed, in a year.
Relieves the stigma.........but nothing is solved.
does this mean they're no longer registering guests?
murtha has a suggestion: Murtha: OK to send Gitmo prisoners to Pennsylvania
just take a moment & think about it: if these guys get into our prisons, they'll be spreading teh islam
murtha has a suggestion: Murtha: OK to send Gitmo prisoners to Pennsylvania
just take a moment & think about it: if these guys get into our prisons, they'll be spreading teh islam
at least it's not teh born agin
Spreading teh love/
It's the American way.
placating the democratic supporters is all this amounts to.
read his words carefully.
we'll see where this stands a year from now.
if any of them end up confined within the borders of this land, wherever that lies will become the prime Islamic terrorist target.
read his words carefully.
we'll see where this stands a year from now.
if any of them end up confined within the borders of this land, wherever that lies will become the prime Islamic terrorist target.
Put them all on a boat, preferably one made out of a 1951 Chevy pickup truck then mysteriously have it sink, I think Cheney should be the captain.
Problem solved.
Problem solved.
"Where the detainees would be housed if not at Guantanamo has become a point of contention for Obama as he grapples with the already thorny legal issue."
that comment will ultimately determine whether or not the facilty will remain open or closed.
that comment will ultimately determine whether or not the facilty will remain open or closed.
That's a waste of a perfectly good 51 Chevy truck.
Lashing the inmates together to form a raft is more efficient plus, unlike the Chevy, the buoyancy will improve over time as the corpses become bloated.
This "Freedom Raft" could then be presented to any of the remarkably well-educated, impeccably healthy citizens of Cuba desperately looking for a way off the Isle of Utopia.
at the earliest.
It is like the oriental rug shop down the road that has been having a 50% off going out of business sale for the past 9 years.
Edit: Sorry Sanjuro, should that be Asian American Rug shop?
I guess it depends on what they sell and who owns it?
better yet.........
i say put them all on an old military transport plane who's airframe has no time left on it.
send it off towards the open atlantic w/ minimal fuel.
have the pilot set the auto pilot, then bail out to be picked up by the coast guard.
then.........
"THIS IS A FOX NEWS ALERT.........."
Oriental Rugs are actually Arabic, or as I like to say, the Sand N.......
Where will college kids go for Spring Break, then?
bzzt. will be closed within a year.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/us/politics/23GITMOCND.html?hp
Crap I can't find the link I had, that said the goal that was stated in that NYT article you had , however realisticly, they said it would take a year.
Hopefully they are wrong and it is done faster .
so if we're closing a perfectly good base because of some ethics violations.....why aren't we closing the white house?
Because we are equal opportunity employers there.
oster_oops:Sping Break's some serious ****....I wonder if all those kids would have been so eager Obama supporters if they only knew he was such a party pooper. At least GWB is a party guy (I've seen him drunk during his years as a governor).
Only the detention part of the base, right? You don't mean that the whole base will be given back to Cuba??
correct. i don't see any indication that the us will be embarking on a widespread campaign to close overseas bases, for better or worse.
made for a good photo, made good on campaign promise, however, nothing of substance in regards to where to to put the Level 3s. We may not have a Gitmo detention center in a year but there will be a detention center somewhere. Bigger issue is how to try detainees. Still a lot of legal questions to figure out before this mess left by Cheney is gone.
upon closer inspection, this is more widely sweeping than originally reported (media's fault - not obama's).
as far as this goes:
that's a tad unrealistic, and could come at the cost of another country's sovereignty if it's truly to be "made sure". overall i see this as window dressing, but a pretty wise move in the theater of presentation.
the article goes on to tell us about some dude who's in a s.c. prison, and that the cia's prison network is just south of 100.
i did not know that.
all in all, i believe cia & obama will work together to creatively - and legally - interrogate, house, & process our future guests. it's simply amazing to read what's still allowable under the geneva convention. i'd crack like bob barker's hip.
Just like extradition treaties with countries who won't ship back their [absolute worst] criminals if they face the death penalty. You can't enforce a thing once they're back in the other countries' hands, but you can stop sending more if you know or suspect the opposite end of the line isn't doing what they said they'd do. (Or, in this case, much more likely that we keep shipping them over and remain blissfully ignorant of what happens after they're across the border...)
Make them citizens of Texas, show them what the true USA is all about, let them study and give them jobs according to their skills (no raghead discrimination), and you'll see how the US American way of life will change their minds. :twich:
I belive that a country that suspects that people they expell will get unfair treatment in the country they come to, then they're not allowed to do so by UN binding rules. A lot of these discussions in Sweden...
Released in November of 2007. So apparently, even using the Bush/Cheney mandate, we weren't able to dig up charges on this guy sufficient to stick. I wonder what his rank, expertise, and experience in Al-Qaeda were before his detainment?
One more nail in the coffin of torture and illegal detainment.
Charges: maybe, maybe not. Detaining before you have a clear legal course of action in regards to trails vs. tribunals, legal, full definition of war criminal, etc. =stupid.
Rank, status, etc prior? Not relevant anymore is it? What's his rank, status, motivation now? Very relevant.
Ohio, if you'd quit worrying so much about being right, you'd see we agree on this, just stating it a different way.
Charges: if had anything, ANYTHING, dude most assuredly would not have been set free. Why weren't our enhanced techniques sufficient to find anything?
Rank and status is relevent. If we turned a low-ranking grunt into a high-ranking officer by detaining him, that certainly is good reason not to detain those without charges for extended periods. We would be growing hardened terrorists like we do petty drug offenders in domestic prisons. If he started high-ranking, how could we not have charges?
What do we agree on?
My body subsists on correctness. I have no choice.
Yes, we're in agreement. I coulda sworn you were arguing it should stay open and continue to attach prisoners to car batteries.
See? We do agree. Let me make sure my point is clear. Gitmo detention was a bad idea. If we felt the need to detain terrorism suspects, we needed to have done all the legal legwork first, had a clear plan for investigating and prosecuting suspects and should have at least had multinational support and assistance, since we deemed it a global war on terror (it was cause I have a medal that says I participated in it)
Did terrorism suspects need to be detained? Probably. Tortured, never.
Like Manimal, I went through military SERE school about being captured and a prisoner of war. I can tell you that if it were real and after a long enough time under duress and torture, I probably would have said just about anything to make it stop.
Bottom line is we're stuck with these detainees, since most countries won't take them, we don't have a means to legally try them and if we just turn them loose, it will turn out like the link I posted above, they'll just become more devoted terrorist.
Did terrorism suspects need to be detained? Probably. Tortured, never.
Like Manimal, I went through military SERE school about being captured and a prisoner of war. I can tell you that if it were real and after a long enough time under duress and torture, I probably would have said just about anything to make it stop.
Bottom line is we're stuck with these detainees, since most countries won't take them, we don't have a means to legally try them and if we just turn them loose, it will turn out like the link I posted above, they'll just become more devoted terrorist.
It's a bit glib to discuss POWs as if they were imprisoned under or by the criminal process.
I'm not saying Gitmo/the POW process was well-handled, mind you, but POWs aren't taken into custody as the result of legal proceedings.
I'm not saying Gitmo/the POW process was well-handled, mind you, but POWs aren't taken into custody as the result of legal proceedings.
I agree that we can't just open the gates, but holding them without charges is ridiculous. The guy from Canada that has been in solitary in a Navy brig since 2001 is crazy.
Not how we expect our guys to be handled.
Not how we expect our guys to be handled.
But they aren't classified as POW's, only "enemy combatants". Or did I miss a memo somewhere.
EU: U.S. must show Gitmo prisoners pose no risk
that eu sure is a funny outfit, complete w/ sequins i'm sure