Then hold him, accuse him openly and offer him a honest trial How long has he be held? Since 2002...he was fifteen, so for seven years almost half of the life he had lived before he was abducted by military forces. Would we want this for our brothers, cousins, or sons. Is this justice? Is this a speedy trial, was he allowed access to counsel?
He has been Held for over six years. He was a baby faced kid and that allowed him to get close to US servicemen. Her was a tool of those much worse than him but he is a terrorist all the same. His brother, Abdurahman has denounced his families terrorist ways.
He was a fifteen year old kid who is now close to twenty one. Weren't the US military skilled enough against a 15 year old? And why did Abdurahman denouce his family's ways? And why do you hate this kid so much? Still not buying that he had to be held off shore for seven years, submitted to torture, and not allowed access to legal justice...how did that make us safer? Did we strip him, submit him to dogs and waterboarding...what intelligence did that gain? Did it make him hate us...bet it did. Will he ever trust US citizens? Probably not. What exactly have we gained? We succeeded in one thing creating another human being that despises us.
WTF the does mean?? Apparently so ,he's in prison. Quite obvious,well to most of us. Because he's a murderer Why do you love him sooo much,??? Omar isn't tossing grenades anymore,that's a start. Good ,Mission accomplished. Opposed to the love he was giving us prior?? 1 less piece of shit trying to cash in on his $1500 a head bounty(amount offered for killing US troops). Blame that on his parents. Who gives a FUCK?? do you trust him?? of course you do....
I have no big problem with Gitmo being closed but they really need to get all of this ironed out before they do.
Because if he was your fifteen year old brother you would want better for him. But after six years held offshore, submitted to torture, I wouldn't even trust my brother. His parents and family didn't create this threat we did with our invalid incarceration. We create monsters when we don't acknowledge they are also humans and treat them under the laws we view just. But that's no reason to continue the injustice. You never explained why his brother didn't follow. Care to clarify?
I think that's why the time table is set at a year. What they have halted are the joke of military trials.
Is he YOUR brother?? you sure act like it. I do have brothers,none of them are terrorist. WE? No "monsters" in Iraq? or anywhere for that matter, only the USA can create a monster, you're unreal. This is just another lame attempt(of many) to justify the Killing of US Troops, anytime,anywhere. No reason ? Tell that to the parents of Sgt. F.C. Christopher Speer . Let him go for time served?
I just think it's better not to rush to close Gitmo. How about changing how the place is being run while working out the details on what you'll do with the detainees before closing? They aren't sure on who will take these people. This could become a mess for Barack.
I'm saying there's plenty of other secret facilities they could transfer these people and torture them there. It's just a ploy to make people think " Hey, he's different than Bush" when in reality he's just a wolf in sheep's clothing who's not changing anything but the location of the prisoners, the soldiers etc. Moving troops from Iraq into Afghanistan isn't ending the war, but that's the "change" we're looking at for the next four years. Playing with numbers, changing words around etc. Guantanamo is notoriously known around the world for the torture that went on there over the last seven years, by closing it down makes Obama look good and that's exactly how they keep the average sheep in check.
Some people here seem to deny that there are horrible and dangerous people being held in Guantanamo. Providing them a "fair trail", as so many feel they deserve, may prove to be impossible. Proving that they killed Americans (Westerners) may not be possible to the same standard as we expect from our courts, charged with the task of trying our citizens. If we are able to prove that these people have ties to Al Qaeda would that be enough? If we prove that the trained in Taliban camps would that be enough? Do we need to have physical evidence and put them before a jury of their peers? I, for one, doubt that any of the Enemy Combatants held at Gitmo are truly innocent victims of America's war on terrorism.
If they weren't "horrible and dangerous" people when they went in, they probably will be coming out. Who wouldn't be after being tortured and put through various forms of sensory deprivation? But it seems that most people's idea of a "terrorist" is anyone who opposes US occupation through force and defensive actions. When we invade a foreign, sovereign nation, kill women and children and make life for these people miserable, and those people defend themselves on their own turf, they're deemed "terrorists." Westerners seem unable to put themselves in the position of their own country being invaded and what they would do if someone was dropping bombs on and firing at their families.
Yes. Perhaps the millions of people incarcerated in the USA presently should stay there because they will probably be terrible people once they come out from prison. Honestly, that's a stupid reason to keep people jailed without trial. I can't believe you even suggested that they are guilty before ever even being charged of anything. Nice little justice you have going on there.
Work on the reading comprehension please. I never suggested anything you're accusing me of. I don't even believe in the notion of "Middle East terrorists" the way most people do. I don't even think they had anything to do with 9/11.
Rat...that sounds to me a lot like what the Israelis are doing. The only caveat being that you do not recognise that Israel has a right to exist...
I ask again, what would you consider a fair trail for the inmates at Gitmo? By what standard of proof would you consider them to be justifiably incarcerated?
To Start with: A competent, neutral and detached judge and jury Uninfluenced witnesses Sufficient and equal amount of legal counsel for all parties The same standard of proof required to lock you up for the rest of your life.
There is some confusion here. Prisoners of war are not criminals. You dont get arrested and convicted of being a soldier in the other side's army. What do you think they are going to get charged with - firearms offences? Assault? People want to simultaneously refer to the geneva conventions and then talk about criminal trials. Secondly,the people in Gitmo are not Afghans and Iraqis "resisting the occupation" as Rat likes to fantasise. Those people are in prison in Iraq and Afghanistan, and getting treated a hell of a lot worse. Gitmo is almost entirely for foreigners captured in Afghanistan and others picked up in Pakistan or elsewhere. It is mostly for Al Queda and other terrorists. Even at that, 420 out of 775 have alredy been released. Another 50 are so are cleared to go if anyone wants them. The rest... well Obama has a year to figure it out.
Actually, you are incorrect, they are not POW's, POW's are released at the end of the conflict and are protected by the Geneva Conventions. Those held in Gitmo are Enemy Combatants. Since Enemy Combatant is not legal status, they are not technically protected by the Geneva Conventions, criminal law or the Constitution. Which according those who approve of this extra-legal status, means if you are designated an Enemy Combatant, they can arrest you and hold you in captivity indefinitely, without trial or any other way to have your innocents or guilt established. If you don't think this can happen to a US citizen on US soil, google Jose Padilla.
