NationStates Jolt Archive

The BBC in the UK is running a "Have your say" on the above question, http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=1102&&edition=1&ttl=20060310151445

I personally think that if you (the US) cannot prove within a couple of months that someone is a terrorist, you should let them go!

The inhumane treatment of the prisoners, goes against all basic human rights.

What do other NS'ers think?

"Should Guantanamo Bay Be closed?"

No.

"Should Guantanamo Bay be closed?"

Of course! Tortures, people enjailed without proofs or reasons...

If it were a normal jail with people judged, I wouldn't see any problem on keeping Guantanamo open, but the place is in a non-legal situation. You can't combat terrorism with terrorism, because then you are equal to a bomber.

Note: No One of those who are inside Guantanamo has ever been found as "terrorist".

Yes, immediately. Not only is the damn place immoral, it's also illegal in god knows how many ways. If the US can prove without a doubt that a prisoner is a terrorist in some way, then by all means keep them and imprison them, kill them, whatever.

But the torturing that goes on in there, the privitations are insane, and more to the point, ultimately pointless. The US hasn't proven that those in the prisons are actually terrorists or even have terrorist links, and as such should be released immediately, given compensation and the right to sue the government for huge damages.

Note: No One of those who are inside Guantanamo has ever been found as "terrorist".

Foolish liberal! That's because they're really, really good at hiding their terrorism. Yeah, that's it, they're using secret ninja techiques and stuff.

In other words, yes, close it.

"Should Guantanamo Bay Be closed?"

No.

Why not? What possible purpose does such a camp have? The people imprisoned there haven't been proven to be terrorists, for christs sake!

I actually posted this to see what our American cousins, thought about the subject.

Seems they are not interested, or unconcerned that the rest of the world appears to think their government is in the wrong.

I actually posted this to see what our American cousins, thought about the subject.

Seems they are not interested, or unconcerned that the rest of the world appears to think their government is in the wrong.

So...because only a few american's have answered in just over 30 Minutes, they're not concerned?

Please. Give it a few hours. Don't start making presumptions so early.

I actually posted this to see what our American cousins, thought about the subject.

Seems they are not interested, or unconcerned that the rest of the world appears to think their government is in the wrong.

Give em a break man, its only about 10:00am there. Wait untill they've finished school/work/whatever and then accuse them of being uninterested.

But yeah, it should definately close. Not that I think this will happen anytime in the near future, but heres hoping.

Why not? What possible purpose does such a camp have? The people imprisoned there haven't been proven to be terrorists, for christs sake!

Because they are being held in camp X ray/Delta/whatever they are calling it now.

G bay is a larger military facility and i think that is what Eut was refering to.

Use Guantanamo Bay to open a Cuba Disney instead. That should piss Fidel no end.

Of course it should be immediately closed! People there are treated worse than dirt, completely ignoring human rights. At least the majority of people there are only *supposed* terrorists, with no hard evidence! :mad:

"Should Guantanamo Bay Be closed?"

No.
You need an extended stay at Guantanomo Bay really badly :upyours:

Give em a break man, its only about 10:00am there. Wait untill they've finished school/work/whatever and then accuse them of being uninterested.

But yeah, it should definately close. Not that I think this will happen anytime in the near future, but heres hoping.


Many apologies, should have remembered the Time difference :headbang:

I'm in favor of closing Guantanamo Bay if we can buy Devil's Island and relocate our facility there.

I'm in favor of closing Guantanamo Bay if we can buy Devil's Island and relocate our facility there.

Is that near Dr. Moreau's island...

Is that near Dr. Moreau's island...
It's near French Guyana (sp?). Ever see the movie Papillon? It's set on a prison collony that's supposed to be based on Devil's Island.

Close it before it becomes a Robyn Island....

"Should Guantanamo Bay Be closed?"

YES!!

Either charge the detainees or let them go. Guantanamo as it is presently conducting business, is violating human rights.

Suspected terrorists should be tried by international courts and not some kangaroo court.

Yes. That facility has been a great setback in the fight for democracy and political/military accountability. It gives tyrannies all over the world a 'w1n' button in that debate.

It's near French Guyana (sp?). Ever see the movie Papillon? It's set on a prison collony that's supposed to be based on Devil's Island.

Read the book. That still open?

I actually posted this to see what our American cousins, thought about the subject.

Seems they are not interested, or unconcerned that the rest of the world appears to think their government is in the wrong.

I'm actually keeping my opinion to myself. OPSEC and all.

Yes, it should be closed. I'm sure that the U.S. will still need a place to house suspected terrorists, but if it closes it's possible that they will have to open that facility on U.S. soil, where it will have to be held accountable to U.S. law. It probably wouldn't happen, but that would just mean that the next facility should have to be closed (and so on) until it does happen.

It's strange, the UK government locked up Irish terrorists in civilian prisons under civilian criminal justice, and no-one complained. It's not like it was a soft punishment, we're talking years to life terms.

Everyone got released as part of the peace process though. I didn't agree with that. But it just shows that there are better ways of doing things. Achieves what you want, without making you look stupid.

It's strange, the UK government locked up Irish terrorists in civilian prisons under civilian criminal justice, and no-one complained. It's not like it was a soft punishment, we're talking years to life terms.


Sorry.... what?

Read the book. That still open?
It's a tourist attraction now.

yes, close the damn place and stop saying everyone in theres a terrorist. you want everdence everyone isn't a terroist-Look at the Tipton 3!

Sorry.... what?
Well, OK, some people complained, but they must have been freedom-hating terrorists too. :p

There wasn't universal international condemnation, is what I meant.

"Should Guantanamo Bay Be closed?"

No.
I'm sure the OP wanted more than just "yer or no" responses.

Guantanamo Bay serves no useful function. You don't even need to touch the torture or legal issues. There is just no point to its existence.

There is no point in keeping its inmates in a legal grey area. We've found out that most of them aren't even suspected of being terrorists. It's just a waste of US government money that would be better spent catching or killing actual terrorists.

Woah, the BBC message board makes this place look tame.

I reckon the place should be shut down. From what I know about Guantanamo it is the equivalent to the Gulags of the USSR. A few are there because of intelligence which wouldn't hold in a court or law or is insuffcient, but most are there because someone with a grude against the detainee pointed a finger at them.

It is also the most shocking of human rights violations considering that the coalitions backup reason for invading Iraq was to put a stop to Saddam's human right's violations (which included locking up terrorists against his regime without trial).

Woah, the BBC message board makes this place look tame.

I reckon the place should be shut down. From what I know about Guantanamo it is the equivalent to the Gulags of the USSR.

Oh boy....

A modern day equivalent in a world where such extremities no longer exist maybe.... a direct comparison? Hardly.

Woah, the BBC message board makes this place look tame.

I reckon the place should be shut down. From what I know about Guantanamo it is the equivalent to the Gulags of the USSR. A few are there because of intelligence which wouldn't hold in a court or law or is insuffcient, but most are there because someone with a grude against the detainee pointed a finger at them.

It is also the most shocking of human rights violations considering that the coalitions backup reason for invading Iraq was to put a stop to Saddam's human right's violations (which included locking up terrorists against his regime without trial).
Just to add a little fun on a Friday afternoon, a concerned group of doctors from around the world have condemned the US for force feeding prisoners that were on hunger strikes at Gitmo.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/3713850.html

MIAMI - More than 250 physicians from around the world are condemning the Pentagon's practice of force-feeding suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in a letter in today's edition of the British medical journal Lancet.

"Fundamental to doctors' responsibilities in attending a hunger striker is the recognition that prisoners have a right to refuse treatment," says the letter, which accuses the U.S. military of violating medical ethics.

The UN calls the force-feeding "torture." There's no way the US can win on this. If these prisoners are allowed to kill themselves through starvation you can bet that these very same doctors, together with the rancid United Nations, would be lining up to condemn the US for their deaths.

Woah, the BBC message board makes this place look tame.
How dare they!!

I suggest we kick it up a notch or two!

All of those who want to keep Guantanamo Bay open surely have brown babies for breakfast.

Those who want to keep it open would tie dynamite stick to their granmas.

Ok, your turn.

I'm 100% in favour of closing down G Bay.
Such blatant disregard for human rights is disgusting. I can't believe the US even attempts to back up keeping that place running. What the hell kind of propaganda is the gov't feeding you people down there that makes it look like it's even remotely necessary to keep it going?

The UN calls the force-feeding "torture." There's no way the US can win on this. If these prisoners are allowed to kill themselves through starvation you can bet that these very same doctors, together with the rancid United Nations, would be lining up to condemn the US for their deaths.

Well the US doesn't listen to the United Nations anyway so... :p

A more realistic question would be: what purpose does the prison at Guantanamo serve? Because if it serves a tactical purpose, and that purpose is more important than the negative publicity the camp creates, it should remain open.

I can't think of any purpose that it may serve.

Oh boy....

A modern day equivalent in a world where such extremities no longer exist maybe.... a direct comparison? Hardly.I think you missed the point of my comparison. My comparison only extended to why the detainees were there, not what was happening to them.

I think you missed the point of my comparison. My comparison only extended to why the detainees were there, not what was happening to them.

Well, someone was going to blow your comparison into something it wasn't... all about the horrors and terrors of Stalin and how dare you compare Stalinist Russia to free America blah blah blah.

I thought I'd get in there first and neutralise that possiblilty. :D

Agree with you though.

Use Guantanamo Bay to open a Cuba Disney instead. That should piss Fidel no end.

Make Guantanamo Bay an independent Country for Cuban Americans with US backing, similar to Taiwan and China,
South Korea and North Korea.

That small area will have a bigger industrial economy than the whole of Cuba, similar to Hong kong, LOL.

Or just a US City with alot of Cuban Americans who would settle there.

I love the Cuba DisneyLand Idea, LOL.

Yes, it would piss Fidel no end, LOL.

How dare they!!

I suggest we kick it up a notch or two!

All of those who want to keep Guantanamo Bay open surely have brown babies for breakfast.

Those who want to keep it open would tie dynamite stick to their granmas.

Ok, your turn.All those who want to shut down the government operation that has provided us with so much security must be arab hippies with plastic surgery on their face to make look like their white!

Is that alright?

All those who want to shut down the government operation that has provided us with so much security must be arab hippies with plastic surgery on their face to make look like their white!

Is that alright?

I want to try!!

Damn liberals!! Nothing more than gay cheerleaders for Osama!
Why do they hate America!!??

i don't think i'm good at this

Make Guantanamo Bay an independent Country for Cuban Americans with US backing, similar to Taiwan and China,
South Korea and North Korea.


Hmmm... given the two examples of yours were founded by war, that's probably not the best solution! :p

I think it should be kept open, but that's for Americans to decide among themselves. I don't think foreign opinion should influence US decisions.

Well, someone was going to blow your comparison into something it wasn't... all about the horrors and terrors of Stalin and how dare you compare Stalinist Russia to free America blah blah blah.

I thought I'd get in there first and neutralise that possiblilty. :D

Agree with you though.Uh... cheers? I just can't tell if someone's being sarcastic, ironic or other things on these forums. So I gave up trying and just take everything at face value. Half the people mean what they say the other half just joking. Gah.

I think it should be kept open, but that's for Americans to decide among themselves. I don't think foreign opinion should influence US decisions.Unfortunately we live in a world experiencing the phenonom of globalisation. People are always trying to tell you what to do, and sometimes it's prudent to listen to them.

Uh... cheers? I just can't tell if someone's being sarcastic, ironic or other things on these forums. So I gave up trying and just take everything at face value. Half the people mean what they say the other half just joking. Gah.

I don't even know anymore... :(

But I was joking anyway. I think

Hmmm... given the two examples of yours were founded by war, that's probably not the best solution! :p

They are not founded by war, the US already controls Guantanamo Bay.

Fidel may wish to go to war with the USA to stop them, but it would mean the end of Fidel's Cuban government, LOL.

How dare they!!

I suggest we kick it up a notch or two!

All of those who want to keep Guantanamo Bay open surely have brown babies for breakfast.

Those who want to keep it open would tie dynamite stick to their granmas.

Ok, your turn.
Those of you who would close down Guantanamo are terrorist puppy-stranglers who would stone little girls to death for learning to read.

I want to try!!

Damn liberals!! Nothing more than gay cheerleaders for Osama!
Why do they hate America!!??

i don't think i'm good at thisPractice makes perfect my young Hitler apologist, freedom hater. Which is why they have so many people at Guantanamo Bay. They're hoping they'll get this freedom-torture down to a t and be able to get Kerry to confess to where he's been hiding Osama.

They are not founded by war, the US already controls Guantanamo Bay.


So, you're saying that North Korea and South Korea, China and the Republic of China were not founded during a war or because of the events of a war.....

So, you're saying that North Korea and South Korea, China and the Republic of China were not founded during a war or because of the events of a war.....

You are correct on the history, at first I thought you was refering to my Ideas of making Guantanamo Bay an independent nation for Cuban Americans and or A US City.

Which as I point out the US already controls Guantanamo Bay and Fidel may wish to go to war with the US to stop them, but would mean the end of Fidel's Cuban government, LOL.

I still love Iztatepoptla's idea of a Cuba Disneyland, LOL.

Which would piss Fidel no end, LOL.

Hmmm... given the two examples of yours were founded by war, that's probably not the best solution! :p


Considering Gitmo is a LEASE from the cuban government, i don't think we can give it away. and nor is it large enough to become its own country.

Just to add a little fun on a Friday afternoon, a concerned group of doctors from around the world have condemned the US for force feeding prisoners that were on hunger strikes at Gitmo.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/3713850.html

The UN calls the force-feeding "torture." There's no way the US can win on this. If these prisoners are allowed to kill themselves through starvation you can bet that these very same doctors, together with the rancid United Nations, would be lining up to condemn the US for their deaths.
The US DESERVES to be in a Catch 22 here.

Considering Gitmo is a LEASE from the cuban government, i don't think we can give it away. and nor is it large enough to become its own country.

La Habana Cuba
The US already controls Guantanamo Bay, since the US is a superpower it can do anything it wants with it, it honors the payment of the lease from a previous Cuban government which Fidel does not collect, it has an American intrest section in Habana, but no offical relations.

Fidel may wish to go to war with the US To stop them, but it would mean the end of Fidel's Cuban government, LOL.

Guantanamo Bay is about 45 square miles - 116 km, bigger than some small nations or dependencys and bigger than some American Cities, Boston Massachusetts 43 sq miles, Miami Florida 45 sq miles.

Make Guantanamo Bay an independent Country for Cuban Americans with US backing, similar to Taiwan and China,
South Korea and North Korea.

That small area will have a bigger industrial economy than the whole of Cuba, similar to Hong kong, LOL.

Or just a US City with alot of Cuban Americans who would settle there.

I love Izatepopotla's Idea make Guantanamo Bay A Cuba DisneyLand, which would piss Fidel no end, LOL.

Yes, it would piss Fidel no end, LOL.

Those of you who would close down Guantanamo are terrorist puppy-stranglers who would stone little girls to death for learning to read.
What?? I haven't strangled any kittens! Oh wait, you said puppies? Okay then... Um... Eh... I NEVER LEARNED TO READ!! :(

Seriously though. Yes, the detention facility on Guantanamo should be closed, or the government should acknowledge that the detainees are subject to US (and international) law and that Guantanamo is under the juridistiction of US courts. The status the facility has as a "legal black hole" is unacceptable.

I must admit. I am shocked, I assumed that, (reading the American press and watching Fox, CNN etc) the americans would whole heartedly support G Bay, after effects etc of 9/11.

So whats going on if the people of the USA can see that G bay is wrong, why can't its President?

I think it should be closed. It is against what Americans claim to stand for. Plus it is of no real use.

Catching Pushtun goatherds and passing them off as Al-Qaeda and claiming victory in war on terror is of no use and is actually counter productive in the sense that real dangerous jihadis have not yet been captured and this catching of low value targets (at best) is inflammatory in that region.

http://www.newsyemen.net/en/view_news.asp?sub_no=5_2006_03_10_5867
Most Guantanamo detainees are not Al Qaeda and were not picked up on any battlefield. According to a study published by Seton Hall Law School, a whopping 86% of the Guantanamo detainees were arrested not in Afghanistan by American troops, but in Pakistan by Pakistani warlords, who were paid bounties of up to $5000 for every “terrorist” they turned over to the United States. In fact, only 5% of the detainees were captured by U.S. forces.

I think it should be closed. It is against what Americans claim to stand for. Plus it is of no real use.
Bingo.

The only people who want to keep it open either do so simply because "teh liberals" want it closed, or because they don't want to deal with the real issues and people.

You need an extended stay at Guantanomo Bay really badly :upyours:
No.

Bingo.

The only people who want to keep it open either do so simply because "teh liberals" want it closed, or because they don't want to deal with the real issues and people.

Yeah...I keep saying it everytime.

This is a dog and pony show going on. The real jihadis (OBL, Zawahiri, LeT leaders, JeM leaders etc) are safe and these goatherds are being passed of as Al-Qaeda #1134 whatever.

No.
It would certainly help you to gain a bit of perspective.;)

Damn right. And the land ought to be given back to Cuba.

The UN calls the force-feeding "torture." There's no way the US can win on this. If these prisoners are allowed to kill themselves through starvation you can bet that these very same doctors, together with the rancid United Nations, would be lining up to condemn the US for their deaths.
This is a typical leftist tactic: condemn a practice which if eliminated will create an unacceptable situation, then condemn the unacceptable situation.

This is a typical leftist tactic: condemn a practice which if eliminated will create an unacceptable situation, then condemn the unacceptable situation.

So the UN is 'leftist' now is it? :rolleyes:

The US DESERVES to be in a Catch 22 here.
I rest my case. Sigh. :(

I'm 100% in favour of closing down G Bay.
Such blatant disregard for human rights is disgusting. I can't believe the US even attempts to back up keeping that place running. What the hell kind of propaganda is the gov't feeding you people down there that makes it look like it's even remotely necessary to keep it going?FOX/CNN/AP, etc

FOX/CNN/AP, etc

AP!? The Associated Press! You've got to be kidding me.

I think it should be kept open, but that's for Americans to decide among themselves. I don't think foreign opinion should influence US decisions.and.. at the same time you think Iranians should decide (whatever they do inside their borders) without US influence.

Dont you?? ;)

AP!? The Associated Press! You've got to be kidding me.one third of US still think that Saddam Hussein is behind 9-11

one fucking third!! Who is kidding whom?

one third of US still think that Saddam Hussein is behind 9-11

one fucking third!! Who is kidding whom?

What has that got to do with the AP? :confused:

one third of US still think that Saddam Hussein is behind 9-11

one fucking third!! Who is kidding whom?
Well, he was! And Iraq was giving nooks to the te'rrists!!1!1

What has that got to do with the AP? :confused:Plz.. Do not tell me you think that 80 million Amerikanz have TVs that block all non-FOX news..

When we were about to Bomb Baghdad.. All the Corporate US media was cheer leading.. It was not only FOX.. All the US media was telling their reporters to Go "enbeded" with the Military..

It was Flag-Day.. every day.. every channel.

It was all FOX.. It could have not been..

All The other Big media decided to play the NeoCon Music.. and Most of my Contrymen danced..

Closed? Yes. It should be closed, burned to the ground, buried under 10 inches of concrete, and then build on top of that a giant playground for Cuban children.

Plz.. Do not tell me you think that 80 million Amerikanz have TVs that block all non-FOX news..

When we were about to Bomb Baghdad.. All the Corporate US media was cheer leading.. It was not only FOX.. All the US media was telling their reporters to Go "enbeded" with the Military..

It was Flag-Day.. every day.. every channel.

It was not all Fox fault.. It could have not been..
It was indirectly. Fox was turning the whole news reporting thing even more into a business aimed only at making money. There was no way the rest of the stations could compete with Fox's flying american flag graphics, news alerts over celebrity happenings, and sounds that connote a significant importance. Fox revolutionized the media even more into a large scale business and they remain the sole component to selling news.

.
He didn't say that, did he?

Stay the fuck away from putting things into quotes people didn't say. It's dishonest, weakens your own point and one of the worst things you can do on a forum like this. So don't. There is plenty of other ways to make the same point.

Putting aside, for a moment, issues of "Guantanamo is Auschwitz!" or "they deserved it!", what point does Guantanamo Bay actually serve?

and.. at the same time I think any country that hates the US should be allowed to get away with anything[/b][/color]

.Libertas Veritas, There is a Mod-ruling against FAKE-QUOTING..

If I were you.. I would delete that FAKE post.

Putting aside, for a moment, issues of "Guantanamo is Auschwitz!" or "they deserved it!", what point does Guantanamo Bay actually serve?
suspention of habeas corpus

well, not really.

Putting aside, for a moment, issues of "Guantanamo is Auschwitz!" or "they deserved it!", what point does Guantanamo Bay actually serve?

I guess it allows a permanent US presence in Cuba, and thus a permanent pressure on the Cuban government. As well as making a huge annoyance to Fidel, as he hates the US, yet can't get rid of it for fear of retaliation.

AP? :confused:BTW in general day-to-day issues AP reporting is 95% unbiased (like all US media).. and likely more accurate than the BBC (they got more money).

But when reporting about War issues or Bush issues.. AP is not even the shadow of the BBC/AFP/EFE, etc.

Libertas Veritas, There is a Mod-ruling against FAKE-QUOTING..

If I were you.. I would delete that FAKE post.

I admit it is a fake quote. I know of the "mod" ruling against such thing. I will delete it when you delete all of your posts. I feel that is a fair deal.

suspention of habeas corpus

well, not really.

They are prisoners of war, they can be kept as long as the war lasts.

I admit it is a fake quote. I know of the "mod" ruling against such thing. I will delete it when you delete all of your posts. I feel that is a fair deal.

What the hell are you going on about? OD may be slightly anti-US< but that's his opinion and it isn't against the rules. Whereas your infraction clearly is. You have no standing here.

They are prisoners of war, they can be kept as long as the war lasts.
There is no war. I don't know if you've noticed, but the war ended when Saddam was defeated.

I admit it is a fake quote. I know of the "mod" ruling against such thing. I will delete it when you delete all of your posts. I feel that is a fair deal.If you know about the FAKE-QUOTES Ruling.. You should delete even faster..

I see no reason the delete my Posts.. they are not FAKE like yours.

I admit it is a fake quote. I know of the "mod" ruling against such thing. I will delete it when you delete all of your posts. I feel that is a fair deal.
That's hardly how it works. :rolleyes:

I might not always agree with OD2, but he's free to express his opinion here. Indeed, since he stuck to the rules, and you didn't, he's got more right to do so than you. It's preposterous that you would demand anything at all.

They are prisoners of war, they can be kept as long as the war lasts.

Really? Have they been treated as POWs under the Generva Convention? I see prolonged detention without release, no sufficent evidence to show they are terrorists - much the opposite in fact - and they are being force-fed and their human rights breached left, right and everywhere. If they are POWs they should be treated under the Geneva Convention.

They are prisoners of war, they can be kept as long as the war lasts.
eternity?

If you know about the FAKE-QUOTES Ruling.. You should delete even faster..

I see no reason the delete my Posts.. they are not FAKE like yours.

My post merely expressed your true beliefs. I see no reason as to why you should be upset over having them exposed.

I admit it is a fake quote. I know of the "mod" ruling against such thing. I will delete it when you delete all of your posts. I feel that is a fair deal.
Wow. "I know the rules, I'm just going to be an asshole because I can." Typical...

My post merely expressed your true beliefs. I see no reason as to why you should be upset over having them exposed

If they were his true intentions, he would have written that quote, not you. You are out of line.

Really? Have they been treated as POWs under the Generva Convention? I see prolonged detention without release, no sufficent evidence to show they are terrorists - much the opposite in fact - and they are being force-fed and their human rights breached left, right and everywhere. If they are POWs they should be treated under the Geneva Convention.

And I have yet to see sufficient evidence to show that they are not terrorists or that they are being mistreated. They are trained to claim that they are being tortured while held in western prisons because there is a good deal of people in the west stupid enough to believe them.

And I have yet to see sufficient evidence to show that they are not terrorists or that they are being mistreated. They are trained to claim that they are being tortured while held in western prisons because there is a good deal of people in the west stupid enough to believe them.

So it's guilty until proved innocent in your eyes? Admittedly this isn't my area of expertise, so I'll await others to post specific links about mistreatment, but ther have been enough. The Red Cross, I believe, condemned the prisons and the treatment there, and the UN did the same very recently.

My post merely expressed your true beliefs. I see no reason as to why you should be upset over having them exposed.
If you know about the FAKE-QUOTES Ruling.. You should delete even faster..

I see no reason the delete my Posts.. they are not FAKE like yours.
This guy sounds amazingly like that one who kept making fake posts a few weeks ago (possibly, my sense of time isn't that great when dealing with NS) and didn't he repeatedly edit yours? Or under OD3?

And I have yet to see sufficient evidence to show that they are not terrorists...
Ahem, innocent until proven guilty. This is not a Sharia court, afterall, is it?

The mistreatment is simply a deprivation of liberty. Without any charges against them, that alone is enough.

And I have yet to see sufficient evidence to show that they are not terrorists or that they are being mistreated. They are trained to claim that they are being tortured while held in western prisons because there is a good deal of people in the west stupid enough to believe them.
If you are so sure about this, then why are they not charged and brought before court? And the Geneva convention applies to 'terrorists' as well.

If you are so sure about this, then why are they not charged and brought before court? And the Geneva convention applies to 'terrorists' as well.
Depends on the definition, I think:

Article 4

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.

4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model.

5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.

6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention:

1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment.

2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties.

Surely definition Six applies to these prisoners then?

"Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war."

That at least covers the native Iraqi fighters, those who fight only against the troops. The others who target civilians, maybe not.

provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
That's the part I think might disqualify them.

*goes off to look up laws of war*

Depends on the definition, I think:
Considering that most people at Guantanamo are simply civilians picked up by Pakistani warlords in exchange for a bounty, I suppose it might not apply to some of them.
But in that case, normal protection of their rights should be guaranteed. People can not simply be deprived of their liberty - that's called kidnapping.

Others, like those "spontaneously taking up arms" or parts of "militias" might well be covered.

By the way, I'm not arguing Guantanamo Bay is 'good' or 'right' - I've signed petitions against it - I'm just saying I don't think all those interned are Prisoners of War.

That at least covers the native Iraqi fighters, those who fight only against the troops. The others who target civilians, maybe not.
I don't think anyone from the Iraqi theatre is at Guantanamo. They have places like Abu Ghraib there where they can do "interrogation" in a lawless zone already.

This guy sounds amazingly like that one who kept making fake posts a few weeks ago (possibly, my sense of time isn't that great when dealing with NS) and didn't he repeatedly edit yours? Or under OD3?Yeah... that dude was impersonating me .. (under OD3).. 1st link on my sig.

and he did it repeatedly because he found out it really annoyed me (when Jocaiba did it) So he did it for a few times on that tread.. and started again (when he run out of arguments)a week later on a different thread..

From now on I shall be going straight to moderation.. as these may -or may not- be copycats.

I don't think anyone from the Iraqi theatre is at Guantanamo. They have places like Abu Ghraib there where they can do "interrogation" in a lawless zone already.
Yes, they're mostly from Afghanistan.

Yeah... that dude was impersonating me .. (under OD3).. 1st link on my sig.

and he did it repeatedly because he found out it really annoyed me (when Jocaiba did it) So he did it for a few times on that tread.. and started again (when he run out of arguments)a week later on a different thread..

From now on I shall be going straight to moderation.. as these may -or may not- be copycats.

Wait...so OD3 wasn't actually you? So the person me and Jocabia spent days arguing with was actually an imposter?

It should be closed tomorrow and the prisoners there either be put in jails or in POW camps.

Yeah... that dude was impersonating me .. (under OD3).. 1st link on my sig.

and he did it repeatedly because he found out it really annoyed me (when Jocaiba did it) So he did it for a few times on that tread.. and started again (when he run out of arguments)a week later on a different thread..

From now on I shall be going straight to moderation.. as these may -or may not- be copycats.

Why do you assume I did it for fun? Or because I ran out of arguments? Why can't you understand that I did it because I hate everything about you?

No, no it should not be closed. Reformed? Hell yes. Closed? No. Methinks it will merely take a decent change in government here in the U.S. to allow for the reform. The basic idea behind it is good...but like so many other things the Bush administration has done, it's been implimented rather badly.

Wait...so OD3 wasn't actually you? So the person me and Jocabia spent days arguing with was actually an imposter?I am OD3 too.

Achtung 45 has an exellent memory (better than mine).. Not only he remebered Novoga's Fake-Quoting.. But he alse remembered that I was posting under OD3.

I am OD3.. :D dont make me sing that eminem song again:D

*OD3.. Who cuss like me. Who dress like me. Walk, Talk and act like me ...* ;)

I am OD3 too.

Achtung 45 has an exellent memory (better than mine).. Not only he remebered Novoga's Fake-Quoting.. But he alse remembered that I was posting under OD3.

I am OD3.. :D dont make me sing that eminem song again:D

*OD3.. Who cuss like me. Who dress like me. Walk, Talk and act like me ...* ;)

Have to use alot of names for some reason, eh?

Why do you assume I did it for fun? Or because I ran out of arguments? Yeah-yeah.. All your silly excuses are in my sig too.Why can't you understand that I did it because I hate everything about you?You are allowed to hate everything about me.
But you are not allowed to break the Forum rules.

Have to use alot of names for some reason, eh?
It's the same bloody name. Just pipe down already.

You can argue, but you can't pretend to be someone else.

Have to use alot of names for some reason, eh?
So?

*cough*topic*cough*

Have to use alot of names for some reason, eh?once upon a time there was the OD1.. he always spoke as he saw it... he was bold and naughty.. but hes was fair (bold to everyone.. even his countrymen).

he disappeared for unknown reasons(mystery).. and OD2 was born.. OD2 wasted no time posting with the same kind of take-no-prisoners mentality... without compromises..

and life goes on under the NS sun..

*cough*topic*cough*Gitmo shoud be closed.
The UN should ask that to the US. the EU should ask that too.

they should force BUSH to use his veto on a weekly basis.

Gitmo shoud be closed.
The UN should ask that to the US. the EU should ask that too.

they should force BUSH to use his veto on a weekly basis.

I agree.

I agree.I want to say something.. Its just that.. I may need more time..

*stunned*

The Prison at the Bay needs to be closed and moved to mainland America for the prisoners to recieve trial or be declared POWs and be monitored by the Red Cross.

What a pathetic dick.

I rest my case. Sigh. :(
You didn't have a case to rest. :rolleyes:

I stated the obvious. The US created their own "Catch 22", first by illegally invading Iraq, and then illegally detaining "illegal combatants", and then denying them their human rights. You can spout your "freedom of speech" rhetoric all you want, especially when you would deny these people any voice at all.

You can't tell the whole world that you are fighting for "freedom and democracy" when you forget the meaning of those words.

List of Guantánamo Bay detainees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Guantanamo_Bay_detainees)

If these "detainees" have committed crimes, then try them according to International laws. Make sure they get legal counsel and a fair trial. Somehow, I don't think the US can do that given the way that the whole situation has been handled.

If the US can't think of any charges, then I guess the US should let them go?

Closed, no. We've had that place for too long to just give it to them durn Pinko Commies.

At least make sure the people in there are actually enemies, yeah, sure, better than just randomly grabbing people for stupid reasons while letting drug cartels and immigrants make a mockery of our border security.

If the US can't think of any charges, then I guess the US should let them go?
Well aparently, if they're wearing Casio watches, they're guilty as charged.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=472433

lol...gotta hand it to the Bush admin. They truly have made people (well intentioned and otherwise sane people) defend the indefensible by misrepresenting their agenda as the right thing to do.

Most of gitmo detainees are just random people passed off (sold should be word) as al-qaeda. A very few really important ones like Ramzi and KSM are held there....the rest are just some random yahoo goatherd who pose no threat to American interests.

All this while the people who matter in AQ are still free and the core of the taliban and leadership of other assorted jihadi orgs are still free to pursue their agenda.

Some people will never learn. The mistakes that led to 9/11 are being repeated again and the worst part is that the mistakes are being claimed as success and are being defended with vigour.

Well aparently, if they're wearing Casio watches, they're guilty as charged.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=472433
Yup, he was listed on the link that I posted to GB "detainees".

I guess Casio watches just "tick" off US forces? You would think that this is just a waste of "time"? Perhaps the US intelligence is getting their info "second hand"?

Yup, he was listed on the link that I posted to GB "detainees".

I guess Casio watches just "tick" off US forces? You would think that this is just a waste of "time"? Perhaps the US intelligence is getting their info "second hand"?
Oh boy the pun festival, it must be very pun! wow, that was bad.