NationStates Jolt Archive

So after three guys hang themselves in Guantanamo a few days ago there have been renewed calls for the closure of the illegal prison camp.

Today MEPs have added their voice to the list of those demanding closure, which already includes the UN's committee on human rights and numerous other national governments and human rights watch dogs

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5074216.stm

what do you think?

Close it and give it back to Cuba

Dont close it.

Torture has become as American as apple pie!

I'm already on record saying we need to do something about it, long before any detainees committed suicide. We need to either clean up our practices there or close it all together. Our war should never be justification for treating people like animals. If they're criminals, well, detain them but still treat them like humans. Charge them with a crime and try them. If we've got no evidence to charge and try them, we should ship them out.

We're no better than the people we hate if we don't treat our prisoners as human beings.

Close the Prison or the Base? The Prison ??? the base sure close it after Castro dies and we (the USA) reestablish a good relastionship with Cuba.


So after three guys hang themselves in Guantanamo a few days ago there have been renewed calls for the closure of the illegal prison camp.

Today MEPs have added their voice to the list of those demanding closure, which already includes the UN's committee on human rights and numerous other national governments and human rights watch dogs

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5074216.stm

what do you think?

Close it and give it back to Cuba
Hear hear!

Close it, and release all of the "intelligence" about the suspects into the public's view, just so that we can see what the USA can sink to.

But what'll actually happen is if they do close it, they'll burn it all to the ground methinks.

Close it. Its not good for anybody.

Close the Prison or the Base? The Prison ??? the base sure close it after Castro dies and we (the USA) reestablish a good relastionship with Cuba.
How about we reestablish that relationship now?

How about we reestablish that relationship now?

NOT by Bay of Pigs.

NOT by Bay of Pigs.
Ahahahaha.

Cuba 1, the CIA 0.

Although relaxing trade barriers with Cuba and letting US citizens fly there might help to patch up relations and also encourage capitalism in Cuba, which is what you want, isn't it?

And it would also improve the life of the average Cuban, which is great.

Ahahahaha.

Cuba 1, the CIA 0.

Although relaxing trade barriers with Cuba and letting US citizens fly there might help to patch up relations and also encourage capitalism in Cuba, which is what you want, isn't it?

And it would also improve the life of the average Cuban, which is great.It's always amazed me that the numbnuts in charge have never recognized that it's the embargo and the hostility that helps keep Castro in power. Part of the reason the Cubans love him is because he tweaks the US, and we fall for it every freaking time.

These people were picked up fighting for the Taliban and other terror-groups...They should never be released. We already released several early on, after we investigated and found them innocent, and even some of them rejoined their comrades in the middle-east to fight Americans...

Keep it open. Let them rot.

Although relaxing trade barriers with Cuba and letting US citizens fly there might help to patch up relations and also encourage capitalism in Cuba, which is what you want, isn't it?
Cuba is already capitalist. There's no such thing as communism outside of the heads of idealists.

So after three guys hang themselves in Guantanamo a few days ago there have been renewed calls for the closure of the illegal prison camp.

Today MEPs have added their voice to the list of those demanding closure, which already includes the UN's committee on human rights and numerous other national governments and human rights watch dogs

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5074216.stm

what do you think?
What's illegal?

Hey, I've got an idea! Why not start yet another Guantanamo Bay thread! That way we can have three threads running simulatneously!

Without anything new at all to say.

If you close it your basically closing freedom. To quote sec. Rice, what would we put them if we closed it? Terrorstan, the US? I mean you cant really put them anywhere. Not to mention it has really helped our world standing since it shows the western world we know how to protect people from the evil doers. So I give gitmo the thumbs up til see somethin that says its bad for America

The Prison there, sure, the base itself, no.

If it was upto me, I would close it in no time. As much as I am for arresting and punishing/convicting islamists who are there, I think it is a legal and moral mess.

Get rid of it. But first, hold a big closing party. With all the terrorist suspects there. Invite Castro too, as we're in Cuba. Then invite the North Korean leader. Then drop a huuuuuuge nuke on it, and then say "whoops, didnt mean to do that". That'd be a truly American, subtle way to solve several problems at once :D

Disclaimer: Joke, not actually advocating killing:rolleyes:. Im far too nice for that

Close it. Now.

Close it and give it back to Cuba
Aye

These people were picked up fighting for the Taliban and other terror-groups.


the US govt themsleves admit 60% werent. thats the problem

If you close it your basically closing freedom. To quote sec. Rice, what would we put them if we closed it? Terrorstan, the US? I mean you cant really put them anywhere. Not to mention it has really helped our world standing since it shows the western world we know how to protect people from the evil doers. So I give gitmo the thumbs up til see somethin that says its bad for America

how did you survive before this place? no-one is arguing that everyone in gitmo gets sent home, but that they are tried in open court with a crime and have the right to see the evidence against them. in otehr words exactly how you treated terrorists on sept 10 2001 and the rest of the civilised world does it.

how did you survive before this place? no-one is arguing that everyone in gitmo gets sent home, but that they are tried in open court with a crime and have the right to see the evidence against them. in otehr words exactly how you treated terrorists on sept 10 2001 and the rest of the civilised world does it.
um, actually 3000 of us didnt survive before this place. Do not remember 9/11 and how you felt when the towers fell? the way we treated terrorist on 9/10 is in part of what lead to 9/11. You see, we cant think in this pre-9/11 mindset. The kind of defeatiest attitude that says cut n run. Thats not right, we have to stay the course.

If you close it your basically closing freedom. To quote sec. Rice, what would we put them if we closed it? Terrorstan, the US? I mean you cant really put them anywhere. Not to mention it has really helped our world standing since it shows the western world we know how to protect people from the evil doers. So I give gitmo the thumbs up til see somethin that says its bad for America

You Put them Prisoner of War Camps and treat the with the respect that they have under the Geneva Convention

You Put them Prisoner of War Camps and treat the with the respect that they have under the Geneva Convention
they arent POWs. Unless they can state their name, rank, and serial number no convention applies to them. Freedom is on the march and will continue to do so.

Why isn't there a poll? :confused:

The People of Rome demand a poll!

they arent POWs. Unless they can state their name, rank, and serial number no convention applies to them. Freedom is on the march and will continue to do so.
I'd like it if some freedom stopped marching away from me :(

they arent POWs. Unless they can state their name, rank, and serial number no convention applies to them. Freedom is on the march and will continue to do so.

Yay, freedom is on the march! People are losing their freedoms everywhere, because Freedom isn't, as our friend here has realized, marching towards us, but away from us.

He's not as stupid as he seems ;)

I'd like it if some freedom stopped marching away from me :(

:(

You got it before I did.

they arent POWs. Unless they can state their name, rank, and serial number no convention applies to them. Freedom is on the march and will continue to do so.
Someone needs to tell them to start making up ranks and serial numbers.

Oh and close it after a replacement has been built on American soil. So they can't screw all the prisoners out of habeus corpus.

Why isn't there a poll? :confused:

The People of Rome demand a poll!
I agree with the Romans. We need a poll and more orgies.

Won't happen.... out of spite on both sides.


How about we reestablish that relationship now?

They'll just put in on some Deigo Garcia like rock.


Someone needs to tell them to start making up ranks and serial numbers.

Oh and close it after a replacement has been built on American soil. So they can't screw all the prisoners out of habeus corpus.

they arent POWs. Unless they can state their name, rank, and serial number no convention applies to them. Freedom is on the march and will continue to do so.

Have you ever Read Article 4 of the Convention they have rights of POWS until such time as a determined by a Competent tribunal

Have you ever Read Article 4 of the Convention they have rights of POWS until such time as a determined by a Competent tribunal
They did. George Bush said they arent POWs, case closed.

They do not meet the critera of a pow as set forth in that document as they have neither uniform nor chain of command.


Have you ever Read Article 4 of the Convention they have rights of POWS until such time as a determined by a Competent tribunal

I say we should. Of course I would like to ask one thing, why do we have a prison in Cuba anyway? I thought we didn't have any diplomatic relations with that country.

We should close it and reopen Alcatraz! Woo! Then we don't have to build a new prison, Cuba gets back their land, and Americans can keep a better eye on what the government is doing.

They did. George Bush said they arent POWs, case closed.
George Bush isn't a competent tribunal. For one he's only one man, tribunals kinda need more than that. For another he's not an expert of in international law(or any kind of law I imagine), so he wouldn't be competent either

I'm already on record saying we need to do something about it, long before any detainees committed suicide. We need to either clean up our practices there or close it all together. Our war should never be justification for treating people like animals. If they're criminals, well, detain them but still treat them like humans. Charge them with a crime and try them. If we've got no evidence to charge and try them, we should ship them out.

We're no better than the people we hate if we don't treat our prisoners as human beings.

Ship them where?

We've already released over 2/3 of the people who were detained there.

One of the guys who committed suicide was in the process of having the US find a country to take him (he was considered harmless) - but no country wanted him, not even his home country.

So, tell me, what should the US do if no one wants them back?

They did. George Bush said they arent POWs, case closed.

Ehhh...


UNA, what happened to you, man? You used to be so cool, so funny so...inventive with your trolling. Now you're down to this? Come on, any dime-a-dozen troll can recite this crap off by heart. We want originality, goddamit it! More false history threads, more vast, generalising statements about liberals and hippies.

Man, you've changed, and not for the better...

They did. George Bush said they arent POWs, case closed.
Dubya doesn't constitute an indpendent tribunal, no matter what he says.

Ship them where?

We've already released over 2/3 of the people who were detained there.

One of the guys who committed suicide was in the process of having the US find a country to take him (he was considered harmless) - but no country wanted him, not even his home country.

So, tell me, what should the US do if no one wants them back?
We've talked about this briefly in other threads, and all I can say is that we're responsible for them. If no one else will take them, we've got to, and we've got to do better than a cell for them, since they're not guilty of any crimes against us.

Ehhh...


UNA, what happened to you, man? You used to be so cool, so funny so...inventive with your trolling. Now you're down to this? Come on, any dime-a-dozen troll can recite this crap off by heart. We want originality, goddamit it! More false history threads, more vast, generalising statements about liberals and hippies.

Man, you've changed, and not for the better...
Every time TUNA makes a bad trolling post I lose a little faith in humanity.

Every time TUNA makes a bad trolling post I lose a little faith in humanity.

He used to be cool. Now, he's just...



Well, he's just a troll.

I agree with the Romans. We need a poll and more orgies.
Yeah!

...

Orgies? :eek:
YEAH!
*Parties* :fluffle:

I have a better idea than discussing this.

Getting drunk and playing ping-pong. Who's up for that.

They aren't POWs, they maybe terrorists (or freedom fighters, depends who you ask) but they are HUMAN!

So after three guys hang themselves in Guantanamo a few days ago there have been renewed calls for the closure of the illegal prison camp.

Today MEPs have added their voice to the list of those demanding closure, which already includes the UN's committee on human rights and numerous other national governments and human rights watch dogs

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5074216.stm

what do you think?

If the UN doesn't mind watching them, then fine, we can close Guantanamo Bay. Until then, they're terrorists, and we don't particularly want them free to blow things up. Does Human Rights Watch not give a damn about the innocent people terrorists kill?

They aren't POWs, they maybe terrorists (or freedom fighters, depends who you ask) but they are HUMAN!

freedom fighters target military assets... not their own civilian countrymen.

If the UN doesn't mind watching them, then fine, we can close Guantanamo Bay. Until then, they're terrorists, and we don't particularly want them free to blow things up. Does Human Rights Watch not give a damn about the innocent people terrorists kill?
If you can prove they're terrorists, charge them, convict them, and lock them up. But the US has already admitted that there are innocent people there--one of the suicides was an innocent who was supposed to be released and hadn't been told yet. You can't just leave those people sitting there--it's inhuman.

If the UN doesn't mind watching them, then fine, we can close Guantanamo Bay. Until then, they're terrorists, and we don't particularly want them free to blow things up. Does Human Rights Watch not give a damn about the innocent people terrorists kill?

why do all you right wing yankees assume that closing this camp = releasing those in it?

or are you deliberatly being obstinate

Does Human Rights Watch not give a damn about the innocent people terrorists kill?

What about innocent people killed by Coalition troops in Iraq and Afghanistan?

freedom fighters target military assets... not their own civilian countrymen.

Still it depends who you ask! Get the point?

These people are suspected terrorists not US citizens. They don't have the right to a quick and speedy trial, which is a privilege of being a US citizen, not something that everyone on earth is entitlted to. There have been claims of torture, but so far no one has brought any credible proof to substantiate that. Yes, the inmates are upset, but that's no reason to close the facility. I would be upset too if I was a fanatical Muslim and couldn't blow myself up to be with 70-something virgins. Until some real evidence of torture is brought up, the facility should stay open.

Until some real evidence of torture is brought up, the facility should stay open.

Do you know that pictures and video of the torturing has been found and released to public? Check your facts first please...

Ahahahaha.

Cuba 1, the CIA 0.

Although relaxing trade barriers with Cuba and letting US citizens fly there might help to patch up relations and also encourage capitalism in Cuba, which is what you want, isn't it?

And it would also improve the life of the average Cuban, which is great.


you're assuming that the average cuban has a crap life, they have the best doctor/patient ratio of any country in the world, they have exceptional further education institutions. Any short comings in terms of quality of life in Cuba are due primarily to the US trade embargo.

Don't assume that capitalism is the only way to produce a decent society

These people are suspected terrorists not US citizens. They don't have the right to a quick and speedy trial, which is a privilege of being a US citizen, not something that everyone on earth is entitlted to. There have been claims of torture, but so far no one has brought any credible proof to substantiate that. Yes, the inmates are upset, but that's no reason to close the facility. I would be upset too if I was a fanatical Muslim and couldn't blow myself up to be with 70-something virgins. Until some real evidence of torture is brought up, the facility should stay open.
I was looking up habeus corpus on wiki, in the hopes that you were wrong. Unfortunately I found:Suspension during the War on Terrorism

The September 18, 2001 Presidential Military Order gives the President of the United States the power to declare anyone suspected of connection to terrorists or terrorism, as an enemy combatant. As such, that person can be held indefinitely, without charges being filed against him or her, without a court hearing, nor is this person entitled to a legal consultant.

shut it down now!

These people were picked up fighting for the Taliban and other terror-groups...They should never be released. We already released several early on, after we investigated and found them innocent, and even some of them rejoined their comrades in the middle-east to fight Americans...

Keep it open. Let them rot.


did it ever occur to you that maybe the whole reason they're pissed off at america now is cos they were locked up for no reason for years and years.

Just proves everything they heard about the US being the "evil empire"

yDon't assume that capitalism is the only way to produce a decent society

Makes this commie happy that even one guy in this world thinks capitalism ain't the only solution.

What's illegal?


its illegal because it breaches the Geneva Convention on the treatment of POWs.

The war in Afganistan is long over they should be released even if they are with the Taliban. The rules of war can't be broken just because you're not engaged in European style head to head warfare where both sides wear a uniform and have similar units and tactics.

If you close it your basically closing freedom. To quote sec. Rice, what would we put them if we closed it? Terrorstan, the US? I mean you cant really put them anywhere. Not to mention it has really helped our world standing since it shows the western world we know how to protect people from the evil doers. So I give gitmo the thumbs up til see somethin that says its bad for America


how about their respective homes?

Suspension during the War on Terrorism

The September 18, 2001 Presidential Military Order gives the President of the United States the power to declare anyone suspected of connection to terrorists or terrorism, as an enemy combatant. As such, that person can be held indefinitely, without charges being filed against him or her, without a court hearing, nor is this person entitled to a legal consultant.

If they are enemy combatants they are POWs. Geneva convention...

If it was upto me, I would close it in no time. As much as I am for arresting and punishing/convicting islamists who are there, I think it is a legal and moral mess.


You can't punish someone for fighting in a war. Thats insane, imagine if at the end of WW2 we decided to try every german soldier for supporting Nazism.

War is a game, you pick your sides according to what you believe or where you live, some people die some don't. You can't punish someone for fighting a cause they belive in. Thats moralistic bullshit

If they are enemy combatants they are POWs. Geneva convention...


I agree,

"enemy combatants"

is a load of bull invented by the US military as an excuse to lock up anyone they dont like the look of..

its fucking illegal, its in breach of the both major conventions on war as well as several UN resolutions. No country but the US could get away with this crap.

No country but the US could get away with this crap.

It's a shame that most of the countries in this world just turn their heads. If more countries said "NO" it could change something.

Do you know that pictures and video of the torturing has been found and released to public? Check your facts first please...

Could you please inform me of how I could find this? If this is true, I would love to see it for myself. I only claimed to the contrary because a source I heard this morning specifically said that there had only been claims.

Could you please inform me of how I could find this? If this is true, I would love to see it for myself. I only claimed to the contrary because a source I heard this morning specifically said that there had only been claims.

There is some video from outside of the camp where a soldier hits a POW for some unknown reason (well that aint torture but you get my point), and there's some pictures of soldiers forcing muslims to eat pork. Heard of some other things too but aint seen any pics/vid.
I saw these pictures on the news and some internet sites too, but I dont remember them. Try google...

[EDIT] Found few pics with google, only the thumbnails tough. The original pics have been removed from the server.[EDIT]

There is some video from outside of the camp where a soldier hits a POW for some unknown reason (well that aint torture but you get my point), and there's some pictures of soldiers forcing muslims to eat pork. Heard of some other things too but aint seen any pics/vid.
I saw these pictures on the news and some internet sites too, but I dont remember them. Try google...

What is the accepted definition of torture anyway? What you said above certainly demonstrates unacceptable behavior by US troops especially in relation to religious freedom, but is that really torture? I always envisioned torture more as cutting off fingers, electric shock, and that sort of thing.

What is the accepted definition of torture anyway? What you said above certainly demonstrates unacceptable behavior by US troops especially in relation to religious freedom, but is that really torture? I always envisioned torture more as cutting off fingers, electric shock, and that sort of thing.

I get your point, but feeding pork to a muslim is like cutting off fingers. They dont believe in the same way we do. It makes them suffer mentaly.

I think part of the problem with torture in the world in general is that its too contextual. There are certain things we know are torture (eg cutting off fingers), but there is not a clear line that separates being a jerk to being a torturer. At what amount of pain does it become torture? Cultural differences especially between the West and Muslims don't help either.

One or two incidents is'nt enough to close down an entire prison...Yes, I know, the pork was traumatic, but that was only one documented case.

If we just moved them to another prison, far-leftists would still complain, since they're still locked up, and still being "tortured". The complaining won't end until we release them all, and we are'nt going to do something that stupid, regardless of all the screeching and hooting from leftist chimps.

You're right far-leftists would complain no matter what, but part of the problem is that the US hasn't really ever dealt with an enemy of this sort. All the other enemy combatants belonged to a national government of sorts.

If they are enemy combatants they are POWs. Geneva convention...
Nope. Read Convention I, Article II, in its entirety.

Protections are only granted to people fighting directly or indirectly for a High Contracting Party, or for a party that has publicly announced its intentions to abide by the Conventions.

None of which applies to members of al-Qaida or the Taliban.

Additionally, there is also a section which covers the treatment of spies, saboteurs, or anyone suspected of conducting hostilities (who isn't in a uniform). You could give them a trial, but the Conventions do not require it (although if you do give them a trial, it has to be a fair one). This clause has been used to justify shooting spies and saboteurs out of hand without a trial - successfully.

Read the Conventions. And stick to what it says, not what you wish it said.

*agrees with DK*

Franc Tirreurs and mercenaries have no protection whatsoever under the various rules of warfare - most definetely including the Geneva Conventions.

Nope. Read Convention I, Article II, in its entirety.

Protections are only granted to people fighting directly or indirectly for a High Contracting Party, or for a party that has publicly announced its intentions to abide by the Conventions.

None of which applies to members of al-Qaida or the Taliban.

Additionally, there is also a section which covers the treatment of spies, saboteurs, or anyone suspected of conducting hostilities (who isn't in a uniform). You could give them a trial, but the Conventions do not require it (although if you do give them a trial, it has to be a fair one). This clause has been used to justify shooting spies and saboteurs out of hand without a trial - successfully.

Read the Conventions. And stick to what it says, not what you wish it said.

Perhaps the best way of thinking about this is if you would be happy for it to be applied in the same way to a US citizen. If you are perfectly happy for any other country to shoot a US citizen suspected of spying without giving them a trial then fair enough, otherwise play by the spirit of the treaty.

Perhaps the best way of thinking about this is if you would be happy for it to be applied in the same way to a US citizen. If you are perfectly happy for any other country to shoot a US citizen suspected of spying without giving them a trial then fair enough, otherwise play by the spirit of the treaty.

It's the rules. If you're not in a uniform, and not a member of a High Contracting Party, you're as good as dead if you're conducting hostilities.

It's the rules. If you're not in a uniform, and not a member of a High Contracting Party, you're as good as dead if you're conducting hostilities.

So you are happy with US citizens being shot without trial?

So you are happy with US citizens being shot without trial?
US citizens not in uniform, who are participating in hostilities (i.e., shooting, blowing things up) are either mercenaries, spies, or saboteurs.

By the book, they don't have protections under the Conventions.

That's why they taught us in basic training that you ALWAYS have your military ID card which identifies you as a member of a High Contracting Party to the Conventions, and your dog tags, and your UNIFORM.

We were CONSTANTLY warned that if we didn't have these when captured, our lives could be forfeit.

Any other questions?

None of which applies to members of al-Qaida or the Taliban.

Afghanistan was ruled by Taliban making them soldiers of that country. That makes them part of all conventions protecting POWs even if USA is the "goverment" today.

Afghanistan was ruled by Taliban making them soldiers of that country. That makes them part of all conventions protecting POWs even if USA is the "goverment" today.
You missed Mullar Omar's notification that they weren't going to abide by the Conventions.

Close it. You aren't helping noone, nor you have advanced in your so called war against terrorism.

You have managed to piss off a lot of people against the USA, although.

If you are going to treat people just as the muslisms do, do not expect other people to think you're better.

This is not a battle for the freedom of humanity, this is a war between an empire and a lesser cultur. Nothing more, nothing else.

Close it. You aren't helping noone, nor you have advanced in your so called war against terrorism.

You have managed to piss off a lot of people against the USA, although.

If you are going to treat people just as the muslisms do, do not expect other people to think you're better.

This is not a battle for the freedom of humanity, this is a war between an empire and a lesser cultur. Nothing more, nothing else.

I don't recall any Guantanamo prisoners having their throats cut on television by Cheney or Bush.

So you are happy with US citizens being shot without trial?

Yep.

If a body is a franc-tirreur, a terrorist, a mercenary, in short, anyone who uses force outside of the context of a properly officered and regulated military establishment ( a category that includes formal resistance-movements ) , I want that body utterly destroyed, demolished, annihilated, regardless of their nationality!

It is a non patieris vivere-thing.

I don't recall any Guantanamo prisoners having their throats cut on television by Cheney or Bush.

No, but the point is that you can't claim to fight for freedom on one hand and deny it on the other.

Closing Guantanamo and being a little more vocal for an 1967-border based Palestinian state would be great PR moves - and good PR is a good way to get your way, especially over issues like 'Iran'.

I don't recall any Guantanamo prisoners having their throats cut on television by Cheney or Bush.

You are right. It's not like you don't have other means to do harm

You are right. It's not like you don't have other means to do harm
I guess you're not aware that the majority of people who have been detained at Guantanamo have been released.

The ones who remain are those who have been determined by tribunal that they are indeed bent on fighting the US by violent means (which, under the Conventions, screws them), OR they have been determined (like so many others) to be harmless - but no nation will take them, not even their home nation.

Why isn't there a poll? :confused:

The People of Rome demand a poll!Rome and I.. we want a poll :D

Give it back to Cuba.

I would say no, because you need somewhere to put the crazies.

I guess you're not aware that the majority of people who have been detained at Guantanamo have been released.

The ones who remain are those who have been determined by tribunal that they are indeed bent on fighting the US by violent means (which, under the Conventions, screws them), OR they have been determined (like so many others) to be harmless - but no nation will take them, not even their home nation.

More than 400 people is a lot of people.

Are you going to let those "harmless" people to sue your system for mistreating them with no apparent reason?

More than 400 people is a lot of people.

Are you going to let those "harmless" people to sue your system for mistreating them with no apparent reason?

If you're captured by military forces in a combat zone, and suspected of engaging in hostilities, and you aren't in a uniform of a regular fighting force that is either a High Contracting Party to the Geneva Conventions (or aren't part of a party which publicly acknowledges acceptance of the provisions of the Conventions), you DON'T get a trial, and you DON'T get all the Geneva Protections, and you DON'T get the right to sue later when they determine that you're harmless and should be let go.


We've quoted chapter and verse on the Conventions on this matter - you can't read into the Conventions something that ISN'T there.

And if your home country won't take you back because they still think you're trouble, that's not the US government's problem - that's your problem.

If you're captured by military forces in a combat zone, and suspected of engaging in hostilities, and you aren't in a uniform of a regular fighting force that is either a High Contracting Party to the Geneva Conventions (or aren't part of a party which publicly acknowledges acceptance of the provisions of the Conventions), you DON'T get a trial, and you DON'T get all the Geneva Protections, and you DON'T get the right to sue later when they determine that you're harmless and should be let go.


We've quoted chapter and verse on the Conventions on this matter - you can't read into the Conventions something that ISN'T there.

And if your home country won't take you back because they still think you're trouble, that's not the US government's problem - that's your problem.

Again, you proved thei were harmless, perhaps some of them were just civilians?

Are you condoning the fact that by being a civilian, (as such not sporting anything that classifies you as militar personnel) nearby hostile grounds, but someone suspected you were engaging in any kind of activities against an army, you are subjected to possible imprisoment without any rights?

If that is right, it should change. That's all.

If you're captured by military forces in a combat zone, and suspected of engaging in hostilities, and you aren't in a uniform of a regular fighting force that is either a High Contracting Party to the Geneva Conventions (or aren't part of a party which publicly acknowledges acceptance of the provisions of the Conventions), you DON'T get a trial, and you DON'T get all the Geneva Protections, and you DON'T get the right to sue later when they determine that you're harmless and should be let go.

Which is fine in theory except for the part where most of the Gitmo prisoners were NOT captured by military forces, nor in combat zones, nor suspected of engaging hostilities (only 2 have been charged with anything)...

So why do you use the Geneva Convention to determine their status is rather bizarre. Especially if you disregard the part where a tribunal has to declare them ennemy combattans in the first place.

Close Guantanemo Bay? Yes.

Will the prisoners be released? No.

Where will the prisoners go? Prisons built in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, out of the publics view.

Should the prisoners be released? I would think that after 4.5 years the CIA could find something to charge them with. Clearly they can't/won't and this is not only arbritary detention, but a breach of international law which highlights the gross hypocrisy of the U.S and its allies.

By the way, guilty or not, if they are released, the CIA would have bugs up their arse anyway...so they would know if they're 'joining their comrades' and subsequently arrest them/kill them....or whatever

Were the suicides 'an act of war' as the commander of the facility is reported to have said? Depends. I think all suicides are an act of frustration and desperation. Does it have the effect of staining 'the enemies reputation'? Yes. Is that what motivated them to die? No.

Note that alot of what we hear is what logicians call 'affirming the consequent', 'circular logic' and 'appealing to popularity'. ie it has limited to no basis in reality, and is just a bunch of hooey to stay in power and make dumb laws

I mean, if you were taken from your home whilst you were watching cruise missles whack your family, drugged, shipped on the back of plane, stuck in a cell for 4.5 years with little to no contact with the outside world, insulted, been threatened with dogs eating your groin, and had no visible hope....what would u do? Honestly, I'd be thinking of doing the same thing and anyone who is suprised probably lacked empathy. Of course, this is based on premises derived from a biased media. But still, how would you feel?

Also, the folks that do 'go home and join their comrades' might not have been directly involved before being arrested. Post-Guantameno involvement might actually be a result of anger derived from false imprisonment and inhuman treatment.

Sorry to blab, but thats how I see it

Which is fine in theory except for the part where most of the Gitmo prisoners were NOT captured by military forces, nor in combat zones, nor suspected of engaging hostilities (only 2 have been charged with anything)...

Oh, give me a link to that non-fact

So why do you use the Geneva Convention to determine their status is rather bizarre. Especially if you disregard the part where a tribunal has to declare them ennemy combattans in the first place.
Using the Convention because so many "claim" the Convention gives protections which it does no.

Don't have to be declared enemy combatants. All they have to be are spies, saboteurs, or people suspected of hostilities. The Conventions state that in the event of a trial (which is not guaranteed to them) they should get a fair trial - but it doesn't say they have to get one.

You don't have to charge them with anything. By the Conventions, you can shoot spies, saboteurs, and non-uniformed people with no emblem engaging in hostilities.

You don't have to charge them with anything. By the Conventions, you can shoot spies, saboteurs, and non-uniformed people with no emblem engaging in hostilities.

Hey it's open season on the CIA

Hey it's open season on the CIA

Perhaps now you know why the CIA and its counterparts tend to be pretty good when it comes to officering its operatives...

Hey it's open season on the CIA
It always has been, or maybe you're not familiar with a certain wall at CIA headquaters that is covered with stars, each one representing an operative killed overseas.

Oh, give me a link to that non-fact
Read other threads on Gitmo where it has been linked. I can't be arsed to go hunting for links you have already seen (as you posted on these other threads).


Using the Convention because so many "claim" the Convention gives protections which it does no.

Don't have to be declared enemy combatants. All they have to be are spies, saboteurs, or people suspected of hostilities. The Conventions state that in the event of a trial (which is not guaranteed to them) they should get a fair trial - but it doesn't say they have to get one.

You don't have to charge them with anything. By the Conventions, you can shoot spies, saboteurs, and non-uniformed people with no emblem engaging in hostilities.
Alright, fine. Then why are they detained on Gitmo? Give me the international law that allow the US to abduct citizen in another country and fly them to cuba to be held without trial for an indeterminate time period. Because I really would like to know what legal right gives the USA the right to impugn on other's country sovereignty.

Alright, fine. Then why are they detained on Gitmo? Give me the international law that allow the US to abduct citizen in another country and fly them to cuba to be held without trial for an indeterminate time period. Because I really would like to know what legal right gives the USA the right to impugn on other's country sovereignty.

As I recall, we legally invaded Afghanistan.

The people detained were from there, suspected (although it turns out on further investigation that the majority were innocent) of involvement in hostilities against the US.

As such, they were legally detained under the Geneva Conventions.

The innocents, with a few exceptions, were sent home. But I guess you missed that.

The few innocents who are still there are not there because the US wants to keep them - they are there because NO country will take them - not even the more "progressive" nations in the world - not even Cuba. And their home nations will not take them.

And the rest? They are those who have been identified by military tribunal (a tribunal which satisfies the conditions of the Conventions) as being a continuing threat to the US.

It always has been, or maybe you're not familiar with a certain wall at CIA headquaters that is covered with stars, each one representing an operative killed overseas.

My fear is that the US has set a bad precedent that will be followed. Innocent US citizens who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time will be declared enemy non-combatants or whatever the weasel words are. It will be like the kidnappings in the Lebanon all over again but with an excuse neatly provided.

My fear is that the US has set a bad precedent that will be followed. Innocent US citizens who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time will be declared enemy non-combatants or whatever the weasel words are. It will be like the kidnappings in the Lebanon all over again but with an excuse neatly provided.

US citizens who aren't even associated with the government or military are killed all the time overseas, even before this, in Third World hotspots.

Accused of being spies, mercenaries, etc. And then there's just killing the one American hostage because they're American. Or killing the one military hostage because they're carrying their ID card.

We're following the Conventions. It's not a "convenient reading". It's what's written there. Even if we went way beyond the Conventions, they would kill Americans in any case.

no, prisoners have to meet exacting critea to be a POW while the prisoners in Gitmo do not meet this standard and don't have the right of a POW a enemy combatant has 0 rights and his status is nil.



If they are enemy combatants they are POWs. Geneva convention...

It's important to segment one's thoughts about Gitmo. I completely disagree with the waterboarding and so forth. Interrogate the prisioners, sure, but don't torture them.

That being said, this isn't laser tag. This is a war, and just like other wars, the US has the right to hold prisioners of war. What do you do with prisioners of war? You hold them without trial. Period, paragraph. It's not personal. You're just neutralizing the enemy's asset. The POW option is there so you don't have to blow their brains out.

There is a lot of blame to go around for all of this stuff. The Bush administration could have processed these people's individual cases faster; ascertaining that there is suitable evidence to hold these people is vital. It could have avoided the torturing of prisoners. And it could have avoided the disastrous practice of farming out their practices to European countries. That being said, human rights organizations have to be willing to accept that if a person is caught aiding the Taliban, or Al-quada, his original nationality more or less doesn't matter. He is a member of a "country" that is at war with the United States, the same as if he had enlisted with the German or Japanese army during WWII.

"Close Guantanamo!" "Release the prisoners!' That's what I hear these people say. I would ask these people, "Release them where exactly? To the Saudi government perhaps, where they're liable to go straight from the plane to the noose? Or maybe you just want them dumped on the streets of London or Paris? I'd be okay with that, but would you?"

I have the same problem with this group of people that I have with the war critics in my own country. They are long on moral outrage, and short on solutions to complex problems.

It always has been, or maybe you're not familiar with a certain wall at CIA headquaters that is covered with stars, each one representing an operative killed overseas.

Yes, kicking the third world can take its toll on the toughest foot.....

As I recall, we legally invaded Afghanistan.

You can't legaly invade a country. Atleast if you fail doing so. That would lead to executing all the people behind the attempt. Difrent thing if you succes. Then you can treat people like USA does in Guantanamo.

I have long believed Gitmo needed to be closed as far as the prison facility is concerned. It is foolish to think it will solve the current problem though.

The problem is the President of the United States originally thought that holding prisoners outside of the Continental US would allow him to ignore the US Court system, since this has proven incorrect, and prisoners in US custody are still in the jurisdiction of the Federal courts he and his advisors are beginning to think that Gitmo and Abu-Ghraib are PR liabilities. I couldn't imagine why, after all, the US has only treated the prisoners in these facilities shabbily and tortured them...all while being held with no charges ever being filed against them.

All of this has been the brainchild of Major General Geoffrey Miller, a man who leaves a moist slime trail when he walks and dishonors the US Army uniform with every minute he is allowed to wear it. Lest we not forget our charming Attorney General who wrote the original opinion saying that he thought torture was legal and permissable, and the US could blatantly ignore the very Treaties that it was a primary signatory to.

Heaven forfend that the mighty US be at fault for anything. In the meantime half of the citizens of the US worship at this sick altar of no honor and no dignity and wonder why the world progressively gets sicker and sicker of the vileness we perpetrate.

Oh, yes. Gitmo should be closed and should be left standing as reminder of our contemptible behavior.

As for the prisoners; charge them, let them go, or send them back to their home countries. It shouldn't take three to four years to draw up a charge sheet and make a case.

It's a shame that most of the countries in this world just turn their heads. If more countries said "NO" it could change something.

The Americans aren't exactly known for taking advice.

If more countries said "NO" the yank response would be ordering Lynndie England to go in and castrate the prisoners with a rusty spoon and finding a way to re-elect Bush (assuming Lynndie hasn't allready castrated them with a rusty spoon, of course).

Get rid of it, definately. It serves no legal purpose. From the day before it was leased to the US, it has been a disgrace. The whole Plattmen amendmend and US intervention in Cuba was an Imperial change of hands of a colony. I have no idea why Castro puts up with the presence of a US naval base on his island. I think that him honoring the treaty made by governments who are scapegoats of the indipendence movement of the 50's show he is a man of honor more than the US presidents who want him killed. As far as I can see Guantanamo Bay is a liability for Cuba.

The people held there are of questionable alignments. Most where handed over by bounty hunters, by definition not very reliable people. What little information there is of them clearly can't be used for trails. So then that means they should be released. They're civilians if they're not soldiers. But if they're soldiers, start treating them that way! There is no "terrorist" definition in Geneva. If you don't know what they are, call them rebels or partisans since they essentially are all that. Unless they fought in the Iraqi military or as Taliban Afghanistan soldiers. Al Qaida isn't a recognised military organization so that means they're civilians. If you still think terrorists are different from civilians, take a look a militias. They to break the law of their conquerors, take up arms and sometimes use extreme violence as well. Do we consider them un-civilian? Those who think terrorists deserve less dignity than those people have shown themselves are sadly lowering themselves to the levels of some of the worst wartime murderers in history. Even if "terrorist" was a clearly different thing than civilian or soldier, there are still basic human rights the US most obey to by signatory. Some of these treaty even came to be with US support in the first place.

Gitmo is essentially just a poor excuse for torture and abuse. The administration thinks they are smart by pointing out they have no legal obligations to stop crimes committed by them outside their country. We human beings call such people "morally bereft". They have the power to stop it and are fully aware that Guantanamo is one of the worst places known to men, and they don't. They're either extremely lazy or plain cruel. It's like seeing a squad of firemen hang out around their firetruck parked opposite of a building on fire with people screaming there are some trapped inside.

Just close the damn place completely I'd say. I'd be fine if they opened up about what happens there and allow violaters to be punished and prisoners to be put on trial. It'd solve the real issue. But personally I would be glad if they abandoned Gitmo and let it be part of Cuba again. They can lock up the detainees in the US where the law binds. But they'd better release all innocents ASAP.

DK, does it not worry you slightly that the majority of the gitmo detainess are by your own definition innocent?

should they be entitled to compensation, loss of earnings, defamation etc.?

Could somebody tell me what torture these guys are facing? I've heard of them having to eat pork, look at women who are wearing "inappropriate clothing", and of one soldier punching a detainee. However, is this really torture? I always thought torture was more like cutting off fingers, electric shock, etc. While the US has committed inappropriate actions, do they really qualify as torture?

Could somebody tell me what torture these guys are facing? I've heard of them having to eat pork, look at women who are wearing "inappropriate clothing", and of one soldier punching a detainee. However, is this really torture? I always thought torture was more like cutting off fingers, electric shock, etc. While the US has committed inappropriate actions, do they really qualify as torture?

they were using sleep deprivation, white noise, water techniques, the infamous dog photos, that were all pretty close to the edge of the envelope.

torture/degrading treatment/extreme interregation techniques, whatever. its still a planned, methodical and repeated effort to physically and mentally mistreat people who by and large turned out to be innocent. and all done with the explicit backing of the US govt who put the camp in cuba and have an AG trying to be a smart arnse and re-define torture to exclude what the CIA are up to in gitmo.

its bad form and profoundly anti-american to have this place and be proud of it as some posters are.

they were using sleep deprivation, white noise, water techniques, the infamous dog photos, that were all pretty close to the edge of the envelope.

torture/degrading treatment/extreme interregation techniques, whatever. its still a planned, methodical and repeated effort to physically and mentally mistreat people who by and large turned out to be innocent. and all done with the explicit backing of the US govt who put the camp in cuba and have an AG trying to be a smart arnse and re-define torture to exclude what the CIA are up to in gitmo.

its bad form and profoundly anti-american to have this place and be proud of it as some posters are.

Anti-American my ass...It's about as American as you can get.

Anti-American my ass...It's about as American as you can get.

kidnapping civilians, placing them in detention with no charge. refusing to allow them access to lawyers. no trial. allegations of torture. changing the law to remove civilain courts from the equation. then releasing some and refusing to apologise, compensate or explain why they were detained?

that fits into the american model of personal freedom and small government how?

unless of course, you were being sarcastic. :p

kidnapping civilians, placing them in detention with no charge. refusing to allow them access to lawyers. no trial. allegations of torture. changing the law to remove civilain courts from the equation. then releasing some and refusing to apologise, compensate or explain why they were detained?

that fits into the american model of personal freedom and small government how?

unless of course, you were being sarcastic. :p

It doesn't. But it does fit other government models we know of.

kidnapping civilians, placing them in detention with no charge. refusing to allow them access to lawyers. no trial. allegations of torture. changing the law to remove civilain courts from the equation. then releasing some and refusing to apologise, compensate or explain why they were detained?

that fits into the american model of personal freedom and small government how?

unless of course, you were being sarcastic. :p

Well, saying it's Anti-American is like saying gassing jews is Anti-nazi.

liberal weenies disgust me. I totally support torture of terrorist. Will you little pacifist ever wake up? I think they will only wake up that millionth of a second before they are incinerated.

liberal weenies disgust me. I totally support torture of terrorist. Will you little pacifist ever wake up? I think they will only wake up that millionth of a second before they are incinerated.

You make a persuasive arguement.

You've given me some deep stuff to think about.

liberal weenies disgust me. I totally support torture of terrorist. Will you little pacifist ever wake up? I think they will only wake up that millionth of a second before they are incinerated.

i totally support the torture of you.

you are as much a member of al quaeda as 90% of the residents of hotel gitmo.

i totally support the torture of you.

you are as much a member of al quaeda as 90% of the residents of hotel gitmo.

Bring it on brother!

Bring it on brother!


fuckin keyboard warriors! declaring war others will fight from the safety of your bedroom. :p

go and download some porn ffs

fuckin keyboard warriors! declaring war others will fight from the safety of your bedroom. :p

go and download some porn ffs

Wrong dumbarse. I served my time for my country.

Wrong dumbarse. I served my time for my country.

Your amazing powers of persuasion and intellectual debate suggest that you have indeed.

Wrong dumbarse. I served my time for my country.

in prison? or abu ghraib?

it amazes me how some of these US militaristic types have absolutly no respect for those they are meant to be liberating.

in prison? or abu ghraib?

it amazes me how some of these US militaristic types have absolutly no respect for those they are meant to be liberating.

I have no respect for terrorist like the ones held in Guantanomo Bay. All terrorist should be :mp5:

I have no respect for terrorist like the ones held in Guantanomo Bay. All terrorist should be :mp5:

So, are these people terrorists because they are in Gitmo, or are they in Gitmo because they are terrorists?

So, are these people terrorists because they are in Gitmo, or are they in Gitmo because they are terrorists?

I am sure you are not stupid, and thus, understand what I mean.

I have no respect for terrorist like the ones held in Guantanomo Bay. All terrorist should be :mp5:

your own government admit 90% of those held in gitmo are not terrorists.

I am sure you are not stupid, and thus, understand what I mean.

Thanks for the benefit in doubt, but I do not understand anyone wishing to kill people, even more so if said people are denied a fair and just trial.

Ahahahaha.

Cuba 1, the CIA 0.

Although relaxing trade barriers with Cuba and letting US citizens fly there might help to patch up relations and also encourage capitalism in Cuba, which is what you want, isn't it?

And it would also improve the life of the average Cuban, which is great.
Viva la Communism!

fuckin keyboard warriors! declaring war others will fight from the safety of your bedroom. :p

go and download some porn ffs

Oh, like the one I went and fought?

I'm no friend of US policy on detainment of 'enemy combantants' and 'suspicious persons' but you'd think the way Gitmo has become an icon, the US would find alternative arrangements. Such as sending them to the 'Black prisons' in Egypt and such, where they can torture by proxy.

Your amazing powers of persuasion and intellectual debate suggest that you have indeed.


Whats that supposed to mean wee wang ?

your own government admit 90% of those held in gitmo are not terrorists.

Thats total BULLSHIT . they have still not finished the tribunals seperating the " UNLAWFULL COMBATANTS" from the captured Taliban LAWFULL COMBATANTS aka as POWS . The CONFIRMED Al Queda terrorist ..MAY only make up the 10 percent you claim...the rest are members of AL Queda and others captured durring terrorist actions and counter insugency actions by the US and its allies .
THAT is how you get to GTMO .

Not by the goatherder lotto .

your own government admit 90% of those held in gitmo are not terrorists.
Source? It'd be nice, especially considering that all information about those detained inside of Gitmo is classified.

Hell no. Knock down the walls and make room for more.

There WAS a room reserved for alzarqawi.....

READ THIS .

Stop the bullshit.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2005/d20050304info.pdf

UNCLASSIFIED Current as of March 4, 2005UNCLASSIFIED1JTF-GTMO Information on DetaineesINFORMATION FROM GUANTANAMO DETAINEES The US Government currently maintains custody of approximately 550 enemy combatants in the Global War on Terrorism at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Many of these enemy combatants are highly trained, dangerous members of al-Qaida, its related terrorist networks, and the former Taliban regime. More than 4,000 reports capture information provided by these detainees, much of it corroborated by other intelligence reporting. This unprecedented body of information has expanded our understanding of al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations and continues to prove valuable. Our intelligence and law enforcement communities develop leads, comprehensive assessments, and intelligence products based on information detainees provide. The information includes their leadership structures, recruiting practices, funding mechanisms, relationships, and the cooperation between terrorist groups, as well as training programs, and plans for attacking the United States and other countries. The Joint Task Force, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (JTF-GTMO) remains the single best repository of al-Qaida information in the Department of Defense. Many detainees have admitted close relationships or other access to senior al-Qaida leadership. They provide valuable insights into the structure of that organization and associated terrorist groups. They have identified additional al-Qaida operatives and supporters, and have expanded our understanding of the extent of their presence in Europe, the United States, and throughout the CENTCOM area of operations. Detainees have also provided information on individuals connected to al-Qaida’s pursuit of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. Exchanges with European allies have supported investigations of Islamic extremists in several European countries. INFORMATION PROVIDED BY DETAINEESSupport to combat operations in AfghanistanCoalition forces in Afghanistan continue to capture al-Qaida, Taliban, and anti-coalition militia fighters. Guantanamo detainees remain a valuable resource to identify these recently captured fighters. Detainees also still provide useful information on locations of training compounds and safe houses, terrain features, travel patterns and routes used for smuggling people and equipment, as well as for identifying potential supporters and opponents.Terrorist Trainers and Bomb MakersSome detainees served as trainers in al-Qaida training camps; significant among these are the detainees that served as explosives trainers. Information given includes technical training provided by al-Qaida on building improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and the use of poisons. They have also explained the details of training courses and the process used to identify more talented recruits for further training and future operational activities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
UNCLASSIFIEDUNCLASSIFIED2Many detainees have been implicated in using, constructing, or being trained to construct IEDs. Some are low-level jihadists with just enough training to construct grenades from soda cans. Others are highly skilled engineers with the ability to design and build sophisticated, remotely triggered bombs made with explosives manufactured from household items. Additionally, detainees have been identified as explosives trainers who passed their techniques on to others through structured courses. The courses ranged from a few days (for basic bomb making) up to several weeks on subjects like electronic circuitry. The detainees have also provided the names of at least seven other explosives trainers still at large. At least one detainee holds a degree in Electrical Engineering. Another detainee has been cooperative enough to draw schematic diagrams of the bombs he designed and built, in addition, he has provided his critiques of the design of IEDs being constructed by terrorists in Iraq. He has also identified a complex detonation system – a dual tone multi-frequency (DTMF) encode/decode system – that had been used in the Chechen conflict, and is now being used on IEDs in Iraq, helping U.S. forces to combat this lethal weapon. Detainees were frequently captured with a type of watch that has been linked to al-Qaida and radical Islamic terrorist IEDs. This particular model of watch is favored by al-Qaida bomb-builders because it allows alarm settings (and, therefore, detonations) more than 24-hours in advance. One detainee also detailed how pagers and cellular telephones are used to initiate detonations. Terrorist OperativesDetainees were either actively involved in operational planning for terrorist attacks or had already participated in attacks in Europe, the United States, and/or central Asia at the time of detention. One detainee attempted to enter the United States in the summer of 2001, and a substantial volume of information suggests that he may have intended to participate in the September 11 attacks. Detainees have also provided information about al-Qaida operatives who remain at large as well as numerous al-Qaida, Taliban, and anti-coalition militia members who remain active in Central Asia, Europe, and the United States. Law enforcement entities in Europe and the United States continue to pursue leads provided by Guantanamo detainees.One detainee identified 11 fellow GTMO detainees as Usama bin Ladin (UBL) bodyguards who all received terrorist training at al Farouq, a known terrorist training camp. This detainee also identified another detainee as UBL’s “spiritual advisor,” a significant role within al-Qaida. Another detainee, the probable 20th9/11 hijacker, confirmed more than 20 detainees as UBL bodyguards who received terrorist training at al Farouq and were active fighters against the northern alliance. This detainee admits attending terrorist training at al Farouq with many of these detainees. Financial IssuesDetainees provide information that helps sort out legitimate financial activity from illegitimate terrorist financing operations, as Islamic extremists exploit existing banking
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 3
UNCLASSIFIEDUNCLASSIFIED3systems to take advantage of widespread informal financial networks. These networks include the hawala system, front companies, and the use of charitable organizations to hide financial transactions. One detainee was a senior member of one such illegitimate international humanitarian aid organization that provided significant and prolonged aid and support to both the Taliban and al Qaida in Afghanistan. He was given a letter by UBL providing assistance in the establishment of three new offices in Afghanistan and at least one office in Pakistan for this organization. The detainee had complete authority over the organization and has stated; “nothing happened in this organization without my knowledge.” This same detainee related that this organizationspent $1 million US dollars in Afghanistan between November 2000 - November 2001. During this time, he admittedly purchased $5,000 US dollars worth of weapons utilizing the organization’s funds, stating they were for NGO personnel protection against the Northern Alliance during the onset of Operation Enduring Freedom. Another detainee claims to have traveled to Cambodia to assist with relief efforts at an unidentified orphanage on the behalf of an Islamic organization. By his own admission, this detainee met UBL as many as four times during July 2001 and is believed to have substantial ties to al-Qaida. He was approached by an al-Qaida leader to straighten out logistics and supply problems that al-Qaida was experiencing in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan.More than a dozen detainees had the cash equivalent of US$1,000-10,000 in their pocketswhen apprehended; four detainees had US$10,000-25,000; two detainees had the cash equivalent of more than US$40,000 each when captured.Terrorist FacilitatorsDetainees have described their experiences with al Qaida recruiters and facilitators, the encouragement they received to participate in jihad, and how their travel was facilitated. Detainees who were actual facilitators have detailed their efforts to send interested young men to training camps in Afghanistan, and for some eventually to meetings withthe highest circles of al Qaida leadership.Over 25 GTMO detainees have been identified by other detainees as being facilitators who provided money, documentation, travel, or safe houses. Detainee Skill SetsMore than 10 percent of the detainees possess college degrees or obtained other higher education, often at western colleges, many in the United States. Among these educated detainees are medical doctors, airplane pilots, aviation specialists, engineers, divers, translators, and lawyers.A detainee, who produced al Qaida videos, was hired by a Taliban leader to provide computer services to include installing hardware and software.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 4
UNCLASSIFIEDUNCLASSIFIED4Another detainee, who has threatened guards and admits enjoying terrorizing Americans, studied at Texas A&M for 18 months and has acquaintances in the U.S. He also studied English at the University of Texas in Austin. Another detainee, who has been identified as an al Qaida weapons supplier, studied at Embry Riddle Aviation School in Arizona, obtaining a graduate degree in avionics management. One detainee has a Masters degree in Aviation Management. Another detainee has a Masters degree in Petroleum Engineering. Insight into Future Leaders and Centers of ActivityGuantanamo detainees provide a unique insight into the type of individuals likely to become participants, recruiters, and leaders for the Islamic extremist movements. Detainees possess an astonishing variety of skills, educational levels, levels of motivation and experience. It is likely that many Guantanamo detainees would have risen to positions of prominence in the leadership ranks of al Qaida and its associated groups.Since the elimination of Afghanistan as a sanctuary for al Qaida, the organization has endured a transitional period and become a looser network of extremists. In many cases, it has had to rely upon regional or local extremist networks to carry out its missions. A detainee does not have to be a member of al Qaida to provide valuable intelligence. The information provided by detained members of lesser-known extremist groups will prove to be valuable in the future as we continue to work to prevent the resurgence of groups like al Qaida and its supporters.GTMO as a Strategic Interrogation CenterGTMO is currently the only DoD strategic interrogation center and will remain useful as long as the war on terrorism is underway and new enemy combatants are captured and sent there. The lessons learned at GTMO have advanced both the operational art of intelligence, and the development of strategic interrogations doctrine. Detainees Returning to the FightWe know of several former detainees from JTF-GTMO that have rejoined the fight against coalition forces. We have been able to identify at least ten by name. Press reporting indicates al Qaida-linked militants recently kidnapped two Chinese engineers and that former detainee Abdullah Mahsud, their reputed leader, ordered the kidnapping. (Fox News report October 12, 2004, Islamabad the News October 20, 2004, Washington Post October 13, 2004). Mahsud, now reputed to be a militant leader, claimed to be an office clerk and driver for the Taliban from 1996 to 1998 or 1999. He consistently denied having any affiliation with al Qaida. He also claimed to have received no weapons or military training due to his handicap (an amputation resulting from when he stepped on a land mine 10 years ago). He claimed that after September 11, 2001 he was forcibly conscripted by the Taliban military.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 5
UNCLASSIFIEDUNCLASSIFIED5Another released detainee assassinated an Afghan judge. Several former GTMO detainees have been killed in combat with U.S. soldiers and Coalition forces.SELECTED STATEMENTS FROM DETAINEESStatements made by detainees provide valuable insights into the mindset of these terrorists and the continuing threat they pose to the United States and the rest of the world. A detainee who has assaulted GTMO guards on numerous occasions and crafted a weapon in his cell, stated that he can either go back home and kill as many Americans as he possibly can, or he can leave here in a box; either way it's the same to him. A detainee with ties to UBL, the Taliban, and Chechen mujahideen leadership figures told another detainee, “Their day is coming. One day I will enjoy sucking their blood, although their blood is bitter, undrinkable…”During an interview with U.S. military interrogators this same detainee then stated that he would lead his tribe in exacting revenge against the Saudi Arabian and U.S. governments. “I will arrange for the kidnapping and execution of US citizens living in Saudi Arabia. Small groups of four or five U.S. citizens will be kidnapped, held, and executed. They will have their heads cut off.”After being informed of the Tribunal process, the detainee replied, "Not only am I thinking about threatening the American public, but the whole world." A detainee who has been identified as a UBL bodyguard, stated, “It would be okay for UBL to kill Jewish persons. There is no need to ask for forgiveness for killing a Jew. The Jewish people kill Muslims in Palestine so it's okay to kill Jews. Israel should not exist and be removed from Palestine.” A detainee who has been identified as UBL’s “spiritual advisor” and a relative of a fighter who attacked U.S. Marines on Failaka Island, Kuwait on October 8, 2002, stated,“I pray everyday against the United States.” This detainee repeatedly stated, "The United States government is criminals.” A detainee and self-confessed al Qaida member who produced an al Qaida recruitment video stated, “...the people who died on 9/11/2001 were not innocent because they paid taxes and participated in the government that fosters repression of Palestinians.” He also stated, “...his group will shake up the U.S. and countries who follow the U.S.” and that, “it is not the quantity of power, but the quality of power, that will win in the end.” A detainee who has assaulted GTMO guards on over 30 occasions, has made gestures of killing a guard and threatened to break a guard’s arm.A detainee, captured by Pakistani authorities and who, while being transported, was involved in a riot during which several Pakistani guards were killed, stated that acts of
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 6
UNCLASSIFIEDUNCLASSIFIED6terrorism are a legitimate way for a Muslim to wage jihad against the United States, even if innocent women and children are killed. He also said that he believes that Muslim jihadists will wipe out the government of the United States within the next 20 years. A detainee described how he was sought to assist an extremist in the purchasing of possible biological weapons-related medical equipment through humanitarian organizational channels. The detainee has also assaulted GTMO guards on various occasions and incited riots in the holding areas.A detainee who admits to being one of UBL’s primary drivers and bodyguards had in his possession surface to air missiles when captured. This detainee identified eight bodyguards currently held at GTMO. A detainee, who fought as a Taliban soldier at Konduz, stated to the MPs that all Americans should die because these are the rules of Allah. The detainee also told the MPs that he would come to their homes and cut their throats like sheep. The detainee went on to say that upon his release from GTMO, he would use the Internet to search for the names and faces of MPs so that he could kill them.Contrasting DETAINEE COMMENTSThe following comments from current and past detainees are in contrast to other detainee comments concerning treatment at GTMO. “Americans are very kind people…If people say that there is mistreatment in Cuba with the detainees, those type speaking are wrong, they treat us like a Muslim not a detainee.”“…the devil Saddam and his party have fallen down. How people go to Najaf and Karbala walking and nobody prohibits them? This was grace of God and the USA to Iraqi people.”“I’m in good health and have good facilities of eating, drinking, living, and playing.”“These people take good care of me…The guards and everybody else is fine. We are allowed to talk to our friends.”“The food is good, the bedrooms are clean and the health care is very good. There is a library full of Islamic books, science books, and literature…Sport, reading, and praying, all of these options are not mandatory for everyone, it is up to the person.”

READ THIS .

Stop the bullshit.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2005/d20050304info.pdf

OH NOESS! YOU MUST RELEASE THEM! THEY ARE INNOCENT!

:rolleyes:

shallow grave and an oak tree is way too nice.

Well what do you know more info on the terrorist health spa called GTMO.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/detainees.html


Here's a list of detainees who have gone through the tribunal process..

http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/foi/detainees/detainee_list.pdf


So why all the HYPE ?

Whats up with all the bullshit about GTMO ?

I thought it was a secret ?


Read through the list...no real suprises...until WTF ??????????????

CHINESE MUSLIMS !!!!!!!!!!! ?????????????????????????

Jihadist from China ...now I know we are well and truly screwed .:D


Fot those still concerned about what criteria is used to determine when and how a detainee is kept at GTMO.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2005/d20050908process.pdf


Secret agent man ......

OMGWTF those poor innocent jihadi islamic terrorists they never did anything wrong...

And they were all picked up at random by bounty hunters and sold to the US ...dont forget that one ..:D :D :D :D

* Detainees do not receive the presumption of innocence.
* Detainees do not get access to legal advice.
* Detainees are not entitled to access to the evidence against them, or in their favor.
* Detainees had no right to present witnesses or to cross-examine government witnesses.
* Hear-say evidence is allowed to be used against the detainees
* The use of evidence acquired through coercive interrogation is allowed, there is no protection against self-incrimination.
* Evidence acquired through the torture of other suspects was allowed.

No, there is no problems with the tribunals :rolleyes:


Read through the list...no real suprises...until WTF ??????????????

CHINESE MUSLIMS !!!!!!!!!!! ?????????????????????????

Jihadist from China ...now I know we are well and truly screwed .:D
Yeah, especially since those five chinese Uighurs have been released after spending two or three years at Guantanamo.

They are free, so they might come and visit you when you're sleeping!! :eek: Better look under your bed tonight. :rolleyes: