The Cellar - SCOTUS Grants Guantanamo Prisoners Habeas Corpus

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - SCOTUS Grants Guantanamo Prisoners Habeas Corpus (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=17492)

Would you prefer the situation remain as it is? Should we keep it open indefinitely? At what cost, both politically and financially? The current situation is untenable - something has to change. what???

Close it. Immediately and send them all home but for the few bad guys whom are known to be such. The rest go free. Put them up in Pico's house for good measure and to show them good faith.

Oh here you are anyway.

It's like deja vous

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 507345)

Seriously. You bleeding hearts want to end GITMO, fine, most of us fully support it. Just don't whine when these guys have their heads chopped off as they get off the airplane when they get home. That blood will be on your hands. I welcome the chance to say I told you so.

Seems like you've been doing most of the talking about sending them home, so why isn't the blood on your hands?

All I ever promoted was a fair trial in a fair amount of time without being mistreated in the meantime.

We grabbed these people and that means we now have the responsibility of doing the right thing by them. For some I assume that means incarceration. For others that would mean sending them home. For still others, it would mean letting them find a host country.

Just because you're tired of the situation doesn't mean that you get to make a bulk decision for individuals.

Oh, and the last I checked my heart is just fine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dar512 (Post 508240)

Seems like you've been doing most of the talking about sending them home, so why isn't the blood on your hands?

Now that is funny as hell...

Quote:

All I ever promoted was a fair trial in a fair amount of time without being mistreated in the meantime.

We grabbed these people and that means we now have the responsibility of doing the right thing by them. For some I assume that means incarceration. For others that would mean sending them home. For still others, it would mean letting them find a host country.

Just because you're tired of the situation doesn't mean that you get to make a bulk decision for individuals.

Oh, and the last I checked my heart is just fine.

I see bleeding... You can't have it both ways.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 508316)

I see bleeding... You can't have it both ways.

I see. fairness = bleeding. Will there be a ministry of peace, soon?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dar512 (Post 508240)

We grabbed these people and that means we now have the responsibility of doing the right thing by them. For some I assume that means incarceration. For others that would mean sending them home. For still others, it would mean letting them find a host country.

...

Just because you're tired of the situation doesn't mean that you get to make a bulk decision for individuals.

Well said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dar512 (Post 508333)

I see. fairness = bleeding. Will there be a ministry of peace, soon?

Fairness? Where? I see a majority of people caught up in a dragnet and mix in with a few very bad actors. Let the mass go home, put the few bad actors in prison for life after the tribunals. So far they have done a pretty good job.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 507372)

send them all home but for the few bad guys whom are known to be such. The rest go free.

Free to do as they please . . .

Quote:

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico – As a prisoner at Guantanamo, Said Ali al-Shihri said he wanted freedom so he could go home to Saudi Arabia and work at his family's furniture store.

Instead, al-Shihri, who was released in 2007 under the Bush administration, is now deputy leader of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, a group that has claimed responsibility for the Christmas Day attempted bomb attack on a Detroit-bound airliner.

His potential involvement in the terrorist plot has raised new opposition to releasing Guantanamo Bay inmates, complicating President Barack Obama's pledge to close the military prison in Cuba. It also highlights the challenge of identifying the hard-core militants as the administration decides what to do with the remaining 198 prisoners.

Like other former Guantanamo detainees who have rejoined al-Qaida in Yemen, al-Shihri, 36, won his release despite jihadist credentials such as, in his case, urban warfare training in Afghanistan.

He later goaded the United States, saying Guantanamo only strengthened his anti-American convictions.

"By God, our imprisonment has only increased our persistence and adherence to our principles," he said in a speech when al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula formed in Yemen in January 2009. It was included in a propaganda film for the group.

Link

I'm not picking on anyone here, but I'm still concerned about how many of these situations we are gonna have. Should this guy have gone free? Was his time spent there a contributing factor?
Were/are their options? There is only one know to me - This situation sux.

Well people wanted it closed... this is only the beginning.

Quote:

al-Shihri, who was released in 2007