Gitmo, what to do and why?
 

Someone is going to have to deal with this issue sooner or later, share your thoughts.

My vote was to send them home and let their country of origin deal with them. I don't necessarily think it'd be a case of turning out the lights though. I believe if the prisoner was 'captured' by the US, they'd have a certain responsibility to follow through with the trial part and providing evidence as to why they were locked up in the first place etc.

The first 400 that were already released to their countries were set free. Why? They were guilty of nothing. Most all Gitmo prisioners were simply turned in by bounty hunters on rumors. The US imprisioned them mostly because bounty hunters said they were guilty - nothing more.

There is no reason for Gitmo. Anyone who is guilty will be found so in a court of law. Move them all to the US to stand trial. Trial as any decent Amerian patriot would demand and that Nazi like extremists in America fear. Oh. But with almost all prisoners not guilty of anything - we must proclaim the evidence against them as top secret? That is what the wackos are doing to maintain their lies.

Don't fool yourself for one minute. Gitmo exists because the president lies repeatedly. The president even fears the American principles of law. As Cheney said, the Presidency does not have enough power. Stalin had the same ideas.

There are maybe 14 and probably no more than 40 prisoners in Gitmo that are guilty.

Close Gitmo because it is no different than a Nazi concentration camp. Notice how easy it has been for Americans to deny we run concentration camps as the Germans also did in WWII.

Put the guilty on trial as was once called the American way. Time is now to stop making more enemies AND to prosecute wacko extremists in the CIA who did not stand up to and say no to White House wacko extremists. We have many in government who should be on trial including Major General Miller.

Numerous American criminals being protected by George Jr. Time is now to restore the American principles of law. Closing Gitmo should be obvious to everyone as nothing more than a Nazi concentration camp. it existed so that George Jr could decided without judicial review who was evil.

I didn't vote because by dropping a tactical nuke on the place after pulling out all the US troops and letting them meet their maker would also involve others in the vacinity who were blameless.

The wrong people are there. O.K., there may be a few who were involved in 9/11 but the remainder represent a fraction of people who are opposed to U.S. policies around the world. And why shouldn't they be? The U.S. reserves the right to be opposed to any country, let alone a regime that doesn't fall in line with American thinking.

And complaining that these people kill Americans doesn't resolve the problem of Americans killing others. The bombing of Iraq is indescriminate and anyone who thinks otherwise is living in a land of delusion or is a believer in the Bush propaganda machine.

Just ask yourself this question: If as people claim, a numberplate can be read from space why cannot moving images filmed by satellite be run backwards to discover the origin of an IAD for example.

Although I may have strayed away from the subject my contention is that nothing can be believed because this administration has no morals.

Close it completely, right now, or make United States laws and the US Constitution applicable there. They can't have it both ways. Not when they use that as a way to break laws, to torture, to hold indefinitely.

Expand it and lock up all the Cubans too.

Don't stop there. Stuff in all the Venezuelans. That will solve a lot more problems. Then the King of Spain need not tell anyone to, "just shut up".

If they are being held by the military due to being "enemy combatants", it only makes sense in my mind to try them according to our military law.

But when the military is fighting a civillian militia organization, and has the power to declare anyone they want to be enemy combatants, that entire idea is useless.
When the military gets to call anybody an enemy combatant, and enemy combatants have no rights, then as far as the military is concerned nobody has any rights.

Isn't that pretty much how the military works? I see your point about treating these "civilian combatants" as civilians in the US Civilian System, but they are combatants also and therefore should be treated as such by the military. I do hope they do something though and stop this nonsense. Guess well just have to wait till '09.

I'm not saying the military has categorized them correctly. I'm saying that if that's what they want to call these people, then they should treat them as such.

The big issue to me are the people who've been picked up under suspicion of terrorism etc when they're not actively doing any fighting what so ever.

For these people to firstly be detained is one thing. I accept there must be a reason authorities identified said person, however, the issue is that these people are not always found to be guilty of any crime what so ever. There have been two Australians detained in gitmo, both of whom were later released. One after a trial which took over 4 years to happen, and the other before any formal charges were laid, but after nearly a year of detention. He's been back in Oz for several years now and so far hasn't blown anyone up. I guess that's a good sign.

If nothing else, there should be time limits imposed so that people who are not guilty of any crime shouldn't be left rotting and being abused. If there's one thing that I could criticize the US on, it's the way they've treated these Australian citizens. Citizens of a country which has always been a staunch partner.

It is called the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America; also called the Bill of Rights. That law exists which demonstrates how much wacko extremists have pervert American legal principles. Even Terry Schivo could not be left alone because wackos must pervert laws for their poltiical agenda. The Sixth Amendment: Notice the word "all". Gitmo prisoners were denied all these right including right to counsel which is a question only now being asked by the Supreme Court.

To deny almost 800 prisoners 'all' rights, George Jr administration put them in Guantanamo, claimed prisoners in Gitmo are not subject to any American laws , and then invented a category called illegal enemy combatant to further deny these people their Constitutional rights. Yes, everyone in America has Constitutional rights. Some have more rights when also citizens. But all have Constitutional rights.

Worse, many Americans so hated America as to agree with George Jr's extremism.

Meanwhile, George Jr has been signing 'Findings' whereby he secretly declares he is exempt from some laws that were passed by Congress and signed by him. IOW George Jr's respect for American principles of law are that perverted. Often these 'Findings' are signed as soon as he signs the bill into law. But even worse, others approve of this subversion of the American Constitution. There is no Constitutional definition for 'Findings'. It is how a president can violate the law and do it secretly.

They are wacko extremists whose political agenda even justified torture and international kidnapping of any non-American. Justifies presidental violation of American law. Also amazing are the number of non-American Cellar dwellers who remained quiet when they can be kidnapped by America at any time - and this is called legal.

Guantanamo is clearly a violation of the US Constitution AND of American principles. Others deny due to their politics. We must subvert the Constitution because 800 people might be enemies. We must torture them long before considering any Constitutional principles. After all, they must be enemies because they are in Guantanamo and therefore must be evil.

In military tribunals, prisoners are denied counsel. The person who represents them is also obligated to report to military authorities everything their 'client' tells them. These representatives can also deny the prisoner any information that might prove his innocence. Even Judges cannot be trusted to know secrets (such as the identity of a CIA agent named Plame) in this tribunal framework. Only the accussers can be trusted can know such secrets. American wackos call this fair because everyone in Guantanamo must be evil. American law has been that viciously perverted because something approaching one in three Americans is that wacko extremist.

Aliantha's question was answered over 200 years ago - the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution. American laws define such 'time limits'. Constitutional rights are now routinely perverted for a wacko extremist political agenda - including wiretapping. As demonstrated in the Cellar, many Americans approved of these perversions. The propaganda and hate preached by Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson, etc is that alive and well in America. Even the Sixth Amendment is perverted in the name of a new wacko extremist political agenda.

Hiya Bruce!
A large number of Australians object to the mandatory detention of asylum seekers either within Australia or under the "Pacific solution" (awfully Nazi-sounding name isn't it?) of paying Nauru to house them in a camp in their country rather than in Australia. I am one of the objectors.
Conditions are reported to be, well, like a prison. Not so harsh as Gitmo, and no interrogations (as far as I know), but even children would be locked up in this way. :mad2:
That said, the prison camps had a procedure for assessing asylum claims, and the very large majority were eventually granted.

As for the remand point - don't all countries do that? Does the USA? Assess at the bail hearing, if the person is apparently dangerous or a flight risk, they are held (not, as your quote states, in the "regular" prison system, but in remand centers, which are very prison like).