Gitmo suicides

[MasterJedi]

Well good for them.

[agcatter]

Opedo,

Now that you're throwing around your favorite term "fascist", I'll let you and Fern discuss the evil fascist UNITED States.  That should occupy both of you for a day or two.

Me, I'm glad the bastards are dead. Out.

[opebo]

Opedo,

Now that you're throwing around your favorite term "fascist", I'll let you and Fern discuss the evil fascist UNITED States.  That should occupy both of you for a day or two.

agcatter, I don't 'throw around' the term fascist, I use it just as precisely as I use all my speech, and it is the mot juste for the american State.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Practicing islam should be a war crime.

[J. J.]

I fully support the right of any al Qaeda member to hang himself.

For those who call it "torture," I will point out that Allied (and Axis) POW's were held for six or more years during WW II.  Likewise, I believe John McCain was held for six or seven years, and no doubt, North Vietnamese were held for a like period.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Fern,

The World Court found the US guilty of terrorism?  Considering the acts of terrorism committed by Bin Ladin and the like, the fact that it is the US that has been "the ONLY country found guilty of terrorism" doesn't say much for the credibility of the World Court now does it.

The only COUNTRY found guilty. bin Laden doesn't control a country.

[agcatter]

How about Iran, Syria?  Has the World Court got around to looking at their activities?  Nope, no terrorism there.  And how about Libya?  Are they a country enough for you?  I guess the World Court doesn't believe blowing up airliners over Scotland quite falls under the heading of terrorism.

Yeah, the World Court is just swimming in credibility.  LOL

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Well the reason is that no one has ever brought suits against Iran or Syria in the World Court, there certainly would be a valid case there if they did, but since World Court decisions are basically unenforcable, it'd be kind of pointless anyway (not that I put much stock in the World Court for that reason either, just pointing out why bin Laden isn't a valid counterexample). Of course, it's not like saying "at least we're not as bad as Syria or Iran!" isn't much of a moral high ground.

As for Libya, it was under massive UN and US sanctions for over a decade and forced to pay massive retribution, until the sanctions were lifted and it was removed from a list of state terrorism sponsor by....the Bush Administration.

[minionofmidas]

Well the reason is that no one has ever brought suits against Iran or Syria in the World Court, there certainly would be a valid case there if they did, but since World Court decisions are basically unenforcable, it'd be kind of pointless anyway (not that I put much stock in the World Court for that reason either, just pointing out why bin Laden isn't a valid counterexample). Of course, it's not like saying "at least we're not as bad as Syria or Iran!" isn't much of a moral high ground.

As for Libya, it was under massive UN and US sanctions for over a decade and forced to pay massive retribution, until the sanctions were lifted and it was removed from a list of state terrorism sponsor by....the Bush Administration.

Well, they were just seeing the light, with the usual 20-year delay.

[agcatter]

Yeah, after they agreed to give up all programs of WMD and submit to transparent inspections.  I think you conveniently left that part out.

Anyway, few in this country outside of the San Francisco bay area attach any credence at all to anything the leftist at the World Court do or don't do.  For Opedo to use anything involving the World Court to back up his accusation that the United States is somehow a terrorist nation that is murdering Gitmo inmates is quite a reach and only serves to demonstrate the absurdity of his argument (if you can call it that).

Perhaps Turbin Durbin can give another speech on the Senate floor comparing Gitmo to Nazi concentration camps..  The last one went over so well.  I'm sure if he threw in the part about the World Court Americans w3ould immediately see the light.

[??????????]

I fully support the right of any al Qaeda member to hang himself.

For those who call it "torture," I will point out that Allied (and Axis) POW's were held for six or more years during WW II.  Likewise, I believe John McCain was held for six or seven years, and no doubt, North Vietnamese were held for a like period.

Many German POWs were allowed to leave the prison though here in the USA. Many stayed and became citizens after the war.

[opebo]

For Opedo to use anything involving the World Court to back up his accusation that the United States is somehow a terrorist nation that is murdering Gitmo inmates is quite a reach and only serves to demonstrate the absurdity of his argument (if you can call it that).

I never refered to the World Court at all, agcatter.  I merely made the point that where a State is unsupervised by any outside parties, whether humanitarian organizations, an independent judiciary, or the press, it is safe to assume that they are torturing and murdering.

[agcatter]

Opedo,

You are correct in that you were not the one who brought up the World Court.  My apologies.

[Mr. Morden]

I agree with Guantanamo critics who say that it's deplorable that we're holding some of these people on very thin evidence that they're even members of al Qaeda, but I think some critics go too far in suggesting that we should either criminally charge them or release them.  There has to be some kind of hearing to establish whether they actually are al Qaeda or not.  And if they are, then isn't *that* sufficient grounds to hold them?  Even if they're not guilty of any crime in the conventional sense, isn't it pretty well established that you can detain enemy combatants in war simply for being combatants?  That's what I don't get about the calls for closing Gitmo.  Don't we have to hold such prisoners *somewhere*?  If, say, you have a group of al Qaeda surrender to American forces in Afghanistan, then don't you take them prisoner?  What's the alternative?  Criminally charge them in an Afghan court?  Is that really practical?

[WoosterLibertarian]

Here is Michelle Malkin's thoughts on these suicides.

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/TOF-Malkin-Boo-H.mov

[dazzleman]

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

^^^^^^^^
I'm glad they weren't able to take anybody with them.  That proves the wisdom of keeping them locked up.

[Emsworth]

I have no compassion for bloodsucking terrorists nor should I.

How do you know that all of the individuals being held at Gitmo are terrorists? The United States has already released some individuals who turned out to be innocent.

What you are saying, in effect, is that there is the presumption that an individual is deemed innocent until proven guilty does not apply to people who are terrorists according to George W. Bush.

[WoosterLibertarian]

I have no compassion for bloodsucking terrorists nor should I.

How do you know that all of the individuals being held at Gitmo are terrorists? The United States has already released some individuals who turned out to be innocent.

What you are saying, in effect, is that there is the presumption that an individual is deemed innocent until proven guilty does not apply to people who are terrorists according to George W. Bush.

Exactly. Also what you are saying is that if they are Muslim, they are automaticaly terrorists. Plus most of the people at Gitmo are in fact non combatants.

[agcatter]

Fine.  Let's give all of  them full access to the US court system and each an OJ dream team of lawyers.

Boo fricken hoo.  You libs are hilarious.  Yeah, they were all picked up at a shopping  mall because they were Muslim.

[Democratic Hawk]

I'm fillin' up 'ere

Dave

[opebo]

Fine.  Let's give all of  them full access to the US court system and each an OJ dream team of lawyers.

Boo fricken hoo.  You libs are hilarious.  Yeah, they were all picked up at a shopping  mall because they were Muslim.

This question has nothing to do with the specifics of the case, agcatter - the religion of the victims, or the specific nature of the 'threat' the perportedly represent.  No, the question here is limitation of State power over the individual - without proper oversite abuse is inevitable.

[Emsworth]

Let's give all of  them full access to the US court system...

There are two equally acceptable alternatives: first, treat them as prisoners of war, or second, give them due process.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I never said anything about all of them. I said that some of them have been released because they turned out to be innocent; certainly, it is possible, or perhaps even probable, that there are more innocent people remaining.

[WoosterLibertarian]

Let's give all of  them full access to the US court system...

There are two equally acceptable alternatives: first, treat them as prisoners of war, or second, give them due process.

Since Condi has said multiple times that the prisoners at Gitmo are not POWs (they cant be POWs because the Bush Administration doesnt want to follow the Geneva Conventions) does that mean that you are advocating due process for all of the prisoners?