Senate OKs move of Gitmo prisoners to U.S. for trial
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
N Korea stages mass military parade for late leader
( 7 )
-
Maid kills Singaporean widow after being called stupid
( 4 )
-
At least 356 killed in Honduras prison fire
( 3 )
-
Republicans oppose any cuts in nuclear weapons
( 26 )
-
Russia: West 'slammed door' on Syria at U.N.
( 11 )
-
- Financial Advisor
- Select Asset Management KK, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥100,000 ~ ¥999,999 Paid Training Commission Based
-
- Corporate Business English Trainers
- ACT Systems, Inc.（株式会社アクト・システムズ）, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥269,500 ~ ¥280,000 / Month
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
Order by Time Order by Popularity
30 Comments
Login to comment
0
SushiSake3
I'm really still not sure what is behind the uproar on the Right about this plan.
The GOP and conservatives seem petrified about having people, most of whom have not even been charged with a crime, housed in their state.
The GOP and conservatives say these men are dangerous - and yet cannot prove it.
The GOP and conservatives say these men need to be locked up - and yet cannot articulate why.
It's the height of ridiculousness and underlines the extent to which the GOP has shrivelled into an extremist, ever-scared shadow of its former self.
If security is really an issue, incarcerate them in Supermax - no one has ever escaped from Supermax - until they are proven innocent or guilty.
Can any Americans on JT provide a rational answer as to why so many states and senators are against relocating Gitmo inmates into their states?
"I think they are dangerous because I heard it on Fox News" really doesn't cut it IMO.
0
timorborder
Good. Give these people due process and treat them accordingly. If they are guilty, they should be hung out to dry. If not, they should be released.
0
SushiSake3
timorborder - "Good. Give these people due process and treat them accordingly. If they are guilty, they should be hung out to dry. If not, they should be released."
That's exactly what I think.
The GOP and conservatives, meanwhile, allow themselves to be ruled by fear and right-wing talk show hosts.
0
timorborder
The GOP and conservatives, meanwhile, allow themselves to be ruled by fear and right-wing talk show hosts.
Well in response to that people need to be reminded that we are talking about the "US" and not Hitler's "SS".
It is OK to play hardball with these people being relentless in hunting them down and killing them where necessary, however, it is not acceptable to give away the moral high-ground and treat them as prisoners in a manner that goes well beyond what is acceptable in a civilized society. Indeed, one of the things that annoys me most about these Gitmo detainees is that the US conveniently side-stepped the issue of incarcerating its own nationals such as John Walker Lindh. The same rules should apply for all. Either the folks down in Gitmo get their day in court (in the same manner as Mr. Lindh), or you drop all pretense of being civilized and take all of them (including those possessing US citizenship) and slot the lot.
0
sailwind
Good luck with getting anybody to sign that certificate, including President Obama.
0
SushiSake3
Sailwind, what do you think should happen with Gitmo detainees?
0
skipthesong
why can't they just try them at gitmo? Its a US base. If guilty, send them to the states to receive the proper punishment and if not guilty send them where they were found.
0
sailwind
Military Tribunals at GITMO.
0
SushiSake3
Sailwind - "Military Tribunals at GITMO"
Should Gitmo inmates get legal representation like you and I would?
If no, why not?
0
sailwind
Should Gitmo inmates get legal representation like you and I would?
If no, why not?
No, They gave up their own citizenship's to their own countries when they joined an outlawed terrorist organization. They think they are above the law in the first place. They gave up their rights when they went stateless themselves. They're lucky they would be even given tribunals in my opinion.
0
SushiSake3
Sailwind - "No, They gave up their own citizenship's to their own countries when they joined an outlawed terrorist organization."
Did all of them do that?
"They gave up their rights when they went stateless themselves."
How many of them "went stateless"?
How do you differentiate between real sodliers and men/fathers who were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time?
Do you honestly believe such shoddy reasoning such as what you have just presented to us would stand up outside of a kangaroo court???
This is probably why it doesn't.
Sailwind, you are really doing a major disservice not just to yourself but to your country when you come up with reasoning that is completely full of holes, as you just have.
0
SushiSake3
Sailwind, your 'with us or against us,' 'black or white' mentality really does not do justice to your age and experience IMO.
0
SushiSake3
The Republican game plan with respect to Gitmo detainees is plainly obvious and has been for years:
1/ If a person is detained in Gitmo, they are stone-cold guilty of a crime we're not sure of and have yet to prove, if we ever do.
2/ 1/ (above) applies to **ALL **Gitmo detainees, regardless of circumstances, facts or evidence, in fact heresay is the best proof of unquestionable guilt if you are a card-carrying conservative.
3/ If you disagree with 1/ and 2/ above, you are weak on terror.
In a civilized society, of which many conservatives want to believe they belong to, this is WRONG, and conservatives do not help themselves one bit by pushing this corrupt, irrational, poorly thought out garbage.
0
tanglewood
"Can any Americans on JT provide a rational answer as to why so many states and senators are against relocating Gitmo inmates into their states?"
We don't need to. America is a sovereign nation. Why don't you get a normal hobby. You seem obsessed or something.
0
SushiSake3
It's amazing - the conservatives on this board have nothing to say in defence of indefinite detention of Gitmo inmates.
It goes to show they never really believed their own thoughtless rhetoric.
Incredible....
0
SushiSake3
tanglewood - "We don't need to. America is a sovereign nation. Why don't you get a normal hobby. You seem obsessed or something."
Obsessed?
No, just p*ssed off that there's still millions of Americans who broadbrush hundreds of Gitmo detainees as being 'Enemy Combatants' and some kind of threat when their own government - after nearly a decade - still cannot come up with a sturdy case to convict more than a handful of these men.
It's called justice, something that Americans screamed for after 9-11 and then conveniently forgot when Gitmo started filling up.
That's called hypocrisy.
Even tanglewood cannot present 1 single rational reason why so many states and senators are against relocating Gitmo inmates into their states.
0
SushiSake3
I find it interesting - I can always tell when a conservative knows s/he is being beaten in an argument - they start getting defensive, evade direct questions and start hitting back to mask the fact they know they are getting horse whipped.
Or - like Sailwind - they just disappear and stop posting.
I'll ask again - can any Americans on JT provide a rational answer as to why so many states and senators are against relocating Gitmo inmates into their states?
0
tanglewood
I have no problem with the Gitmo detainees being sent to Hyde Park, Chicago, or to San Francisco. For the record I have no problem with them being repatriated to the countries they left for Afghanistan.
Why won't European nations take them back? Why won't Middle Eastern nations welcome back these prodigals?
0
Madverts
"No, They gave up their own citizenship's to their own countries when they joined an outlawed terrorist organization."
Hell, what do we need judges and juries for when we have sailwind laying down the facts. Heh, Guilty if I say so, and bollocks to the rest!
0
sailwind
Hell, what do we need judges and juries for when we have sailwind laying down the facts. Heh, Guilty if I say so, and bollocks to the rest!
Agreed.....Send them France, you deal with em
0
SushiSake3
Sailwind - "Agreed.....Send them France, you deal with em."
That's called Taking Responsibility - U.S. conservative-style.
In laymans terms - we screw up. YOU fix it.
Awesome.
0
sailwind
That's called Taking Responsibility - U.S. conservative-style.
In laymans terms - we screw up. YOU fix it.
Awesome.
In layman terms.....There in GITMO right where they belong.
0
sailwind
And Sushi,
I liked to keep them there, you want to let em out.
0
Sarge
"In January Obama ordered the facility closed within a year"
He's got 3 more months to make good on that.
0
SushiSake3
Sailwind - "I liked to keep them there, you want to let em out."
I would respond to that if I knew you were serious, but it's clear you're not.
0
TheQuestion
Put them in the Pelican Bay general prison population. Give it maybe two weeks and we won't have to deal with them anymore.
0
Madverts
sailwind,
Buddy, simply stated your attempt at a retort is pathetic. At least if you have evidence of what you're alleging - or moe importantly - if the US government has it - then try these people properly instead of interning them indefinitely without charge. The presumption of innocence is held high in all modern states that cherish freedom and democracy.
Braying that they should be "sent to France" because you're not comfortable with me pointing out this fact is no different from the un-hinged Americans that were posting about bombing France when they were refusing to climb on board a fiasco that began early 2003. Heh, oh wait - you were doing that too.
0
SuperLib
I believe I wrote a couple of longer posts explaining the problems with it a while back. Your response was to thank me for taking the time to explain it to you. Unfortunately your War on Republicans (TM) has somehow erased all of that from your memory.
0
Madverts
Heh....War on Republicans....sushi, I don't believe in kicking people when they're down.
0
SuperLib
(sigh)
Once again we'll have to go over this....
The inmates shouldn't be allowed to enter the US justice system. The US justice system isn't set up to handle terrorism charges since the ramifications of the trial go beyond our borders.
You can show a man the evidence against him because you can lock him up after. You can even show men in organized crime the evidence because even tho tipping your hand will help others not yet charged, it's not like they're going to flee to Syria, and their crimes are usually localized and don't pose the same threat as international terrorism.
What you can't do is show your evidence to terrorists. Then they'll know exactly what you're doing, who your contacts are, how you collect information, what information gathering techniques you have in place, etc. There are ramifications beyond our borders that are extreme enough that showing the evidence to convict one man might increase the likelhood of another large scale terrorist attack.
In short, out justice system was created at a time when threats like this didn't exist. We're better off setting these men free as opposed to giving them free access to our intelligence. At that point convicting them becomes counterproductive and the judicial system is in fact helping terrorists. If a man is willing to strap a bomb to himself and blow up a cafe, surely they'll find men willing to literally walk into the courts and give themselves up and then feed information that their lawyers collect to their contacts overseas. Call it a legal jihad.
If they are to be tried, then it should be through tribunals. Our own servicemen go through that when they are tried by the military. These people should not be allowed to be tried like "regular" criminals because the system fails under that circumstance.
There ya go, Sushi. A Democrat has explained it to you yet again. I know your War is with Republicans and not with the system or any position, so I know my words won't stop you much, but perhaps others can read it and learn a little more about it. Perhaps now you can see the trouble Obama faces. In the end he'll mostly do what Bush but he'll change the name. That's one of the reasons why I voted for him. And in the end we'll have that extremely odd situation where the far right criticizes Obama for doing what Bush was doing and the far Left will praise him.
Back to top