Tim
Here is my issue with this. Here in the United States people have been
detained for "ties to terrorism" as slim as being the waiter that
served one of the 9/11 hijackers luncha few weeks before the
hijacking. Assuming this is in fact the extent of the tie, what danger
does this person pose to the United States?
I guess the problem is that this administration really lacks all
credibility in my eyes anymore, and so it seems quite plausible to me
that quite a number of these guys could well be random taxi drivers or
passers-by that got snagged by mistake.
Granted that they are not charged with a crime, they are not being
treated as prisoners of war *either.* When I say a trial, perhaps I
mean a review... just some sort of casting of fresh eyes upon the case
to ensure that there is in fact good cause to hold this person.
I mean, holding people indefinitely without trial, this has not been
done since the Magna Carta in Plantagenet times. Well, in English
speaking countries. In France, they had the Bastille, and when they
had the revolution they tore it down stone by stone.
Dana
On 6/15/05, loathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Look,
> Who is going to testify against these guys?
>
> American Soldiers, Special Forces? CIA officers?
>
> Umm no the force protection risks would be far to high in personal terms for
> people that already sacrifice too much.
>
> What are they going to say?
>
> We rolled into {insert village here} and began taking fire (or had an IED go
> off or received indirect fire). We saw three males with AK-47s running from
> the scene. We chased them down and caught them with weapons.
>
> Does that sound like something that will float in a trial?
>
> We have something called the UCMJ. The uniform code of military justice.
> This is law that pertains only to members of our military. It sets a very
> different standard than that by which the average civilian has to live by.
> This set of laws was created because congress saw that the laws of war were
> very different from the laws of civilian society. Offering these people the
> same rights as an American citizen just doesn't make sense. Even if we look
> at it as though they were truly prisoners of war, all we would have to do is
> let them receive mail, and let in the red cross to check them out once in a
> while. We wouldn't have to return them to their host or home nations. Why
> so they can take up arms against us again?
>
> What crime should we be charging these people with? Say they fought for the
> Taliban, ok, now what? What did they do that was against international or
> even Afghani law? Nothing. Did we send German or Japanese troops back home
> during World War 2? No we put them into internment camps until the war was
> over, and for some even longer so we could find the war criminals, the
> people that should actually be charged with something.
>
> As a final note lets take this discussion from a different perspective.
>
> Two of your friends and fellow soldiers are killed in an IED attack. Your
> unit is tasked with taking down the house of the man who is known from
> multiple sources to have built the bomb.
>
> How would you all react? What about the guys that lit up my convoy leaving
> a cache site? Should we all hold hands and sing kumbya while they rock and
> roll?
>
> The simple fact that these people are making it to a detention center at all
> is a testament to the honor, integrity and self control of the American
> soldier and marine.
>
> Everyone wants to complain about how we are treating our detainees, but
> realistically I think it speaks very highly of us for two reasons. First
> these are people that MOST LIKELY tried to kill Americans (or Brits, or one
> of the other nations involved, 76 in Afghanistan right now, including your
> own Australians). Second they are living far better than they could ever
> provide for themselves. How much time have you spent in third world
> countries? They are fed, given health care, and kept safe from harm and the
> elements. That's saying a lot. Look into what the Japanese did to American
> POWs in WW2 or the Vietnamese in that war.
>
> Finally the simple fact that we are open enough that:
>
> 1. People know where the detainees are being held
> 2. We actually have allowed some to stand trial
> 3. We actually care what other nations think enough that we debate this
> issue, and we are open enough to allow internal dissatisfaction drive the
> debate
>
> These points alone show that we are doing more than a great many nations in
> the world would do, even so called civilized ones.
>
> To my mind, and I am sure to most peoples that have been there, this debate
> is silly to the point of insanity.
>
> Tim
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael Bramwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 9:09 PM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: Re: Yes, we can lock them up forever....
> >
> >
> > THEY KILLED or were
> > > trying to KILL americans...
> >
> > Actually only around 4-5 detainees have been charged with
> > anything since their detainment. Surely if they were trying to
> > kill Americans and there was evidence they would have been
> > charged by now. It is getting on for four years now.
> >
> > I am from Australia which of course has a very good relationship
> > with America. Even here you have no idea how bad Guantanamo and
> > the current Washington Adminstration is making America look to
> > the rest of the world.
> >
> > Mike.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Tony Weeg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "CF-Community" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 2:59 AM
> > Subject: Re: Yes, we can lock them up forever....
> >
> >
> > > fucking right we can.
> > >
> > > DONT TRY TO KILL AMERICANS!!!!
> > >
> > > simple as that. you play with fire and you get burned, you stay burnt
> > > FOREVER right?
> > >
> > > dont play with fire.
> > >
> > > we could have killed them. we showed restraint and didnt.
> > THEY KILLED or were
> > > trying to KILL americans... should we be nice to them?
> > >
> > > i dont think so.
> > >
> > > tony
> > >
> > > On 6/15/05, Raymond Camden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > I'm going to blog about this as well... but dang this makes me sick:
> > > >
> > > >
> > http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&e=3&u=/nm/20050615/p
> l_nm/security_usa_detainees_dc
> > >
> > > The best line, a quote from Senator Jeff Sessions: "Some of them need
> > > to be executed."
> > >
> > > I guess a fair tial would just be too much trouble, eh?
> > >
> > > --
> > > =======================================================================
> > > Raymond Camden, Director of Development for Mindseye, Inc
> (www.mindseye.com)
> > >
> > > Member of Team Macromedia (http://www.macromedia.com/go/teammacromedia)
> > >
> > > Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Blog : ray.camdenfamily.com
> > > Yahoo IM : cfjedimaster
> > >
> > > "My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is." - Yoda
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:161153
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
