Land Of The Free? Imprisonment Without Trial

[MagicNakor]

I don't believe they've been charged with anything, so it's rather difficult to label them as "war criminals."

The sink/float test is a crude way of detecting a demon's tart. Everyone knows that they're marked with spots of different skin pigmentation or a mole. Read your Malleus Maleficarum, RF.

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@7 August 2003 - 10:34
Everyone knows that they're marked with spots of different skin pigmentation or a mole. Read your Malleus Maleficarum, RF.

i thought everyone knew they didn't exist...

[gaz_k]

If it is land of the free.

how cum u lot cant drink lager n that till your 21
cant smoke in public
drop litter
have sex till 18 (i think, could be wrong)
use drugs


if you were free, then you could do these things, you can in toher countries


n why does madonna go on about her living the american dream when she lives in london?

just what is the american dream?

[evilbagpuss]

Originally posted by DarkBlizzard
If you not American then its not ur problem is bug off.

education be US not system used The what is it to.

On a more serious note...

This is all about revenge for 9/11. The crowd wants blood and Emperor Bush is going to give them what they want. Whether the prisoners are innocent or not is irrelevant because the objective of this exercise has nothing to do with justice.

There are many SodiumChloride & DarkBlizzard types out there. They want their pound of flesh and there bloodlust must be satisfied. Its as simple as that.

[echidna]

so is the situation that there is a very large and powerful posse reaping revenge, and it is too large and powerful for fair minded folk to safely criticise? i had thought that most of america was revolted by the phenomenon of the lynch-mob, yet it seems that the mob's baying for blood is the reasoning for this departure from 'due proccess'?
as i set out above, the USA seems to be very proud of it's judicial proccess, yet it seems to hold similar pride in the studious lack of aplication of this process to the detained people at guantanamo

Originally posted by http://web.amnesty.org/pages/usa-110...ckground_2-eng
More than 650 people from some 40 countries are being held without charge or trial in Guantánamo Bay.

Most of the detainees have been held for more than a year in conditions which may amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. They have not had access to any court, to legal counsel, or visits from relatives. They have been subject to repeated interrogations and confinement to small cells for up to 24 hours a day with minimal opportunity for exercise. Several have attempted suicide.

when the primary responses are that these people are guilty without any trial and that they deserve to die [so who cares how they'll be treated], i fear for what else could be sold to the USA's people, doesn't this worry anyone else?

[j2k4]

We've been through all this before.

Military detention, or rather, detention in a military facility, is different than stateside, civilian detention.

Different rules, legal access, etc., more room for expedience from the authority side-

As I said, this has been discussed ad nauseum; go to search, type in "Guantanamo", and commence reading-it's all there.

[echidna]

The difference is obvious, why it is apropriate is not.
My understanding of military detention is that the detainees are generally POWs and subject to the geneva conventions on the rules of war.
It has been seen that the USA doesn't like to adhere to these rules while expecting others to abide by them, but what are the reasons that this double standard is justified?

searching for 'guantanamo' provides a list of topics which doesn't constitute an exhaustive discussion of the issue 'ad nauseum', more a discussion of the issue in it's relation to other discussions with the exception of the amnesty international thread which dealt with the issue broadly.

Anyway the situation continues that the USA has prisoners which it is keeping in a legal limbo without the proccesses afforded to either criminals (aleged and proven) and POWs.

Considering the 'moral high-ground' which the USA maintains is it's position, this continued maintanence of a legal no mans land must be seen to seriously erode that position [placing the USA closer and closer to the positions of worse states like North Korea, Myanma, Zimbabwe, Israel, Angola, China to name a few]
Rat Faced poits this out very clearly in his last post in the amnesty thread

[j2k4]

Let us backtrack then to the whining of Amnesty International, which organization bemoans the treatment of the detainees at Gitmo, while ignoring the outrages taking place "over the fence"?

Or has Cuba escaped notice or inclusion among such as the U.S., Israel, et.al., because they have ratified, which seems to be the aim, rather than actually addressing human rights violations?

Is it the case, as always, that lip service continues to trump actual deeds?

Or does that only work for Communist dictators?

PUHLEEEEEEEZE!

Read the roster of membership for the U.N. Human-Rights Council, then tell me how fucked-up America and it's treatment of Gitmo detainees is.

[lynx]

Do we hear AI supporting human rights violators? No.

Do we hear the other human rights violators saying 'look, we are the good guys'? No, I don't think so, or at least if they do, no-one believes them. So why should we believe the US?

Rather than trying to divert attention from the wrongdoings of the US by pointing at equally deplorable acts of others, perhaps one of it's supporters could give us reasons why they think the US should descend to the level it criticises in these others. I would love to hear this reasoned argument in favour of human rights violations.

[j2k4]

I am sure no circumstance, including suspician of terrorist activity, would prove sufficient to warrant or justify any special/exceptional/extraordinary treatment of the Gitmo detainees to the U.S.'s critics.

I'm a bit tired of being subject to the "sensibilities" of others on this subject, and other than due-process complaints (typical when comparing civilian/military detention), these people are not being starved or tortured, I don't think, but that is also a problem:

Nobody believes what the U.S. says about their treatment.

Everybody assumes we are Saddam incarnate, behind closed doors, for which misperception there is no solution.