U.S. Government Puts $5 Million Bounty on Al-Qaeda Terrorist It Had Just Released from Gitmo
There’s been a loud outcry from some to let prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay (Gitmo) go free. Starting with President George W. Bush and continuing under President Obama, hundreds of Gitmo prisoners have been released in response.
http://www.ijreview.com/2014/12/221331-2...ign=Terror
Quote:U.S. Government Puts $5 Million Bounty on Al-Qaeda Terrorist It Had Just Released from Gitmo
There’s been a loud outcry from some to let prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay (Gitmo) go free. Starting with President George W. Bush and continuing under President Obama, hundreds of Gitmo prisoners have been released in response.
http://www.ijreview.com/2014/12/221331-2...ign=Terror
If only there were some other thing that could be done besides holding people in Guantanamo indefinitely or releasing them...
I'm sure the Republicans in Congress wouldn't do anything to get in the way of that.
Quote:If only there were some other thing that could be done besides holding people in Guantanamo indefinitely or releasing them...
I'm sure the Republicans in Congress wouldn't do anything to get in the way of that.
You mean holding them somewhere else?
Quote:You mean holding them somewhere else?
Yes, as in putting them to trial and incarcerating them in a federal penitentiary if they're found guilty.
The notion that the USA should be running Guantanamo until everyone there dies of old age is ridiculous, and it only serves as an icon to the cause the USA is supposedly fighting.
Quote:Yes, as in putting them to trial and incarcerating them in a federal penitentiary if they're found guilty.
The notion that the USA should be running Guantanamo until everyone there dies of old age is ridiculous, and it only serves as an icon to the cause the USA is supposedly fighting.
I'm all for ending definite detention but your suggesting to give enemy combatants federal trials where they would be given civilian rights as a defense? That to me is just as crazy. Military tribunals are for enemy combatants. We should process them faster fine but don't give them civilian rights.
Quote:I'm all for ending definite detention but your suggesting to give enemy combatants federal trials where they would be given civilian rights as a defense? That to me is just as crazy. Military tribunals are for enemy combatants. We should process them faster fine but don't give them civilian rights.
Not all of them are enemy combatants.
Just because someone is in Guantanamo isn't some kind of an indication of them being a combatant.
They're not part of an organized national military so therefore they're terrorists at most, and terrorists are criminals, not soldiers.
Give them public defenders, give them trials, even if they're not present for them, and if they're found guilty put them in prison with Timothy McVeigh and the white Republican terrorists that are already in federal prison.
Should Execute them if found guilty
Quote:Not all of them are enemy combatants.
Just because someone is in Guantanamo isn't some kind of an indication of them being a combatant.
They're not part of an organized national military so therefore they're terrorists at most, and terrorists are criminals, not soldiers.
Give them public defenders, give them trials, even if they're not present for them, and if they're found guilty put them in prison with Timothy McVeigh and the white Republican terrorists that are already in federal prison.
Yeah, put them where Timothy McVeigh is. You know... ashes scattered in an undisclosed location. I can agree with that.
Quote:Not all of them are enemy combatants.
Just because someone is in Guantanamo isn't some kind of an indication of them being a combatant.
They're not part of an organized national military so therefore they're terrorists at most, and terrorists are criminals, not soldiers.
Give them public defenders, give them trials, even if they're not present for them, and if they're found guilty put them in prison with Timothy McVeigh and the white Republican terrorists that are already in federal prison.
That would require declassifying military operations to "prove" some of these guys guilty. When have foreign civilians that commit acts of violence against a foreign nation ever been given the host nations rights and a civilian trial? Again you're asking us to do something that literally no one has ever done. They're combatants when they're captured in a hostile confrontation, I don't care if they claim no national allegiance, they are foreign fighters captured by our military and should be treated as enemy combatants not civilian criminals.
Quote:Yeah, put them where Timothy McVeigh is. You know... ashes scattered in an undisclosed location. I can agree with that.
Whatever the case, processing the people there an actually discovering their guilt is the first step.
Bush's legacy of war crime has gone on for long enough, time to close the Gitmo chapter.
The way you deal with domestic terrorism and foreign terrorism are different. A domestic terrorist is a civilian they have rights that have to be accounted for. Foreign terrorist have no constitutional rights.
Quote:The way you deal with domestic terrorism and foreign terrorism are different. A domestic terrorist is a civilian they have rights that have to be accounted for. Foreign terrorist have no constitutional rights.
Ignorance and hostility to reality.
Could you quote me the part of the constitution that says the rights within it are reserved only for citizens of the USA?
Quote:Ignorance and hostility to reality.
Could you quote me the part of the constitution that says the rights within it are reserved only for citizens of the USA?
The constitution is not a global document, it isn't ratified by the world, it was ratified by the States and their representatives. Until the rest of the world decides to ratify our constitution and adopt it as their own, their citizens (nationals) are not addressed in our constitution.
Tell you what jump on a plan and head on over the Russia or China, commit a crime and then demand you be given your constitutional rights as an American, see how far that gets you.
It just blows my mind when people argue everyone by default has the rights described in our constitution. It's a document outlining our rule of law and the role of government. There is absolutely nothing in the constitution suggesting, claiming nor implying these laws default to everyone across the globe.
Quote:The constitution is not a global document, it isn't ratified by the world, it was ratified by the States and their representatives. Until the rest of the world decides to ratify our constitution and adopt it as their own, their citizens (nationals) are not addressed in our constitution.
Tell you what jump on a plan and head on over the Russia or China, commit a crime and then demand you be given your constitutional rights as an American, see how far that gets you.
It just blows my mind when people argue everyone by default has the rights described in our constitution. It's a document outlining our rule of law and the role of government. There is absolutely nothing in the constitution suggesting, claiming nor implying these laws default to everyone across the globe.
When someone from Russia or China visits the USA and commits a crime you think they don't get the same due process rights as an American?
Eric, I'm unsurprised that you'd lash out with idiotic hostility to the reality of the world, but you'd really have been better off just not posting than posting something as stupid as the above.
It's a ridiculous notion to call for a "war on terror" and use that as an excuse for holding prisoners of war indefinitely, without trial.
You let them go, they return to fight us. You hold them without trial, that fact is used to recruit more. I fail to see the point of detaining them.
In the meantime, we sacrifice our core values.
Quote:When someone from Russia or China visits the USA and commits a crime you think they don't get the same due process rights as an American?
Eric, I'm unsurprised that you'd lash out with idiotic hostility to the reality of the world, but you'd really have been better off just not posting than posting something as stupid as the above.
There's the key difference, those crimes are committed on US Soil therefore subject to US laws.
Quote:There's the key difference, those crimes are committed on US Soil therefore subject to US laws.
And the 9-11 terrorist attacks that all this is based on weren't?
Not that it even matters to start with, you're clearly no scholar of constitutional law.
Quote:It's a ridiculous notion to call for a "war on terror" and use that as an excuse for holding prisoners of war indefinitely, without trial.
You let them go, they return to fight us. You hold them without trial, that fact is used to recruit more. I fail to see the point of detaining them.
In the meantime, we sacrifice our core values.
I agree we shouldn't hold them indefinitely there certainly needs to be an established COC for dealing with foreign nationals captured fighting against our military. But that's far different from giving them full constitutional rights and having them tried in the United States court system to then be detained in American Prisons.
Quote:And the 9-11 terrorist attacks that all this is based on weren't?
Not that it even matters to start with, you're clearly no scholar of constitutional law.
:wacko: No the hijackers are not in Gitmo.
You've offered no evidence to the contrary only more of your utopian fantasies.
Quote: :wacko: No the hijackers are not in Gitmo.
You've offered no evidence to the contrary only more of your utopian fantasies.
Once again you prove yourself simply too stupid to understand when you're completely off the reservation.