Guantanamo should stay open, waterboarding OK: Cheney

[pedroh 21]

None of us on the outside, really know the potential threats that these detainees might pose against the US. We cannot, simply "dispose of" the potential threats that the USG has clearly vetted against these people. As a citizen, I am not willing to take that risk. Why do you accept the risk?

We held a Canadian citizen for 5 years, based on completely false information. And even when it came to light that the guy had absolutely zero connection to terrorism, the Canadian government still had to push the Bush administration repeatedly to let him go.

Most detainees have been released, and so are presumably innocent, and yet all have been repeatedly tortured and held against their will for 5 years. Our government has shown over and over and over that there is either no evidence, fabricated evidence, or faulty intelligence.

After failure after failure after failure, why on earth are you still willing to accept that the Government knows something you don't about the detainees they haven't let go yet? What on earth makes you think that "oh yeah, they totally f***ed up on every thing else, but surely they must be holding on to these guys for a really good reason." Pfff. They had their chance, and they failed galactically. As I said, in our justice system when the police operate outside the law, then the alleged criminals go free. The government has been operating outside the law. They need to let those people go, and if that means some of the bad guys get let go too then maybe we should start looking to our leaders to be accountable as to why.

quoting a bushbot

"that's just an isolated event... since guantamo was established we haven't had another terrorist attack" and all the blablabla..

I agree.. there's way more than a few detainees with no links at all to terrorism.. they do deserve a fair trail, and at least a freakin apology ffs

[William33 110]

None of us on the outside, really know the potential threats that these detainees might pose against the US. We cannot, simply "dispose of" the potential threats that the USG has clearly vetted against these people. As a citizen, I am not willing to take that risk. Why do you accept the risk?

We held a Canadian citizen for 5 years, based on completely false information. And even when it came to light that the guy had absolutely zero connection to terrorism, the Canadian government still had to push the Bush administration repeatedly to let him go.

Most detainees have been released, and so are presumably innocent, and yet all have been repeatedly tortured and held against their will for 5 years. Our government has shown over and over and over that there is either no evidence, fabricated evidence, or faulty intelligence.

After failure after failure after failure, why on earth are you still willing to accept that the Government knows something you don't about the detainees they haven't let go yet? What on earth makes you think that "oh yeah, they totally f***ed up on every thing else, but surely they must be holding on to these guys for a really good reason." Pfff. They had their chance, and they failed galactically. As I said, in our justice system when the police operate outside the law, then the alleged criminals go free. The government has been operating outside the law. They need to let those people go, and if that means some of the bad guys get let go too then maybe we should start looking to our leaders to be accountable as to why.

I agree that "some" are held without just cause, but having worked for the USG overseas, I rest assured that most of the 500 current detainees are held with significant reason.

Problem: Most of the Intelligence connecting these people with terrorism cannot be successfully tried in US courts.

Why: Intelligence sources and methods are primary evidence. The release of this evidence would compromise USG collection sources and methods.

I am good with that.

[Ban Hammer 14,478]

Problem: Most of the Intelligence connecting these people with terrorism cannot be successfully tried in US courts.

Why: Intelligence sources and methods are primary evidence. The release of this evidence would compromise USG collection sources and methods.

I am good with that.

ditto

[William33 110]

I agree that "some" are held without just cause, but having worked for the USG overseas, I rest assured that most of the 500 current detainees are held with significant reason.

I also have worked overseas for the USG. In the Middle East. You may be able to assure me that the detainees are held with a "signifigant reason" but you cannot assure me that they are held for a valid and legal reason.

Problem: Most of the Intelligence connecting these people with terrorism cannot be successfully tried in US courts.

Why: Intelligence sources and methods are primary evidence. The release of this evidence would compromise USG collection sources and methods.

I am good with that.

Of course you're good with that. Your husband or child or father wasn't picked up off the street, to be completely disappeared with no information at all as to why or what happened to him. Your husband or child or father hasn't been tortured for 5 years with no charges leveled against him. You haven't lived with uncertainty, doubt, fear, and the heartache of not knowing what happened or if you will ever see your loved one again. Your family has never been subject to completely arbitrary detention. You're good with it because you don't have to think about it. You just accept that your government knows best and live a normal life. Cool for you. Sucks for people on the other end of that stick.

Not sure what your job was overseas, but it was obviously not connected with Intelligence collection. If it was, you would have reason to support this agenda.

[William33 110]

Not sure what your job was overseas, but it was obviously not connected with Intelligence collection. If it was, you would have reason to support this agenda.

It doesn't matter what capacity I was in, that's a logical fallacy designed to shut down an argument. The facts are that our government has lied to us repeatedly over the last 5 years, and now you are asking me to believe that in this one case they are finally telling the truth, and oh sorry but if you weren't in intelligence you'll just have to take it at face value. If this government had any credibility whatsoever I'd be more inclined to agree with you. But how many failures do they get before we say enough is enough? For me they crossed the line a long time ago. The government is FOR the people, not the other way around.

EDIT: And I really didn't mean to sound as sarcastic as I think I came across. I don't believe you're arguing dishonestly, but it's an argument I've heard over and over from a government that I ceased believing in right about the time our President landed on the deck of a carrier in the most ridiculous show of propaganda I've ever seen.

Dude, I am not running for office here. I am simply stating the facts on the basis of my relevant experience. If that is not good enough, then listen to what you have been reading in the press.

I only offer a perspective that may not be available to the sheep.

[Amby 490]

Are you surprised? This comes from the man who hunts people

[William33 110]

Dude, I am not running for office here. I am simply stating the facts on the basis of my relevant experience. If that is not good enough, then listen to what you have been reading in the press.

I only offer a perspective that may not be available to the sheep.

Hehe...so it sounds like you eat your breakfast 300 yards from 4000 terrorists who are trained to kill you, and what you want is for me to stand there in my faggoty white uniform and with my Harvard mouth extend you some f***ing courtesy, because I can't handle the truth!

The problem is that I'm sure you know something the rest of us "sheep" don't know, but your perspective isn't backed by anything tangible. I'm not calling you a liar, but if every argument could be settled by "I know stuff you can't possibly know," then the internet we know and love would cease to exist.

Your point seems to be this: The guys currently in Gitmo really really really belong there, trust me on this.

My point is this: the means by which we apprehended the vast majority of the Gitmo detainees was illegal. Furthermore, the methods used to attempt to extract information from these detainees were illegal. By every standard in the book, we tortured these people. Anything we got from these people was obtained illegally, therefore we need to let them go.

Your argument and my argument are not mutually exclusive. I have no doubt there are people in Gitmo who are very VERY bad people. But I also know that our criminal justice system lets very VERY bad people back out on the streets all the time because the people we trusted to put them behind bars acted in ways counter to established criminal justice procedures. This is how our justice system works. It is imperfect, but it has served us very well for the last 231 years. Gitmo is a hopeless clusterf***. It needs to be closed, and the detainees need to be released, because there is ZERO hope for justice to ever be served out of that mess.

Whatever dude.... Clearly, you did not serve overseas for the USG, I believe you were a contractor. Enough said.

[Ban Hammer 14,478]

The problem is that I'm sure you know something the rest of us "sheep" don't know, but your perspective isn't backed by anything tangible. I'm not calling you a liar, but if every argument could be settled by "I know stuff you can't possibly know," then the internet we know and love would cease to exist.

mox, some of us have signed non-disclosure forms, that could be why william isn't giving you anything "tangible" as it would land william in prison for disclosure to a non-authorized individual.

[Ban Hammer 14,478]

mox, some of us have signed non-disclosure forms, that could be why william isn't giving you anything "tangible" as it would land william in prison for disclosure to a non-authorized individual.

lol.

If you signed a disclosure then you are violating that disclosure by essentially saying "wink wink nudge nudge I know stuff that you can't possibly know, you just gotta trust me on this because I worked in intelligence for the government but I can't say anymore than that."

Which is why I refuse to discuss my personal experience in government.

actually, william hasn't said that, he's alluded to the fact that there is intel out there that joe average citizen isn't privy to and that it should be taken into account.

[The_Dude 1,142]

I think that the most important thing in this entire situation is the suspension of Habeas Corpus, a fundamental right.

If we treat our prisoners of war in this fashion (abu ghraib, gitmo), then how can we expect other nations, other armed forces to treat our soldiers who are unfortunately captured in the same manner. We should grant them trials and try them for the crimes they have commited.... in a lawful court of law. These kangaroo courts that Cheney has proposed are preposterous. We have prided ourselves throughout this process as being above the conduct of terrorists. We should actually abide by those words, and not just pay lip service to it as the current administration has.

[The_Dude 1,142]

There is a right way and a wrong way to deal with prisoners of war. The way that we, as a millitary, as a government, and as a consequence a nation have conducted ourselves is outright embarassing. Do you realize how poorly we handled Gitmo? I know people who have served there, and heard tales of the conditions that both the soldiers, and detainee's have dealt with. How can we hold other nations to some arbitrary litmus test of liberty when we ourselves cannot?

[Ban Hammer 14,478]

actually, william hasn't said that, he's alluded to the fact that there is intel out there that joe average citizen isn't privy to and that it should be taken into account.

If you'd read my post, I've already addressed this. Yes, there is information that the average citizen isn't privy to. BFD, it's irrelevant. Everything connected to Gitmo was done illegally. And in this country, when you conduct an investigation illegally and violate your suspect's rights, you pretty much have to let them go, or at least throw out the evidence that was collected illegally. This shouldn't be so hard to understand. If letting these people go because their rights were violated makes you feel unsafe, then you need to take it up with those responsible. You need to hold your government responsible. You need to ask questions, and you need to demand answers.

it may be irrelevant to the average citizen, but not everyone is an average citizen, are they? i seriously doubt that everything connected to gitmo is illegal. that every prisoner in there is innocent. that every prisoner was spirited off to gitmo for no reason. and no, i don't have questions nor do i need to demand answers. i'm not displeased with the way things are in gitmo like you and others may be.

I think that the most important thing in this entire situation is the suspension of Habeas Corpus, a fundamental right.

In most countries, however, the procedure of habeas corpus can be suspended in time of national emergency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus

[Ban Hammer 14,478]

In most countries, however, the procedure of habeas corpus can be suspended in time of national emergency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus

You're right. The President can declare a national emergency and suspend much of the Constitution, including Habeas Corpus. But he hasn't declared a national emergency, and he hasn't suspended the Constitution. It's still in effect. So what's your point? That it's secretly been suspended?

i'm sure it has been selectively applied.

[William33 110]

actually, william hasn't said that, he's alluded to the fact that there is intel out there that joe average citizen isn't privy to and that it should be taken into account.

If you'd read my post, I've already addressed this. Yes, there is information that the average citizen isn't privy to. BFD, it's irrelevant. Everything connected to Gitmo was done illegally. And in this country, when you conduct an investigation illegally and violate your suspect's rights, you pretty much have to let them go, or at least throw out the evidence that was collected illegally. This shouldn't be so hard to understand. If letting these people go because their rights were violated makes you feel unsafe, then you need to take it up with those responsible. You need to hold your government responsible. You need to ask questions, and you need to demand answers.

This is where you fall short. The US business overseas does not fall under US law, especially when there is a "hand-off" to friendly countries.

Edited December 16, 2008 by William33

[The_Dude 1,142]

The United States is not "Most Countries", we assert morality and liberty as justification to invade and subsequently "Liberate" a country after our own failed intelligence does not justify our own actions.

Most countries suspend habeas corpus in times of war, but no the United States. It has been denied in a select few occastions in our history. During the Civil War, it was suspended in selected areas that were disloyal to the United States of America, it was combat treason. During World War II, It was used to distinguish between enemy combatant and non-lawful comatants in regards to saboteurs. These are very narrow definitions that do not apply to current standards and conditions.

The fact remains... How can we expect other nations and entities to abide by the rules and law concerning war, detention, and the trial of such if we ourselves cannot follow them?