Guantanamo should stay open, waterboarding OK: Cheney

[mox 298]

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.

[Ban Hammer 13,364]

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.

[mox 298]

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.

Edited December 16, 2008 by mox

[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 13,364]

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

[mox 298]

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?

[Ban Hammer 13,364]

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?

[joelunchbox 0]

Honestly I think if there were any justice in the world they'd just close the place down and release them all. When police abuse the rights of a suspect, any evidence they collect is inadmissible and must be thrown out in a trial. We certainly abused our authority, no matter how guilty any of these guys are. The manner in which these suspects were rounded up was so haphazard that it wouldn't surprise me if the only terrorists at Gitmo were there through blind luck. Many of the Gitmo detainees are there because the Army was putting a bounty on the heads of "terrorists." Warring factions in Afghanistan would turn in members of enemy tribes simply for revenge and to collect bounties. Gitmo is a complete cluster-f*** and they need to just turn 'em all loose and start over.

Well, Mox, this is a very short sighted perspective. Haphazard arrests? I don't think so.

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?

Yep them goat herders are real byatches for payback....

The only reason it is still open is because we don't want to admit we screwed up.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

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.

Perhaps you should get your facts straight before you make statements like this. The facts are these:

A total of 775 detainees have been brought to Gitmo since Oct 2001. The government has thus far charged and tried less than a handful of them, released the vast majority, cleared for release another huge chunk and plans on actually putting on trial 60 - 80 of those 250 that are still there. Get those number, bro. 60 - 80 are to be tried out of almost 800 total. That's one out of ten or less. Which leaves 9 out of 10 or more having been detained for years for apparently no good reason at all. You might be comfortable with this kind of ratio, I am most certainly not.

[almaty 19]

cheney is yesterday news..an old geezer spouting off

[mox 298]

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.

You really should read the Wikipedia entry you quoted, because what you said here makes no sense at all, and has no basis in fact.

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

Give him a shotgun and another ticker for Xmas and send him to Guantanamo if he loves it so much.

That guy is evil, you can tell by just looking @ him, he can't even smile. I tell you, that guy should've been in the movie the Devil's Advocate.

Edited December 16, 2008 by TävôLuDô