Guantanamo Bay demonstration

[Daggers]

agreed ; why do so many people assume that the US military are so vindictive that they have just randomly rounded up X amount of muslims for no good reason (its hardly helping as a PR exercise)

i do not know if all , some or none are guilty or innocent ; but i believe the US forces know enough to be wary of releasing them

Guantanamo holds scary parallels to the period of internment and SUS laws. My argument against is not that the US should not arrest people suspected of criminal/terrorist activity - it is that they should abide by international accords to which they subscribed when doing so.

These are not detainees caught in the midst of conflict, neither are have they been caught wearing uniform, bearing arms or carrying insignia. They are not legally classified as prisoners of war and are not being treated accordingly...neither are they being classified and treated as criminals. There exists a dichotomy here and it needs addressing.

[Webbo]

Illegal imprisonment, torture and then released without charge or recompense, the only crime they are guilty of is being Muslim and looking a bit different. Seems enough to get worked up about to me.

Your statement amounts to nothing more than emotional unsupported rhetoric that infers things no one has said.

couldn't have put it better myself.

[Daggers]

couldn't have put it better myself.

Where's your facts to support your argument then? Where's your references and citations?

[Head Honcho]

agreed ; why do so many people assume that the US military are so vindictive that they have just randomly rounded up X amount of muslims for no good reason (its hardly helping as a PR exercise)

i do not know if all , some or none are guilty or innocent ; but i believe the US forces know enough to be wary of releasing them

Agreed.

Usually there is no smoke without fire and if it just so happens that a few innocent individuals get caught up in it so be it.

The extremists have killed many more innocents then there are locked up at Guantanamo Bay.

They are simply casualties of war. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Webbo]

Illegal imprisonment, torture and then released without charge or recompense, the only crime they are guilty of is being Muslim and looking a bit different. Seems enough to get worked up about to me

if as your 'citations' say that these people were rounded up in pakistan, handed in by locals for the reward, who exactly did they look different too? why would they be handed in for being Muslim by fellow Muslims?

pleas of innocence do not prove innocence, ask any criminal they'll tell you the same.

[Lineker's Left Foot]

Illegal imprisonment, torture and then released without charge or recompense, the only crime they are guilty of is being Muslim and looking a bit different. Seems enough to get worked up about to me

if as your 'citations' say that these people were rounded up in pakistan, handed in by locals for the reward, who exactly did they look different too? why would they be handed in for being Muslim by fellow Muslims?

pleas of innocence do not prove innocence, ask any criminal they'll tell you the same.

Agree sir As I've already said, they weren't rounded up for buying carrots in Tesco's were they?

[Daggers]

[Rincewind]

In five years the Americans have failed to come up with the proof to convict some of these prisoners yet in a day one or two posters have no doubt of their guilt. The wrong people were in charge it seems.

The issue is not the innocence or guilt of those detained but the way the are detained and treated which according to reliable sources go against International guidelines set out by many countries including the USA and Britain. If some of those detained were not anti-American before they certainly will not be pro-American if they are eventually released without charge.

[Zingari]

Phew its been hot in here

i'm well out of my depth here as to a lot of the argument / discussion here, and and have little knowledge of what is legal/illegal etc as regards treatment of anyone suspected of criminal war activities ; (either by the US captors or detainees.)

however my only point is that of trust and confidence;

on the one hand we have the armed forces of a democratically elected and fully accountable goverment ( with all its misgivings and faults) who claim to have good reason to detain prisoners for our safety

on the other we have a group of unelected/ unaccountable people who can quote legal jargon and human rights mantras seemingly without considering the consequences of their beliefs.( that is not to say they are wrong)

so often "after" a tradgedy by terrorists etc the usual chorus goes up "WHY DIDN'T THE GOVERNMENT DO SOMETHING BEFOREHAND ; WE KNOW THEY HAD THE INTELLIGENCE TO PREVENT IT !!!" ;

so often "before" a tradgedy the chorus goes up " WHY ARE YOU DETAINING THESE PEOPLE YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PROOF TO HOLD OR PROSECUTE THEM"

this to me is the dilemma facing the western democracies and one which the terrorists (and governments that seemingly do little to prevent) do not .

i expect this point could be torn to shreds by more educated posters and i probably could not argue against them "face to face" ;as i have said i do not have the education or savvy of international law but it is my opinion and am probably too old to change ; but i also believe that many that critcise the US only seem interested in finding sources that reinforce their beliefs that the US is wrong.

[Strokes]

I think you'll find they were protesting because of ignorant and unfounded attitudes like the one you opened the thread with.

Illegal imprisonment, torture and then released without charge or recompense, the only crime they are guilty of is being Muslim and looking a bit different. Seems enough to get worked up about to me.

You don't know that, as far as i am concerned they are prisoners of war. If any of our boys are caught in iraq/afganistan who fights for their human rights, war is war, if you don't like it look away.

[hairy]

Guantanamo is hypocritical of the war we in the west are fighting in the middle east. we talk of freedom and democracy yet treat prisoners like animals. It goes against the treaties that were put in place by our grandfathers following years of wars and detaining foreign soldiers. They maybe soldiers but so are ours but lets only hope ours are treated better.

[Dames]

Some people seem to forget that at least we take prisoners and do not execute them on live TV...

There maybe some people who were caught in the wrong place at the wrong time etc.

But generally most the people in there are the ones that have been threatening to blow us all up and ambushing our troops all along.

[Bloomer]

If you think that Guantanamo is the 'worst' (or even the best) example of the USA's war on terror, fear not because its the stuff that isnt in the public domain that would turn your shit green. When you have the power and the reach these people have there are no 'out of bounds'. Although the Politicians in Government have let loose the dogs, its the people who hold the chains of the dogs that are deciding 'policy' on the ground, or operational 'policy' and these fellows are not good citizens of the global community. They are not corrupted by politics, they are just by the power.

I like the idea of a just and peaceful world, I fear it will remain an idea until all the people have gone.

[Head Honcho]

In five years the Americans have failed to come up with the proof to convict some of these prisoners yet in a day one or two posters have no doubt of their guilt. The wrong people were in charge it seems.

The issue is not the innocence or guilt of those detained but the way the are detained and treated which according to reliable sources go against International guidelines set out by many countries including the USA and Britain. If some of those detained were not anti-American before they certainly will not be pro-American if they are eventually released without charge.

Think I'd rather fancy my chances of survival in Guantanamo then in one of the Mukhabarat detention centres run by Saddams brother Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti.

[Webbo]

I think I've won that one.

[l444ry]

"At least a dozen detainees that have been released have gone back to fighting with al-Qaeda. What also is not revealed is the intelligence gained. In many cases, this intelligence has given the United States information on how al-Qaeda is organized, where some al-Qaeda cells are, and on future operations. The media has also neglected to point out that al-Qaeda manuals instruct members to make false claims of being tortured if they are captured."

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htiw/articles/20051130.aspx

[James.]

I think I've won that one.

More likely he got bored by the length of time you've spent NOT backing up any of your arguments with evidence, citations, etc.

I don't want to speak on Dave's behalf but this seems a very juvenile response and one that continues to ignore earlier posts requesting some kind of substance to your arguments.

Guantanamo Bay is an absolute scandal and reflects the knee-jerk reactionary stance of the Americans that we have seen cause so much carnage in the middle east.

The propaganda and sensationalism that has been thrust down our throats since the "war on terror" began has distorted our view of reality - people are now so scared that they accept the horrific stories coming out of places like Guantanamo as just unfortunate and "a necessary by-product of war".

Rubbish. Of course there are people imprisoned that probably should never be released but there are also innocent people who, at the whim of the Americans, and against all international law continue to be imprisoned for no justifiable reason.

It is this arrogance of a nation that makes me the most angry. And 5 and a half years on after September 11th are we really any closer to "winning" the war. From my daily exposure to newspapers, television and other sources it doesn't look like it to me.

The sooner the American administration realise this and give some serious thought to their current methods the better.

[Head Honcho]

More likely he got bored by the length of time you've spent NOT backing up any of your arguments with evidence, citations, etc.

I don't want to speak on Dave's behalf but this seems a very juvenile response and one that continues to ignore earlier posts requesting some kind of substance to your arguments.

Guantanamo Bay is an absolute scandal and reflects the knee-jerk reactionary stance of the Americans that we have seen cause so much carnage in the middle east.

The propaganda and sensationalism that has been thrust down our throats since the "war on terror" began has distorted our view of reality - people are now so scared that they accept the horrific stories coming out of places like Guantanamo as just unfortunate and "a necessary by-product of war".

Rubbish. Of course there are people imprisoned that probably should never be released but there are also innocent people who, at the whim of the Americans, and against all international law continue to be imprisoned for no justifiable reason.

It is this arrogance of a nation that makes me the most angry. And 5 and a half years on after September 11th are we really any closer to "winning" the war. From my daily exposure to newspapers, television and other sources it doesn't look like it to me.

The sooner the American administration realise this and give some serious thought to their current methods the better.

I'm sure some of you on here think that most of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay are there for pickpocketing or something trivial like that.

Most of them were either caught red-handed in AK training camps or through very sensitive intelligence information that if revealed would aid AK and their allies.

For this reason many of the detainees must be kept in custody without trail, to put them on trail would put at risk many US informants or spies still currently in the middle east.

[James.]

I'm sure some of you on here think that most of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay are there for pickpocketing or something trivial like that.

Most of them were either caught red-handed in AK training camps or through very sensitive intelligence information that if revealed would aid AK and their allies.

For this reason many of the detainees must be kept in custody without trail, to put them on trail would put at risk many US informants or spies still currently in the middle east.

As I stated in my post I'm well aware there are people who should be there. And I congratulate the work done by the security services in ensuring they are no longer a risk.

But that doesn't justify keeping those that shouldn't.

[Alexikokopops]

You don't know that, as far as i am concerned they are prisoners of war. If any of our boys are caught in iraq/afganistan who fights for their human rights, war is war, if you don't like it look away.

Well according to their detainees they're not.

The USA has repeatedly argued that they are not classed as prisoners of war so the Third Geneva Convention doesn't apply to them, hence the reports of torture and the terrible conditions.

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/...b306a870dc.html

Anyway, I think James the Blue has hit the nail on he ol' noggin there

[Rincewind]

This is getting silly. For those who think its right to detain people for up to five years without charge or little evidence put yourself in this scenario.

You have followed England as a supporter to an European country (or anywhere doesn't matter) You are in a bar having a drink with a couple of mates when all hell breaks loose. Not wanting to get involved you leave the bar and go back to your Hotel which is close by. No sooner you are in the room when the door is broken down and you are dragged away by armed police. You are beaten up then thrown into a cell and denied any phone calls or contact with the British consul. When asked what you have supposed to have done you are told that you are being held in connection with a riot and the murder of one of the countries soldiers who was home on leave in the same bar as you were in. You ask for evidence and they say they only have suspicions at the moment because

1 You have a British passport.

2 You speak English

3 An England shirt was found in your luggage

4 You were in the same country as where the incident took place.

5 You were seen drinking Stella.

Do you think these are good enough reasons to detain you? Would you support their actions?

[l444ry]

This is getting silly. For those who think its right to detain people for up to five years without charge or little evidence put yourself in this scenario.

You have followed England as a supporter to an European country (or anywhere doesn't matter) You are in a bar having a drink with a couple of mates when all hell breaks loose. Not wanting to get involved you leave the bar and go back to your Hotel which is close by. No sooner you are in the room when the door is broken down and you are dragged away by armed police. You are beaten up then thrown into a cell and denied any phone calls or contact with the British consul. When asked what you have supposed to have done you are told that you are being held in connection with a riot and the murder of one of the countries soldiers who was home on leave in the same bar as you were in. You ask for evidence and they say they only have suspicions at the moment because

1 You have a British passport.

2 You speak English

3 An England shirt was found in your luggage

4 You were in the same country as where the incident took place.

5 You were seen drinking Stella.

Do you think these are good enough reasons to detain you? Would you support their actions?

Surely you cannot be serious in using that argument as a parallel to the Twin Towers atrocity. If that event had not happened there would be no Guantanamo Bay. There would be no "war on terror." This is not a conventional war with armies facing each other. Guantanamo Bay is not an ordinary prisoner of war camp. It is important to remember that the purpose of detaining these enemy combatants is not to punish them for committing a crime, but to gain intelligence about terrorist operations and to prevent them from attacking again.

Put it this way - suppose someone had abused a child. You know for certain that it was one of a group of people, but not who exactly. Would you not interrogate the suspects with whatever means available in order to find out the perpetrator?

[Lineker's Left Foot]

I think I've won that one.

Yes I agree too

[Lineker's Left Foot]

As I stated in my post I'm well aware there are people who should be there. And I congratulate the work done by the security services in ensuring they are no longer a risk.

But that doesn't justify keeping those that shouldn't.

IMO, I'm afraid that it's up to the innocent Muslims to constantly collude with the governments in an attempt to indicate the terrorist individuals - I believe it's their duty and this should become a regular occurrence. This will also stop innocents being detained (of which of course, I'm totally against).

[Lineker's Left Foot]

This is getting silly. For those who think its right to detain people for up to five years without charge or little evidence put yourself in this scenario.

You have followed England as a supporter to an European country (or anywhere doesn't matter) You are in a bar having a drink with a couple of mates when all hell breaks loose. Not wanting to get involved you leave the bar and go back to your Hotel which is close by. No sooner you are in the room when the door is broken down and you are dragged away by armed police. You are beaten up then thrown into a cell and denied any phone calls or contact with the British consul. When asked what you have supposed to have done you are told that you are being held in connection with a riot and the murder of one of the countries soldiers who was home on leave in the same bar as you were in. You ask for evidence and they say they only have suspicions at the moment because

1 You have a British passport.

2 You speak English

3 An England shirt was found in your luggage

4 You were in the same country as where the incident took place.

5 You were seen drinking Stella.

Do you think these are good enough reasons to detain you? Would you support their actions?

That scenario has no commonality with the Guantanamo Bay one I'm afraid. Innocent people are getting killed and murdered by terrorists. As I've previously said, it is the DUTY of ALL LAW-ABIDING ANTI-TERRORIST MUSLIMS to inform the authorities if something suspicious is occurring within their community. This would stop more innocents being captured.