Guantanamo Bay

[Damien]

This was a subject which a drifted onto in another topic. I have copyed my post across to start a fresh topic on this subject. For these reasons the post is not great and the questions are aimed at all of you instead of just one user.

Now I have been always been in favour of the war because I wanted to remove Saddam. He was an evil man who violated human right laws and nerved gassed his own people in the Kurdish regions.

However there has since been the problem at Guantanamo Bay! The government of the United States of America, who recently celebrated their 'independence day' have been keeping people detained without trail and without evidence in some cases

Now I admit it was good we got rid of Saddam, after all I supported the war for these reasons, but the fact that Saddam was bad does not let bush off the hook when he feels like violating human right laws. Justice is now being done thanks to the USA and the UK. But now what about Justice for all the people stuck in Cuba?

How do you feel about your government detaining people in a prison for more that 2 years without trail? What about the persistent claims of torture from the inmates? And as the case with the recently detained Britons show many of them do not even have evidence against them. How do you feel about that?

[Matt D]

Originally Posted by Damien

How do you feel about that?

It's wrong.

I've spoken against the whole "internment in Camp Delta" thing here before, so can't be bothered to go over it all again myself.

Although...

Here are some stories relating to the recent US Supreme Court ruling regarding the "unlawful combatants" interned without trial at Guantanamo....

"Bush may transfer detainees to US jails - Supreme court forces rethink on Guantánamo Bay inmates"

"Lawyers launch Guantanamo fight"

"New hope for Britons in Guantanamo"

"Belmarsh prison - Britain's Guantanamo-lite"

"A blow for freedom"

A quote from the last story....and it's actually from a conservative Supreme Court Justice, who voted with the majority, not a liberal one.....

The last word deserves to be left with the US supreme court from its judgment on Hamdi delivered by one its most conservative members, Sandra Day O'Connor:
"It is during our most challenging and uncertain moments that our nation's commitment to due process is most severely tested; and it is in those times that we must preserve our commitment at home to the principles for which we fight abroad."

[Russ B]

The problem here, as I'm sure the token American will point out, is that international law suggests what the US is doing with those detained at Guantanamo Bay is wrong - but of course, the Yanks don't recognise any laws other than their own (except when it suits them of course... ).

[Matt D]

Originally Posted by Russ D

The problem here, as I'm sure the token American will point out, is that international law suggests what the US is doing with those detained at Guantanamo Bay is wrong - but of course, the Yanks don't recognise any laws other than their own (except when it suits them of course... ).

They may not recognise international law, but they have to abide by their own laws....and by US Supreme Court rulings

The Supreme Court now says that the Guantanamo inmates cannot be held indefinitely, & should have access to US courts

[danielf]

I will try and dig out the links in the morning, but the UK isn't exactly spotless. Under UK law, people can (and are) be held indefinitely without being charged. The only difference is that they can elect to leave the country. They will be released if they do so (opt to leave the country), but other than that, they can be detained indefinetely without being charged...

[Matt D]

Originally Posted by danielf

I will try and dig out the links in the morning, but the UK isn't exactly spotless. Under UK law, people can (and are) be held indefinitely without being charged. The only difference is that they can elect to leave the country. They will be released if they do so (opt to leave the country), but other than that, they can be detained indefinetely without being charged...

I know....Our "Gitmo" is at Belmarsh...there's a story about it in my earlier post, & there was a fair bit of press about it a while ago, after an inmate appealed to the SIAC tribunal.

[Damien]

Originally Posted by danielf

I will try and dig out the links in the morning, but the UK isn't exactly spotless. Under UK law, people can (and are) be held indefinitely without being charged. The only difference is that they can elect to leave the country. They will be released if they do so (opt to leave the country), but other than that, they can be detained indefinetely without being charged...

That only applies to foreign people though so leaving the country isnt a drastic as it sounds. Its basically just them being refused a permit to stay here

[Jerrek]

Originally Posted by Damien

How do you feel about your government detaining people in a prison for more that 2 years without trail? What about the persistent claims of torture from the inmates? And as the case with the recently detained Britons show many of them do not even have evidence against them. How do you feel about that?

I'm impartial to the whole matter. Ideally, I'd want to see people go through the system there in under 1 month. The length of this captivity is too long. They should be either executed or let go. People that plotted against the United States and were involved in terrorism should be executed; the rest can be let go.

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

They should be either executed or let go. People that plotted against the United States and were involved in terrorism should be executed; the rest can be let go.

I think that's a little unfair considering your country wouldn't execute US nationals who engaged in terrorism against other countries.

Originally Posted by Bifta

I think that's a little unfair considering your country wouldn't execute US nationals who engaged in terrorism against other countries.

Well, it would be a little tricky considering that would have to include people who've been president.

Originally Posted by Jerrek

I'm impartial to the whole matter. Ideally, I'd want to see people go through the system there in under 1 month. The length of this captivity is too long. They should be either executed or let go. People that plotted against the United States and were involved in terrorism should be executed; the rest can be let go.

When you make comments like that, it only brings out a great desire in me to see you rushed through a kangaroo court without a proper trial. How you can put a time frame of 1 month for everything to be done and dusted is quite astonishing, obviously you have some means of ensuring that all evidence is collected and all arguments put across within 30 days.

To paraphrase Wilde, two people separated by a common language, here I`m seeing some separation due to your novel and hitherto unknown use of the word "impartial".

[SOSAGES]

sometimes to make the world a better place u have to be a bit nasty and lock people up or have them killed govts been doing it for years, im more than happy for a few people to have there human rights removed - better than flying planes into buildings, people suffer all year round if a couple of them do happen to be innocent then its regetable but for the sack of a safer world its worth it - Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, while we do read a lot of stuff on the subject i dont belive much of it goverments are very good at keeping secrets and what you read is probably the complete opposite im no conspiracy guy but i do belive they cover up a lot of stuff for our own good -

and if someone flew planes into my country id do more than take a few people to an island and dress them in orange.

[Bifta]

Originally Posted by dr wadd

Well, it would be a little tricky considering that would have to include people who've been president.

I'm talking about people who fund/supply and work with (and have been prosecuted and jailed in the USA) the IRA.

Originally Posted by Bifta

I'm talking about people who fund/supply and work with (and have been prosecuted and jailed in the USA) the IRA.

Well, I`m not prepared to drag this thread off onto a discussion about the IRA in general. However, over July 4th I did consider the fact that if the War of Independence had been one by the British, history would now record the American fighters as a terrorirst uprising. Perhaps the fact that the USA is a country born as a result of terrorism has something to do with it.

Originally Posted by SOSAGES

sometimes to make the world a better place u have to be a bit nasty and lock people up or have them killed govts been doing it for years, im more than happy for a few people to have there human rights removed

Just as long as you accept that stamping all over other people is one of the reasons the USA finds itself a target of terrorists.