Vacancy at Guantanamo

[Kuciwalker]

You realize "held without trial for years" is precisely what happens to POWs, right? And that the entire controversy is the allegation that the US should have afforded them all the rights of POWs when, instead, it convened tribunals that determined they were unlawful combatants not entitled to those rights?

[kentonio]

You realize "held without trial for years" is precisely what happens to POWs, right? And that the entire controversy is the allegation that the US should have afforded them all the rights of POWs when, instead, it convened tribunals that determined they were unlawful combatants not entitled to those rights?

I.E. you made up a ridiculous invented status so you could lock them up and torture them outside of any kind of justice system. ****ing barbarians.

[Kuciwalker]

No, at no point in that sentence do you demonstrate a correct understanding of my claim.

[kentonio]

No, at no point in that sentence do you demonstrate a correct understanding of my claim.

I've re-read it several times and I'm failing to see where you said anything other than stating the obvious. You did however try and smudge the POW issue, as POW's also get the right to not be tortued by their captors while they are being held.

[notyoueither]

they weren't prosecuted, they were taken and held without trial for years, or sent to third countries where they often suffered torture.

This guy was prosecuted. That sort of puts the lie to the position you and kentonio are arguing, no?

The US governemtn has been trying to get rid of this guy for some time. The Canadian government dragged its feet before bowing to the inevitable (a Canadian born citizen is eventually going to return).

I'm not saying that everything the Yanks have done is good or just. I am saying that Omar is not a good poster child for people who were horribly abused by agents of regimes friendly to the US and held indefinitely without ever being tired. He was treated roughly, yes, but not nearly like those who were exported to thugs and he had a judicial process that is now seeing him returned home to serve the balance of a sentence.

[kentonio]

This guy was prosecuted. That sort of puts the lie to the position you and kentonio are arguing, no?

No, constructing some case years after holding and torturing someone does not make the whole thing clean.

I'm not saying that everything the Yanks have done is good or just. I am saying that Omar is not a good poster child for people who were horribly abused by agents of regimes friendly to the US and held indefinitely without ever being tired. He was treated roughly, yes, but not nearly like those who were exported to thugs and he had a judicial process that is now seeing him returned home to serve the balance of a sentence.

No, but he was a child when he was taken. Others were treated worse is not exactly a brilliant defence.

[notyoueither]

I.E. you made up a ridiculous invented status so you could lock them up and torture them outside of any kind of justice system. ****ing barbarians.

I don't think the US made up any sort of status. The GCs are pretty explicit that there are cartegories of people to whom the protections of lawful combatants do not apply. It's almost as if the drafters of those documents recognized that there are rabble, mobs, and other irregular groups of armed people that uniformed soldiers have to deal with from time to time. That status is centuries old, and people who fall in it have normally been dealt with very harshly.

[kentonio]

I don't think the US made up any sort of status. The GCs are pretty explicit that there are cartegories of people to whom the protections of lawful combatants do not apply. It's almost as if the drafters of those documents recognized that there are rabble, mobs, and other irregular groups of armed people that uniformed soldiers have to deal with from time to time. That status is centuries old, and people who fall in it have normally been dealt with very harshly.

As I already pointed out, the whole reason why the US passed the MCA was because they knew they couldn't justify their actions under existing law. You remember the case that caused that to be passed?

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that military commissions set up by the Bush administration to try detainees at Guantanamo Bay lack "the power to proceed because its structures and procedures violate both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the four Geneva Conventions signed in 1949."[1] Specifically, the ruling says that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions was violated.

[notyoueither]

No, constructing some case years after holding and torturing someone does not make the whole thing clean.

People are being held by countries other than the US right this minute who have been locked up for longer than Kadar has been and they have not been tried yet. Dealing with terrorism suspects is not easy.

No, but he was a child when he was taken. Others were treated worse is not exactly a brilliant defence.

I'm not defending what the Yanks have done in all cases. I am pointing out that Omar is a bad example to argue from. He very likely would have been tried as an adult had he committed the crime on Canadian soil and been tried in a Canadian court. Given his radicalised nature, he may have been a candidate for dangerous offender status and face indefinite incarceration.

[Kidlicious]

It's a bit more difficult to try and claim rules of uniformed combat when you're invading a country to fight a non-uniformed opponent.

It's not when they started it, flying airplanes into our buildings.

[Kidlicious]

I would attempt an intellectual discussion with you Kid about the actual facts of the case but quite frankly in such a discussion I would have to consider you unarmed. Geneva prohibits it.

So you've decided to troll instead? Nice.

[kentonio]

It's not when they started it, flying airplanes into our buildings.

There's a long and deep discussion there about who started what, but it wasn't the Taliban who flew planes into your buildings. I supported the invasion because the Taliban sheltered Al Queda and that **** could not be allowed to stand, but that does not give the US a free pass to ignore international law and start acting like psychos. Do you not understand WHY we started getting so freaked out about America when you started snatching people up, flying them off to secret prisons and torturing them? Seriously man, states torturing suspects? That's the kind of thing the west was supposed to stand against at all costs! That's nazis, soviets, dictatorships, everything we're supposed to hate! The stuff our grandparents fought a world war against!

[C0ckney]

You realize "held without trial for years" is precisely what happens to POWs, right? And that the entire controversy is the allegation that the US should have afforded them all the rights of POWs when, instead, it convened tribunals that determined they were unlawful combatants not entitled to those rights?

your argument is incredibly weak.

they were held for a number of years, without any of the rights afforded to people under the geneva convention, until a supreme court case held that they had the rights granted under article 3. many claimed that they suffered torture and that false confessions were extracted from them. they were denied a fair trial. the tribunals were kangaroo courts. various judgements in US courts held that the prisoner's rights to a (fair) trial had been violated.

[C0ckney]

This guy was prosecuted. That sort of puts the lie to the position you and kentonio are arguing, no?

The US governemtn has been trying to get rid of this guy for some time. The Canadian government dragged its feet before bowing to the inevitable (a Canadian born citizen is eventually going to return).

I'm not saying that everything the Yanks have done is good or just. I am saying that Omar is not a good poster child for people who were horribly abused by agents of regimes friendly to the US and held indefinitely without ever being tired. He was treated roughly, yes, but not nearly like those who were exported to thugs and he had a judicial process that is now seeing him returned home to serve the balance of a sentence.

as wezil pointed out the guy was offered a choice.

"Plead guilty or we will keep you here forever".

does that sound like justice to you?

my complaint is that the people in guantanamo bay were denied justice at every turn. they were held for years, badly treated, sometimes tortured and were never given the opportunity to defend themselves in a fair trial.

if these people committed crimes, fine. put them on trial, with a judge and jury, and let the evidence by heard in open court. like we (in the west) do with everyone else.

[regexcellent]

It sounds like a choice between being treated as a POW, and not being treated as a POW. POWs don't get trials. Non-POWs do but they lack certain other rights that POWs get.