The closing of Guantanamo Bay

[Abu]

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/01/23/...2b810594663.txt

Anyway, most of you would know that Gitmo has been closed by the new President of the US, Barack Obama.

Some of us are against it (*cough*flsweetheart422*cough*) while I'm sure some of us agree with the move.

The fact that they kept multiple detainees without trial on a foreign land where no human rights laws apply is a tragedy in itself.

If someone's worried about where the detainees are going to go, here is a crude, yet simple, solution.

Execute the convicted prisoners, have a trial for the ones that have yet to go on a trial and release the ones that are not criminals back to their own countries.

I don't get how people are concerned about having them on American soil? It can't be bad at all if they're in a prison in a desert or something?

Thoughts / Comments?

[moneyfaery]

Ms. Lee issued a written statement published by the advocacy group Move America Forward. She said, “This is a dangerous plan that makes the anti-military Code Pink crowd happy and maybe even some of our weak-kneed European allies, but it is at the cost of Americans’ safety and national security. Not to mention, it demoralizes our troops who are risking their lives capturing these murderous killers.”

I'm for the closing. 'Murderous killers' though? Seriously? That really depends on the point of view. Anyway, a lot of the people who want Gitmo open want retribution and revenge. An eye for an eye makes the world go blind... how is that going to move American forward?

Beautiful use of emotive language though. She sounds like a proper politician (maybe she is???).

[Vvi]

I don't really mind whether they close it or not, but I wouldn't want any of the prisoners to be taken into Finland. Even if they were released from Guantanamo and not convicted of terrorist activity, they could still have links to organizations and have planned attacks that the US just didn't have enough evidence to convict them with.

Osama's driver has to serve the rest of his jail sentence in Yemen, where he came from. Everyone else should also be sent back to their home country. There's that group of Chinese Muslims that claim they will be killed if they return. They can move to another city in China then. I might not seem very sympathetic, but there's a reason why people are in Guantanamo: they've been suspected of terrorist activity. It's not just a "Let's round up all the non-Americans and stick them in here". If the September 11th terrorists had been caught and out in there, we might not have a war in Afghanistan or Iraq.

My mother's solution was to take a bomb and drop it on the whole centre. She argued that it would solve the problem of where to put the prisoners. Which to me doesn't seem humane, and I told her that.

250 people isn't that many to deal with at least. Hopefully they'll sort it out soonish.

[Rose]

How about giving the prisoners fair trials first?

[moneyfaery]

There's that group of Chinese Muslims that claim they will be killed if they return. They can move to another city in China then. I might not seem very sympathetic, but there's a reason why people are in Guantanamo: they've been suspected of terrorist activity. It's not just a "Let's round up all the non-Americans and stick them in here". If the September 11th terrorists had been caught and out in there, we might not have a war in Afghanistan or Iraq.

With that publicity, I'm not sure if gov't would so eager to kill them off as it might be seen as "inhumane" by the rest of the world. They won't have a pleasant life at all though.

[Capa]

I think it would be a shame if Guantanamo had not been closed. The opening of it was in no way justified.

I hear right-winged people in Norway say than we should not talk diplomaticly to Iran and so on because they don't care about human rights. Those people are the ones that love the US policies the most and thinks Nato is so important.

This double morale makes me so angry!

[heartworthy]

I think it would be a shame if Guantanamo had not been closed. The opening of it was in no way justified.

I agree. It's just that the American government always talks about how egalitarian everything we do it, yet having something like that is basically above the law... Let's leave torturing in the medieval times, guys.

[CodeRed15]

I might not seem very sympathetic, but there's a reason why people are in Guantanamo: they've been suspected of terrorist activity.

That is untrue. There's a movie called Road to Guantanamo, It's a documentary about three British citizens who were kept at Gitmo for 5 years and then released without warning or any compensation. If you actually watch the documentary, you'll realize how unjust it is and how badly they are treated. They were not convicted of anything and were found to be innocent.

Edited January 28, 2009 by CodeRed15

[Mahuta ♥]

I might not seem very sympathetic, but there's a reason why people are in Guantanamo: they've been suspected of terrorist activity.

Nope I dont agree at all, I too watched a documentary about a press member. He was tortured in the ways we all know and released without any warning nor anything of that sort. I bet half of the so called criminals are innocent.

We all know that the US arrests innocent people jsut for the sake of emphasizing their 'war against terrorism' which i personally think is non sense.

[TJBARU]

...there's a reason why people are in Guantanamo: they've been suspected of terrorist activity. It's not just a "Let's round up all the non-Americans and stick them in here"...

I'm in no way against the U.S holding terrorism suspects for a reasonable period of time, provided they are given access to 'fundamental rights', such as their general human rights, language support e.t.c., and that they are treated with the respect that a U.S citizen would be accorded in a civillian prison - ie: not tortured in an attempt to gain 'evidence'.

The maj. of the suspects have been held beyond a period of time reasonable for a criminal trial, have been treated with disdain and abuse and have had little or no chance to their fundamental rights, eg: attorney or translator. So I'm for shutting G.B down. But, I don't think that releasing the prisoners immediately after closing the prison is a 'good' solution (for obvious reasons - they are suspects of terrorism) , nor is moving them to a civillian supermax prison (the environment is unsuitable).

[Mahuta ♥]

I think just like they managed to take that huge number of so called suspects in there, i really think they should have trials just like any suspect has. I'm suspecting that the majority are innocent.

But, I don't think that releasing the prisoners immediately after closing the prison is a 'good' solution

Yup, I agree although I kind of not agree that they are true suspects.

[Vvi]

I think that the amount of time that people have been held in Guantanamo is ridiculous; 5 years there doing what? Unfortunately most judicial systems in the world seem to be incredibly slow at giving trials. The case in Italy with the murdered English exchange student Meredith Kercher is only now starting its trial, and she was murdered last year. The trial could last until autumn. I don't know why it takes countries so long to bring justice to people. Maybe someone who studies law in the future can explain it to one day.

Also, arresting minors is completely unwarranted. The US government protests against the keeping of minors in prison until they are adults and then executing them in Iran, but has no problem doing it itself.

And what is constituted as "torture" is completely irrational in some cases. http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Anti-tort...n/1135242915526

Anti-torture committee criticises Finnish prison conditions again

The committee first took issue with cells with just a bucket for a toilet already in its first report on Finland in 1992. Nevertheless, there were still 508 cells in Finnish prisons that lacked a flush toilet in April of last year, when the committee was in Finland to gather material for the report that it issued on Tuesday. According to the report, the situation was worst in the northern wing of the Helsinki Prison, where inmates have to use buckets between 4:30 PM and 7:10 AM, and bottled water for drinking and washing.

The report reveals that in one case last spring, a guard used a taser to subdue a psychiatric patient, who was attacking him. In the view of the Human Rights Committee, a taser should be used only if someone’s life is in danger, and this was clearly not the case in the situation in question.

I don't see how that constitutes torture in any way. Prisoners having to use buckets for toilets sometimes? Toilets not flushing? And a guard using a taser instead of pinning the prisoner to the ground? Using force on a prisoner would probably be considered "torture" these days too. Conditions for prisoners these days are getting so luxurious, comparable to living in an apartment. Doesn't that committee have some other country, like North Korea, to examine for human rights abuses rather than Finland? Seriously, European prison standards are royal compared to those in Somalia or Congo.

Obviously something like whipping a prisoner is unacceptable. But the "legal" methods of interrogation are sometimes completely ineffective. People pass lie detectors tests all the time. All it requires you to do is not get your heart racing and your body temperature up. Having the police sit you down, and say "Tell us what you know" is hardly going to produce results.

I think that in cases of security, for example where there is enough evidence to suspect people of planning a terror attack or a murder, people should be interrogated in harsher ways. No government wants to admit it, but everyone uses torture in one form or another. Solitary confinement is considered torture by some. So is "lack of stimulating activities", as mentioned in the above article (whatever that means). Anything can be torture these days. It seems that soon we won't have any effective methods of punishment if everything continues to be labeled as inhumane. Might as well just let people walk free.

Edited January 29, 2009 by Vvi

[Mushka]

they've been suspected of terrorist activity.

Does anyone not notice the word "suspected" or is it just me?

There's a fine line between "charged with" and "suspected of"

Basically, what they're saying is, they don't have enough evidence to lock them away but since they're 'suspected' we'll lock them in anyway!

now, how can you justify that?

If everyone was suspected of doing something wrong then everyone would be in jail. mind you, even if there wasnt enough evidence to convict you you'd still go in, simply because well... you were suspected of it!

Is that really a justice system? because to me it doesn't seem so.

As well, you should also watch a documentary called "Ghosts of Abu Ghraib" you can also get a glimpse of what they do in Gitmo by watching that.

a woman also got fired because they were photos of her smiling and enjoying torturing them and also show men completely nakes (not actually show you the men) but photos of them ontop of each other and well.. so many other things. It was disgusting tbh

[Mahuta ♥]

In al Jazeera there's a program called 'prisoner 345-Sami Haj'. He's the aljazeera photographer that was kept in GUnatanamo forr 5-6 years. He's telling the story in details. Honestly, I think the US army should feel extremely ashamed from the things he's saying about them. It's insane! The things that were done to him.

He was forced to strip naked infrnot of soldiers including females.

He wasnt given proper food for 2 weeks.

He was only allowed to use the restroom infront of other soldiers and a bunch of females, although it wasnt really a restROOM.

and much more.

Even if they are suspected, this is just out of order, let alone innocent.

I seriously dont get why the US chose to open this guantanamo bay in the first place. In fact, who ever asked the US to imprison suspects all over the world?! Was it given some order from some supernatural god to be in charge of the 'world'?

[Mushka]

who ever asked the US to imprison suspects all over the world?! Was it given some order from some supernatural god to be in charge of the 'world'?

well, I don't know about that, but nobody really stopped them and soo... they went along with it and they have been for quite some time now.

[Carsarefood]

I agree with closing it. We surely cannot know whether these people are terrorists or not, but they are human. As a member of Amnesty International I'm almost obliged to agree with the release of such prisoners inmost cases. Countries that have schemes for deliberately violating the human rights are obviously (at least to me) doing something very unwanted. If you put people out on an island where there are no human rights-laws, they are still humans and should be treated as such. The only right thing to do was to close it down because, as has been said earlier, the creation of this site was by no means justified.

I feel this is almost the same topic as 'the war on terror'. They accuse whole countries (or even whole races, or religious groups) of being all terrorists who "threaten our way of living". This is really some sort of world-police idea that isn't justified. The USA has no rights to play judge and executioner on large groups of people because a very select few individuals did something very bad. This is collectively punishing major groups of people for what some individuals did.

I have always seen the case like this, and to me it is hard to understand how one could think otherwise. I'm not sure how much anti-'terrorist' (or should I say middle-eastern) propaganda is going on in the USA, but fear and hate for some people does not justify their actions to me anyway.

[Sandwich]

Even if they're genuinely guilty of terrorist offences, torture (and committed by a country like the USA!) is beyond any reasonable limits of what is acceptable.

Most of these people were never even charged with something. Robbing people of basic rights by moving them to a country with no rights protection is... low.

[Mahuta ♥]

As i was talking about the program on aljazeera, i finished watching it...and just like everyone said, they had no rights at all.

The way the guy was telling the story just gave you a general view, he was sexualyl abused, physically, extremely abused. the medical 'care' was very harsh and caused more pain than before the so called care. Religious matters were always insulted and treatev very badly in front of the prisoners.

This guy considered him self lucky.

He even mentioned that a pakistani guy got caught on the borders with him. He was just taking his baby to the doctor because it was an emergency. For this stupid reason, they got caught and taken, with the baby!

Imagine the very bad conditions the ill baby had to go through, they didnt go to Guantanamo Bay immediatly, they went to kandahar and pagram before. It is crazy, the guy and his son went to the bay with this guy and they're still there, more than 6 years now. The baby ws obviously kept seperate with the rest of the young prisoners who are in the bay for years without doing anything wrong, the ages were in between 10-16.

[Mattias]

I agree that Guantanamo Bay should be closed.

As an American, I have these things to say:

If you are going to arrest and incarcerate "criminals" without a trial, I think number one you ought to keep them on your own soil.

Gitmo has been a symbol for what the United States has been for the past 20-30 years: a bully.

Tearing it down will garner previously lost support from other countries.

I think that Obama is doing a great thing.

Also, it is my belief that the "terrorists" in Gitmo are constantly treated inhumanely, and I think nothing gives you the right to do that, no matter what they did, or what country you you are from.

I hope this act will restore the worlds faith in Americans. (At least, a little bit)