Guantanamo, is it right?

[Gibsonfire]

Well i found this article on BBC, its about the latest developments at Guantanamo bay. So what do you think of it? Is it justified, or is it completly wrong? I am personally sickened by Guantanamo as it is against human rights and the American goverment have argued that the geneva convention does not apply to inmates. However please post up and say your opinions, but please be civilised about it

 

[Haven]

Is imprionment without recourse or trial right. No its not.

 

[DocBot]

completely wrong. it's a bit different here, since a swedish citizen was actually imprisoned there (without trial, of course)m so more or les everyone thinks it's horrible. which is good.

 

[Pestcontrol]

They are using a loophole in order to do something their own American lawmakers forbade them to do. They would never have wanted this. For a very good reason. It's pragmatism of a kind that makes me shudder.

It's nice that it violates the Geneva and human rights conventions also were it not that the United States never signed them.

 

[Gopha]

well i watched that program on the 3 guys who got put in there, not a nice place tbh, and its not even on american soil!

 

[Taffy]

well i watched that program on the 3 guys who got put in there, not a nice place tbh, and its not even on american soil!

Yeah it was a pretty harsh place. It's amazing how people (George Bush) can contradict themselves soooo much, isn't it?

 

[thatbloke]

As it goes: "Everyone is innocent until proven guilty." I, however, believe that in some cases this is not true. The problem is that if these guys are suspected terrorists, waiting for them to bomb something or whatever is, in my opinion, worse than keeping them locked up while awaiting a trial. I know alot of you won't agree with this and occasionally they will get the wrong person... but I would rather be safe than sorry... who wants another 9/11 or 7/7???

EDIT: I would like to add however that although I would like to see suspected terrorists locked up, They should only be locked up pending a trial (and not for a massively long wait like 5 years or some shit) and I do not condone the way that people are treated in guantanemo

 

[Birdy]

um simple. lock them up some where else!!!! or dont bail them for a year and then we might get some where.

 

[elDiablo]

The problem with the whole Patriot Act is that they can hold suspected terrorists for as long as they like, without having to even try and get a trail date. Thats what I dont agree with. Locking up suspected terrorists is good - if someone thought I was a terrorist, I wouldn't mind being questioned or held for a while, as long as it was in a fair way. Guantanamo Bay is that they are treated like dogs.

The suspects (who are mostly muslim, of course) are forced to prey in the wrong direction, have their beards and heads shaved (in Muslims religions, hair is the sign of strength, see Samson), etc. THAT, in my opinion, is pretty barbaric, and proves that the American politians who worked for this are just as bad as the terrorists - they don't agree with what they believe in, so treat them like shit (excuse the language).

And no, I'm not saying that they need to have 5* hotels, with sky and room service for these suspects, but they need to be treated like humans... And the forms of torture that were "outlawed" in some convention (Geneva?), such as sleep deprivation, are being used at Guantanamo.

Grrrrr....


Sorry for the post not being overly structured, in a rush!

 

[BiG D]

Of course what's going on there is wrong. I urge anyone who thinks differently to go act like a potential terrorist (these days, paying off your credit card balance should suffice) on US soil so you can spend a couple weeks there.

Tossing people in prison and treating them like shit isn't going to prevent anything. The terrorists aren't stupid. Even if you manage to toss one or two in jail, the rest will continue whatever they were doing. The US would be best off spending the millions and millions they're using on finicky anti-terrorist stuff on emergency response instead. Not only does that improve the life of people right now, but when the terrorists strike again, and they will, America will have proper emergency personelle and equipment to help the victims.

 

[Pestcontrol]

The amount of people detained in places like Guatanamo is neglible compared to the amount of actual Taliban and al'qaeda supporters still active. The people there are mainly detained for questioning in the hope of obtaining information on terrorst activities and eventually, capturing the ever more elusive Bin Laden. I don't think it's working.
If these people are released eventually, they won't be pro-US, to put it lightly.

The problem with the Patriot Act is, you can label anyone a terrorist and do with them what you like. It is very sensitive to abuse and basically gives the American authorities the same powers as totalitarian regimes grant themselves.

 

[Gizmo-5]

The americans like to think that everyone wants to kill them, it makes them feel noticed.

Guanta is an excuse to torture people with the states protection, and because theyre the big cheese the UN won't touch them. It is also important to remember that if the say, israelis were to detain americans unlawfully the us would be the first to jump up and down waving the OMG->WARCRIMES! flag.

anyone remember the big issue they made when one of their pop stars got searched for drugs...

p.s. i dont see the big issue with bombing, anyone whos played cs:source knows the disarm codes anyway

 

[Pubic_Warrior]

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty

or you are guilty until proven innocent

they maybe treated like dogs but anyone who is a terrorist is a dog but without trail and stuff is harsh as someone may just be in the wrong place wrong time, but terrorists dont deserve a place in society

 

[Fi$hy]

I've never understood this whole "no trial thing"

I'd expect a U.S military court to be seriously biased as it is, so if the U.S military could find so much as a tiny bit of evidence, then they'd go through that process, and no-doubt be found guilty as charged.

The fact that the U.S army doesn't even give them the right to an un-fair trial suggests that for the majority of them the U.S doesn't have the slightest bit of evidence against them.

 

[Pestcontrol]

After a trial, regardless of it's results, the future of the accused is set, it'll be jailtime or freedom, regardless, in a lot of cases you can't do what you like anymore. It's the lawlessness of the situation the US hope to profit from.

Pubic, a terrorist to one is a hero to another, it's all relative. A lot of these people aren't much different from the Afghanis who fought the Russians back in the 70's. Are they terrorists? Heroes?

Still, you're only a terrorist when you've been accused and found guilty (or dead from a suicide attack).

If you're guilty until proven innocent anyone can point their finger and destroy your life (this in fact has happened with some of the guatanamo detainees who have been turned in by personal enemies). It's better to have guilty people walk freely than innocent people punished, that's why you're innocent until proven guilty and not the other way around.

 

[Pubic_Warrior]

a terrorist to one is a hero to another

its a good statment but even if a british christian went to a middleastern country and blow himself up i wouldnt see him as a hero, id see him as stupid for killing himself, and he would be a terrorist if he didnt die id expect him to go to this place (dont no how to spell it ) and as thatbloke said...

who wants another 9/11 or 7/7???

i deffo dont, my uncle was almost blown away in the 7/7 bombings

 

[elDiablo]

This is a pretty good show of what the patriot act boils down to...

Bush in 30 seconds is a great site of how the American people see Bush... Still don't understand how he's in power. And good luck to any Americans who want to play a game if Hilary Clinton gets in!

 

[Fi$hy]

The thing with Bush, yes he's stupid, but I don't see why everyone hates him so much.

Bush is really just a figurehead, the majority of "American policy" comes from the Senate, It's the Senate that has the power in America, not the president.

Secondly the president can be effectivly ignored if the senate votes 2/3'rds in favour of whatever act is being passed (even if the president is in opposition)

Obviously there is one exception to this, executive order.. The president can bypass congress and the senate and bring something in by executive decree (i.e the Patriot Act) but again, this power brings with it a lot of trouble, and there's got to be at least some form of excuse.

Meaning, if Hilary Clinton get's in, Gamers will need to fear the Senate not her, as it's unlikely she'd get away with passing Gaming legisture via Executive Order (unless America has a "huuurrr" day, and doesn't notice the abuse)

 

[elDiablo]

Fair enough. I didn't know most of that.

However, being the figurehead, as Bush is, is why people hate him. He's the one who everyone assumes is in charge. And the fact that Hilary is kicking up a fuss about games just to get into the public eye (which, IMO, is just because at the moment, when someone says Hilary Clinton, you think Monica) is why I dislike her. Why politians have to attack entertainment media (the same they did with the film industry when it first got "gory"), which bring a LOT of income to the country, and provide a LOT of jobs, when they could be getting votes from actually trying to benefit humanity. Instead of trying to make a name for themselves, or just screw everyone else over...

 

[DeZmond]

or you are guilty until proven innocent

Or, in the case of America, you are guilty until proven guiltier.

I don't like talk of people suspending human rights for suspected terrorists - it's this simple: if you remove the human rights of a terrorist, you bring yourself down to their level. Simple as that.

And once you have all of these sweeping anti-terrorism laws, well, what's to stop you changing the definition of a terrorist?

How to make your own dictatorship in 4 easy steps:
1) Pass massively restrictive anti-terrorism laws in a country of your choice by manipulating world events to sway public opinion.
2) Change the definition of 'terrorist' to include those opposed to the political system, and those in other political parties.
3) Use your recently passed bill that allows you, as a minister, to rewrite any law without parliament approval in a matter of weeks to abolish Parliament.
4) Relax in the knowledge of a dictatorship well done.