Just how bad was Gitmo?

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: mstersmith
Doesnt bother me at all. Closing this down will make the Terrorsit love us. Oh wait, they will just find another reason we are the devil.

Republicans.txt

The Dems have had plenty of time to close down gitmo, what's going on here?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: mstersmith
Were does the Constitution say that it does cover non citizens? Glad some of you shed a tear for these animals because most of us wont.

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Applies to the Federal Government too.

Just because you wipe with the constitution doesn't mean everyone else does.

"Person" may be another word referring to US citizens. However, I have not reviewed case law so am unsure what USSC rulings may have interpreted this as.

What greater insult could you pay a terrorist than not to sink to his level. He uses terror precisely to separate the cowards who, out of their own yellowness, will sink to his level, and the real Americans who remain true to their fundamental principles. The war between civilization and terrorism is a moral war that can be won only by those willing to stand up for human dignity. All others are the hopeless detritus of self hate.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Fair treatment. Fair trials. Who can reasonably argue against this?

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM
Fair treatment. Fair trials. Who can reasonably argue against this?

Republicans. Oh wait, you said reasonably, nevermind

 

[bob4432]

you see more at a mma fight....

verbal threats are torture?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: CitizenKain
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Applies to the Federal Government too.

Just because you wipe with the constitution doesn't mean everyone else does.

section 1 of the 14th amendment does not apply to the federal government.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM
Fair treatment. Fair trials. Who can reasonably argue against this?

Republicans. Oh wait, you said reasonably, nevermind

Originally posted by: JD50


The Dems have had plenty of time to close down gitmo, what's going on here?

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: JohnnyGage

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JohnnyGage

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Skoorb
And some "Americans" actually condone this.

And call it 'Patriotic' when they do. Disgusting.

Enlighten us on a little history of Omar Khadr and his family before we make such judgements about what we did. Though judgements are needed, lets not forget what this poor Canadian Teenager did and was planning to do.

It's irrelevant what he did (or didn't or was accused of) do. Torture is illegal regardless.

That's why we don't allow murderers and rapists to be beaten up every day when they are in prison, while protecting prisoners with "lesser" crimes.

A person was in our custody. We are required *by law* to treat him a certain way, which doesn't include torture. What that person did has no bearing at all with his treatment. Can you somehow argue differently?

Geez, the lack of thinking by people trying to defend this is truly mind-boggling.

Which law are you speaking of? Murderers and rapists are usually citizens protected under the constitution, he was not a citizen of the US. Geneva convention? He was not a uniformed soldier he is an enemy combatant so the Geneva convention doesn't apply here. If he was tortured then that is wrong, but totally glossing over who this guy is--is wrong as well.

The law applies to all US citizens. Are you somehow saying that murdering illegal aliens is now OK, since they aren't US citizens? Or, if you go 12 miles offshore, outside US waters, you are free to murder someone? I don't think so.

Get it? Torture is illegal. It is illegal for *any* US citizen to torture, anywhere.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: mstersmith
Doesnt bother me at all. Closing this down will make the Terrorsit love us. Oh wait, they will just find another reason we are the devil.

Republicans.txt

The Dems have had plenty of time to close down gitmo, what's going on here?

Playing politics...oh wait, your just thread crapping, you don't have anything to say about this do you, nevermind then.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JohnnyGage

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JohnnyGage

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Skoorb
And some "Americans" actually condone this.

And call it 'Patriotic' when they do. Disgusting.

Enlighten us on a little history of Omar Khadr and his family before we make such judgements about what we did. Though judgements are needed, lets not forget what this poor Canadian Teenager did and was planning to do.

It's irrelevant what he did (or didn't or was accused of) do. Torture is illegal regardless.

That's why we don't allow murderers and rapists to be beaten up every day when they are in prison, while protecting prisoners with "lesser" crimes.

A person was in our custody. We are required *by law* to treat him a certain way, which doesn't include torture. What that person did has no bearing at all with his treatment. Can you somehow argue differently?

Geez, the lack of thinking by people trying to defend this is truly mind-boggling.

Which law are you speaking of? Murderers and rapists are usually citizens protected under the constitution, he was not a citizen of the US. Geneva convention? He was not a uniformed soldier he is an enemy combatant so the Geneva convention doesn't apply here. If he was tortured then that is wrong, but totally glossing over who this guy is--is wrong as well.

The law applies to all US citizens. Are you somehow saying that murdering illegal aliens is now OK, since they aren't US citizens? Or, if you go 12 miles offshore, outside US waters, you are free to murder someone? I don't think so.

Get it? Torture is illegal. It is illegal for *any* US citizen to torture, anywhere.

Are you saying that a citizen of the US is bound by US law in foreign countries?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: mstersmith
Doesnt bother me at all. Closing this down will make the Terrorsit love us. Oh wait, they will just find another reason we are the devil.

Republicans.txt

The Dems have had plenty of time to close down gitmo, what's going on here?

Playing politics...oh wait, your just thread crapping, you don't have anything to say about this do you, nevermind then.

Obviously you didn't read the OP.

Conservatives should hang their heads in shame

The Dems have had plenty of time to close down gitmo, what's going on here?

 

[2Xtreme21]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: mstersmith
Doesnt bother me at all. Closing this down will make the Terrorsit love us. Oh wait, they will just find another reason we are the devil.

Republicans.txt

The Dems have had plenty of time to close down gitmo, what's going on here?

Playing politics...oh wait, your just thread crapping, you don't have anything to say about this do you, nevermind then.

The Dems have had plenty of time to close down gitmo, what's going on here?

Scare tactics by Republicans blocking any legislation closing it down. Things like "we don't want terrorists released into American streets!"

Instead of just spewing BS to attack the other side, do you have any opinions of your own?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: mstersmith
Doesnt bother me at all. Closing this down will make the Terrorsit love us. Oh wait, they will just find another reason we are the devil.

Republicans.txt

The Dems have had plenty of time to close down gitmo, what's going on here?

Playing politics...oh wait, your just thread crapping, you don't have anything to say about this do you, nevermind then.

The Dems have had plenty of time to close down gitmo, what's going on here?

Scare tactics by Republicans blocking any legislation closing it down. Things like "we don't want terrorists released into American streets!"

Instead of just spewing BS to attack the other side, do you have any opinions of your own?

Great, another person that doesn't read the OP. All the OP does is "spew BS to attack the other side", how dare I call him out on it!!!

Phokus is blaming gitmo squarely on conservatives. Fine, shut it down. Conservatives don't have any power right now and it's all their fault, so what are we waiting for?

 

[JD50]

I'm sorry but I'm getting a little confused here. Conservatives that critized Obama for wanting to shut down gitmo should hang their heads in shame, but the Democrats that are actually stopping Obama from shutting down gitmo should..........?

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JohnnyGage

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JohnnyGage

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Skoorb
And some "Americans" actually condone this.

And call it 'Patriotic' when they do. Disgusting.

Enlighten us on a little history of Omar Khadr and his family before we make such judgements about what we did. Though judgements are needed, lets not forget what this poor Canadian Teenager did and was planning to do.

It's irrelevant what he did (or didn't or was accused of) do. Torture is illegal regardless.

That's why we don't allow murderers and rapists to be beaten up every day when they are in prison, while protecting prisoners with "lesser" crimes.

A person was in our custody. We are required *by law* to treat him a certain way, which doesn't include torture. What that person did has no bearing at all with his treatment. Can you somehow argue differently?

Geez, the lack of thinking by people trying to defend this is truly mind-boggling.

Which law are you speaking of? Murderers and rapists are usually citizens protected under the constitution, he was not a citizen of the US. Geneva convention? He was not a uniformed soldier he is an enemy combatant so the Geneva convention doesn't apply here. If he was tortured then that is wrong, but totally glossing over who this guy is--is wrong as well.

The law applies to all US citizens. Are you somehow saying that murdering illegal aliens is now OK, since they aren't US citizens? Or, if you go 12 miles offshore, outside US waters, you are free to murder someone? I don't think so.

Get it? Torture is illegal. It is illegal for *any* US citizen to torture, anywhere.

Are you saying that a citizen of the US is bound by US law in foreign countries?

In several cases, yes. Also, certain actions are illegal, whether it happens in the US or outside the county. You didn't know this?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat


In several cases, yes. Also, certain actions are illegal, whether it happens in the US or outside the county. You didn't know this?

How often has this actually happened?

What I mean is, how often has someone been arrested for breaking a US law in a foreign country? I guess I've never really thought about it before, that's why I'm wondering.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat


In several cases, yes. Also, certain actions are illegal, whether it happens in the US or outside the county. You didn't know this?

How often has this actually happened?

What I mean is, how often has someone been arrested for breaking a US law in a foreign country? I guess I've never really thought about it before, that's why I'm wondering.

IANAL, but I know since the 80's, anyone that breaks certain laws outside the US can be tried in the US. I believe this started to enforce anti-terrorism laws. That's how we captured terrorists that committed acts outside the US, and brought them to a US federal judge to be tried.

I believe that certain other laws have similar concepts, where the law applies outside the US. Certainly not every law would be under this, since that would be stupid. I don't know where a full listing of all laws would be.

This federal law applies to torture, specifically spaying that it's illegal outside the US.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat


In several cases, yes. Also, certain actions are illegal, whether it happens in the US or outside the county. You didn't know this?

How often has this actually happened?

What I mean is, how often has someone been arrested for breaking a US law in a foreign country? I guess I've never really thought about it before, that's why I'm wondering.

IANAL, but I know since the 80's, anyone that breaks certain laws outside the US can be tried in the US. I believe this started to enforce anti-terrorism laws. That's how we captured terrorists that committed acts outside the US, and brought them to a US federal judge to be tried.

I believe that certain other laws have similar concepts, where the law applies outside the US. Certainly not every law would be under this, since that would be stupid. I don't know where a full listing of all laws would be.

This federal law applies to torture, specifically spaying that it's illegal outside the US.

Hmmmm.....interesting.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: JD50

Are you saying that a citizen of the US is bound by US law in foreign countries?

In the case of torture, YES. Torture is a violation U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions and other interntational treaties, making it a crime in any signatory country, including the U.S., which, by law, incorporates all treaties into the U.S. legal code.

Are you to claim some misguided, invalid excuse for torture by anyone, anywhere?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: JD50

Are you saying that a citizen of the US is bound by US law in foreign countries?

In the case of torture, YES. Torture is a violation U.S. law and the Geneva Conventions and other interntational treaties, making it a crime in any signatory country, including the U.S., which, by law, incorporates all treaties into the U.S. legal code.

Are you to claim some misguided, invalid excuse for torture by anyone, anywhere?

Ummm.....no, where did you get that idea?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: JD50
I'm sorry but I'm getting a little confused here. Conservatives that critized Obama for wanting to shut down gitmo should hang their heads in shame, but the Democrats that are actually stopping Obama from shutting down gitmo should..........?

:clock:

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: JD50
I'm sorry but I'm getting a little confused here. Conservatives that critized Obama for wanting to shut down gitmo should hang their heads in shame, but the Democrats that are actually stopping Obama from shutting down gitmo should..........?

:clock:

Should hang their hands even further, since they are just playing politics, and not doing what is best for the country. (Something both parties are guilty of probably 99% of the time, IMHO)

Neither party really cares about us, they just want to play their games, keep their personal power by getting re-elected, and try and "beat" the other party. We really don't matter in their games.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat


In several cases, yes. Also, certain actions are illegal, whether it happens in the US or outside the county. You didn't know this?

How often has this actually happened?

What I mean is, how often has someone been arrested for breaking a US law in a foreign country? I guess I've never really thought about it before, that's why I'm wondering.

IANAL, but I know since the 80's, anyone that breaks certain laws outside the US can be tried in the US. I believe this started to enforce anti-terrorism laws. That's how we captured terrorists that committed acts outside the US, and brought them to a US federal judge to be tried.

I believe that certain other laws have similar concepts, where the law applies outside the US. Certainly not every law would be under this, since that would be stupid. I don't know where a full listing of all laws would be.

This federal law applies to torture, specifically spaying that it's illegal outside the US.

Hmmmm.....interesting.

For one, there are a lot of US laws that we extend to foreigners in their own lands, and consider we have the right to grab, bring, try and punish people.

Take Noriega for just one example - a Panamanian in Panama, charged in US court for violating US laws for things he did there, captured, brought - there are many others.

For another thing, international law has come to recognize some rights of 'anyone' to hold people accountable for some crimes like genocide.

This is clearly needed in light of the practicalities that the perpetrators are frequently in power in a state who is not going to hold them accountable.

It gets difficult to sort out, but the choice of just not doing anything against such crimes, and the most powerful nations being 'more equal than others' under the law in their getting to selectively enforce laws where it happens to fit with their selfish interests, isn't too good a situation.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: JD50
I'm sorry but I'm getting a little confused here. Conservatives that critized Obama for wanting to shut down gitmo should hang their heads in shame, but the Democrats that are actually stopping Obama from shutting down gitmo should..........?

:clock:

Should hang their hands even further, since they are just playing politics, and not doing what is best for the country. (Something both parties are guilty of probably 99% of the time, IMHO)

Neither party really cares about us, they just want to play their games, keep their personal power by getting re-elected, and try and "beat" the other party. We really don't matter in their games.

Now that's something I can agree with.
:thumbsup:

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat


In several cases, yes. Also, certain actions are illegal, whether it happens in the US or outside the county. You didn't know this?

How often has this actually happened?

What I mean is, how often has someone been arrested for breaking a US law in a foreign country? I guess I've never really thought about it before, that's why I'm wondering.

IANAL, but I know since the 80's, anyone that breaks certain laws outside the US can be tried in the US. I believe this started to enforce anti-terrorism laws. That's how we captured terrorists that committed acts outside the US, and brought them to a US federal judge to be tried.

I believe that certain other laws have similar concepts, where the law applies outside the US. Certainly not every law would be under this, since that would be stupid. I don't know where a full listing of all laws would be.

This federal law applies to torture, specifically spaying that it's illegal outside the US.

Hmmmm.....interesting.

For one, there are a lot of US laws that we extend to foreigners in their own lands, and consider we have the right to grab, bring, try and punish people.

Take Noriega for just one example - a Panamanian in Panama, charged in US court for violating US laws for things he did there, captured, brought - there are many others.

For another thing, international law has come to recognize some rights of 'anyone' to hold people accountable for some crimes like genocide.

This is clearly needed in light of the practicalities that the perpetrators are frequently in power in a state who is not going to hold them accountable.

It gets difficult to sort out, but the choice of just not doing anything against such crimes, and the most powerful nations being 'more equal than others' under the law in their getting to selectively enforce laws where it happens to fit with their selfish interests, isn't too good a situation.

Good stuff.