What is Digg?143 Comments
- JamesBondJr, on 01/05/2009, -5/+35And even if both of them close, the government will still do top secret stuff like that and we'll never know, what ever happened to some transparency?
- Morticae, on 01/05/2009, -4/+18And what, exactly, would be the harm in presenting your evidence to a judge and letting someone impartial decide if you have enough evidence? Or is that just letting the terrorists win?
- itisme1760, on 01/06/2009, -2/+15People in Guantanamo get better health care than some people living in the U.S. - Michael Moore.
- Seminarian, on 01/06/2009, -0/+11In addition to the word "suspected" the other operative word is "indefinitely."
- lemur, on 01/06/2009, -3/+14I think the premise of our system is based on a universal sense of human dignity (eg we hold these truths to be self evident...). If we can't hold others to the standards of justice to which we hold ourselves, then we're nothing more than the filthy oppressors that they claim we are.
- inactive, on 01/06/2009, -2/+12SUSPECTED
You know. Innocent before proven guilty. - defektiv, on 01/06/2009, -2/+11I can't believe it's still open. And I can't believe people don't see the damage this does to our FUTURE. Imagine when the families of those tortured grow up and get an ability to lash back.. it's ridiculous that people think they can hold secret wars and torture and that there won't be any fallout from those actions in the future.
You reap what you sow.. no amount of denial will excuse a person (and the innocent people around them) when your actions come around full swing and smack you in the face. Have we learned nothing? Nevermind, don't answer that, I know the answer. - mcnees287, on 01/06/2009, -3/+12except they may not be. many are just captured and held without ever been charged. if they're terrorists then fine charge them as terrorists and let them face trail. The current system is contradictory. on the one had we say we are a nation of laws but we fail to use laws when they are needed most.
- TreeTops8, on 01/06/2009, -0/+9I think North Korea tortures, you like torture, I don't like torture. Which two go together?
- WhiteHatTrick, on 01/06/2009, -1/+10If you have evidence to say they are terrorists, why not present that evidence and do things legitimately?
- inactive, on 01/06/2009, -4/+11Every dickless Republican is here to explain why we need to lock up brown people with no proof.
- TreeTops8, on 01/06/2009, -0/+7Wow! So, in your world, if the your rulers do it, then it must be right. Wow again.
- whatthefu, on 01/06/2009, -2/+8Yes, I love my freedom so much I'll let my government set up secret prisons and allow them to detain anyone they want in the name of fighting the blanket-term that is terrorism. I love my freedom so much that I'll give it up for security because I wouldn't know what to do with my freedom anyway.
- rdoger6424, on 01/06/2009, -1/+7"THEM DAMN A-RABS IS EVIL"
- Murdats, on 01/06/2009, -1/+7if you were shot by one of these guys then surely you have evidence to lock them up, you know, innocent until you present the gun, witnesses, the bullet and medical reports.
- inactive, on 01/06/2009, -5/+11"Crying foul because we apprehend terrorists and don't put up with their ***** won't stop them from killing you and the people you care about. And they wouldn't pause or think twice about it."
Oh Jesus, what a bunch of chicken-little *****.
If these people are so guilty, why the need for secret prisons? - scallon, on 01/06/2009, -1/+7when the hell was the united states government ever transparent?
- kinseyincanada, on 01/06/2009, -1/+7***** i would live next to one, what kind of dumbass terrorist would attack his neighbor?
- Infowarsdotcom, on 01/06/2009, -3/+8I like to read the news, when delivered by Dr. Seuss.
- grumpyrain, on 01/06/2009, -1/+6Here is semperfi524. He is a terrorist. I can offer no proof of this, but you can't always prove the guilty guilty now can you?
Now how do I get my thousand buck bounty? - protogenxl, on 01/06/2009, -1/+6A Gitmo Grows in Afghanistan
- reaper527, on 01/06/2009, -6/+11give them what they are entitled to, a military tribunal. these are NOT american citizens, they are not entitled to use the american court system
- emazur, on 01/06/2009, -0/+5Out of the frying pan and into the 60 million dollar gulag:
"So the Pentagon has decided to build a new prison to replace the current Bagram Theater Internment Facility, a converted hangar used by the Soviets during their occupation. The new facility, expected to cost at least $60 million" - kc8yds, on 01/06/2009, -3/+8Obama:
shut down bushes horrible prisons
start new prisons 100 times worse and call it change - mcnees287, on 01/06/2009, -1/+6actually america was foundedas a country of laws. Random dudes in the cia and military are not allowed to do whatever the ***** they want.
- SelfAbortion, on 01/06/2009, -1/+5Obvious troll is obvious
- thcobbs, on 01/06/2009, -0/+4Its the process of discovery that can be very harmful to US national security.
- kronzdigg, on 01/06/2009, -3/+7isn't obama going to take care of this? Other secrete prisons will be opened on his watch. More of the same. BushBama
- carbonfilament, on 01/06/2009, -1/+5you're right. They are entitled to visits to a doctor. I have to pay 395/month for insurance, and 25/visit after that. But given that the cost of that health care is eternal internment without trial or parole, I'll take the medical bill, thanks.
- whatthefu, on 01/06/2009, -3/+7The whole thing about terrorism is it instills unproportional fear in governments and people. To deny those apprehended people basic rights guaranteed by our own constitution (especially since many turn out to be innocent) is the opposite of what America is about.
- grumpyrain, on 01/06/2009, -0/+4> Again, back to my point, they are so innocent, then why doesn't their own countries want them back.
You seem rather naive.
What if I was to offer, in cash, 18 months worth of average income for every terrorist you could hand over? Let us assume that your country has been in civil unrest for 25 years, and that power is controlled by waring tribes.
Hmmm, the equivalent of 75 grand, and all I have to do is hand over those bastards I hate. Now they want me to take them back? No thanks. - NerveBand, on 01/06/2009, -2/+6Wow, the ignorance in your post is an extremely sad reality we face today.
- TreeTops8, on 01/06/2009, -2/+6For those Fathers, Mothers & Daughters, we need to INVESTIGATE 9/11, find out who the terrorists are, and pursue, capture, imprison them.
- mcnees287, on 01/06/2009, -2/+6So who decides these men are terrorists then?
i doesn't even matter if they are indeed terrorists, send them to trail and then let the law decide. stop listening to limbaugh, your point has little weight. - carbonfilament, on 01/06/2009, -0/+4*citation needed
- mcnees287, on 01/06/2009, -4/+8How the hell does this stuff even happen?
***** idiots who set this stuff up do not represent the interests of America at large.
Drastic change is needed or we will fail as a nation. America will go the way of all empires before it . - nullcodes, on 01/06/2009, -1/+4Many people would take the ones cleared of any wrongdoing and falsely accused, if they actually allowed this. Actually recently there were some detainees almost released into the US that a group was making this offer to .. it became a big deal because the govt. almost allowed it and then rescinded at the last minute.
First they said OK: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7658045.stm
Then, the white house blocked it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7660399.stm
Of course you never bother to hear those stories. - Alheithinn, on 01/06/2009, -1/+4FTA: "The Obama transition team has declined to comment on whether U.S. detention policy for enemy combatants will change with a new Administration. Nevertheless, the U.S. military is building a new prison for what it calls "unlawful enemy combatants" at Bagram that won't be finished until Obama is well settled in the White House. "The Obama Administration is inheriting not so much a shrinking Guantánamo as an expanding Bagram," says Tina Foster, executive director of the International Justice Network, a nonprofit legal group based in New York City."
If the Obama team hasn't commented then nothing is written in stone. Obviously, he'll be dealing with a great deal of inertia from policies put in place by the outgoing administration. - dmightx, on 01/06/2009, -1/+4Obviously they are doing something they shouldn't be doing. However, does that justify giving no trial and torture?
- rdoger6424, on 01/06/2009, -2/+5Dugg for spelling Guantánamo with the accent
- reaper527, on 01/06/2009, -0/+3"Military tribunals sound sonorous and, ah, sternly appropriate, yet there again how can non-American citizens be prosecuted except for offences committed on American soil ?"
your kidding, right? did you follow something called world war 2? just like the nazis in nurenburg (who never set foot in the usa), these terrorists are enemy combatants, and we are absolutely within our rights to detain them and put them in front of a tribunal for crimes commited against our troops. - grumpyrain, on 01/06/2009, -1/+4Yes. I do believe that some of the detainees were picked up off the streets. There are some well documented cases of exactly this. I believe this to be the policy of offering bounties was abused by local warlords to remove their enemies and get rich at the same time.
Other detainees are terrorists who should rot in jail. That is why we have courts you know; to determine whether the person actually committed the crimes they are charged with. Find me any place in history without an independent arbiter where corruption wasn't rife. I have no time for the bastards who seek to destroy the things I love. I do however have great concern for those innocent caught in the crossfire. - InfinitySnatch, on 01/06/2009, -2/+5What a poetic title.
- vtbarrera, on 02/03/2009, -5/+8What we see happen in Guantanamo will never actually cease, the US will just circumvent human rights protocols and find other avenues to imprison suspected "enemy combatants".
- Fragowell, on 01/06/2009, -1/+4And the Democrats you guys voted in will keep doing it.
- semperfi524, on 01/06/2009, -1/+4"Yes We Can"
- CosmicSurfer, on 01/07/2009, -0/+2Just NOW paying attention? This is another Rummy scheme put in to full spin .. We aren't just screaming to get our rocks off....
Did you REALLY THINK GITMO was the sole prison? Bush and Co with their cadre of black hearted spooks have them set up throughout the world with a potential for one on every base (Army Regulation 210-35, In effect Valentine's Day 2005). Those of us who have been working with Congressional members to close them down have been working to close them ALL down. There is no accurate count as to the actual number but look at the number of military installations in the world and you have the number of potential GITMOs - If you want to help, go to AIUSA and AI International... - thcobbs, on 01/06/2009, -1/+3It never existed.
- theorwells, on 01/06/2009, -1/+3Like "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn."
- Claverhouse, on 01/06/2009, -0/+2Um... if they're not entitled to American law procedures, then they can't be prosecuted under American law, which would mean America can only hold them illegally.
Military tribunals sound sonorous and, ah, sternly appropriate, yet there again how can non-American citizens be prosecuted except for offences committed on American soil ? The ( puppet ) government of Afghanistan is the sole recognised source of law in their own country: should they wish to prosecute someone for, say, shooting an American soldier, they alone have that right and not the American Army. Apart from which, America has not declared war upon anyone, or any group, in Afghanistan, so is debarred from counting enemies as francs-tireurs ( unlawful combatants ). The fact that America, in hot pursuit of Osama bin Laden and wishful to destroy the Taliban, happened to invade Afghanistan and has made war there for seven years doesn't actually give her any moral or legal rights over Afghanis.
Personally, I've no great objections to terrorists being put up against a wall and shot, but would prefer not to keep them or others in repellent jails for years without legal reason; and still more object to either side appealing to the moral high ground in what is just another bushfight. -
Show 51 - 100 of 145 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is