What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
47 Comments
- oldhick, on 11/20/2008, -1/+32Guantanamo Bay will always be remembered as a stain on the history of this great nation.
- Depthfunction, on 11/20/2008, -1/+28What's unfortunate is that the many innocent people who have been held in Guantanamo have now been radicalized. They might never have thought about committing terrorist acts before, but I'll be now they'd like nothing better than to take revenge against the evil bastards who tortured them.
- NinaOdell, on 11/20/2008, -0/+24It's going to remembered for all time...
right along with Slavery, Jim Crow, and the internment of Japanese-Americans. - johnnr2, on 11/20/2008, -1/+17A very conservative judge at that!
- oldhick, on 11/20/2008, -0/+11I hope you're wrong but I see your point. I can imagine those would be my feelings...
- MJG2007, on 11/21/2008, -2/+12What really saddened me is how some of the right wingers I've talked to about the detainees are convinced that every single person in Gitmo is a terrorist and if you suggest that if there is evidence, they should have a trial, if they don't have evidence after this long, we have no business holding them, they get all indignant about it. "THEY AREN'T CITIZENS!!!! Why should they have fair trials be released if we don't have evidence? That's insane!"
. - CommonSense2k8, on 11/21/2008, -0/+9I bet in a few years it will turn out that no more then a handful of the people being held their have ANY connections with terrorism.... other then having a similar skin complexion
- vanzee, on 11/21/2008, -0/+9Only five?
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -0/+7They'll also argue that geneva convention only applies to the signatory nations, so we can do what ever we want to Iraqis. The problem is, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and even Cuba are all signatory nations... Oh, yeah and the USA is one too. I guess we forget that sometimes.
- lolmax, on 11/21/2008, -0/+6the whole concept of Guantanamo Bay is so ***** up i cant believe anyone could ever support it.
truly a shameful part of america at this point in time - deepthot42, on 11/21/2008, -2/+8Well, if they weren't terrorists... they are now.
- SRSco, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5Now they can start to sue the US Government.
- mllawso, on 11/21/2008, -0/+4I think he's trying to say that while they weren't terrorists when they went in -- now they have good reason to become "terrorists"
- robert82, on 11/21/2008, -0/+4Why would you not be able to sue the gov't for damages?! You just have to find a judge that is independent and confident enough to not deny justiciability.
Maybe US judges wont, but judges of other countries might. Torture is an international crime for which immunity/act of state doctrines do not apply. - oboshoe, on 11/21/2008, -1/+4Where do they drop them off at? I assume its not Cuba
Once Guantanamo is closed, I sure hope they don't release these guys into the continental USA
I'm sure the ones being released innocent and all. But still....... - yosserhughes, on 11/21/2008, -0/+3"can be held captive for the duration of the war"
Which war would that be? - Ransack, on 11/21/2008, -2/+57 years of torture because of a single unnamed source. They should be compensated. How much is a day of torture worth?
- DankNugzPlz, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2I can't imagine they would be, since most (if not all) are citizens of foreign nations like Afghanistan and were never on US soil in the first place.
- razor150, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2We haven't declared war on anybody. Or did I miss Congress voting on a Declaration of War?
You can't arrest people and hold for drug crime indefinitely without a trial, and we have a "War on Drugs." - VeryBoredNow, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2$2.50
- DandyMandraff, on 11/21/2008, -1/+3Guantanamo is definitely something we don't want to be remembered for.
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1How in the HELL can you say you know that?
- callmejordy265, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1I'm sorry. As much as I want to, I cannot digg you for that comment. For you have just ruined the chicken sandwich I was eating.
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Do any of you girls know what we did with un-uniformed combatants in previous conflicts?
- inactive, on 11/22/2008, -0/+1Help fight against torture and other attacks on liberty: http://www.campaignforliberty.com
- DandyMandraff, on 11/21/2008, -1/+2Reading the article before replying helps... it says they will release them in Bosnia.
- razor150, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1The court decided the 2000 judgment in such a way that it doesn't apply to any other case. So you're right, it doesn't count.
- CommonSense2k8, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1umm........ you both are wrong,
Razor: you can arrest someone for a drug crime and hold them indefinitely, the prosecutor just comes up with some ***** story to tell the judge.
Beagle: The Geneva convention applies, and there will be worldwide prosecutions against the people who claimed it did not come end of January 2009. - RHandler, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Actually none of them are being lawfully held; I'm sure that little detail just slipped the judge's mind.
- callmejordy265, on 11/25/2008, -0/+1Apparently not.
- Czechxican, on 11/21/2008, -1/+2Bush already lost in Hamdi and Hamdan. These releases are inevitable because Obama is going to shut Guantanamo down anyways.
Two of the most important court cases of all time were decided under Bush. And no, the 2000 election didn't count. - oldhick, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Did I say we didn't? I was simply trying to stay on topic.
- rossnyc, on 11/21/2008, -1/+1You must have not seen the movie.
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -3/+3you have hel of lot of other stains too you know.
- matt.rubin, on 11/21/2008, -1/+1Harold? Kumar?
- yosserhughes, on 11/21/2008, -1/+1Doesn't matter, this administration will never let them go, the Justice Department will appeal, and appeal: if they lose they will reclassify them as 'Undesirables' or some such ***** and start the whole process again.
The only chance they've got is after Jan 20th. - Barackalypse, on 11/21/2008, -1/+1Kudos to the Court for striking a blow against Government tyranny. Although I'd be willing to wager that most of the men in Guantanamo deserve to be there, its wrong to hold them without a trial.
- robert82, on 11/22/2008, -0/+0From the very site you linked to: "The United States has waived sovereign immunity to a limited extent, mainly through the Federal Tort Claims Act, which waives the immunity if a tortious act of a federal employee causes damage"
Torture is (among other things) a tort. - BannedEagle, on 11/21/2008, -1/+0Hmm doesn't have to be declared as it is not against a specific country. Geneva conventions apply. You should read article 118 as it pertains to this.
- CRCulver, on 11/21/2008, -3/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity
- tubbsthezombie, on 11/21/2008, -8/+6"great nation"?
pfffft. - inactive, on 11/21/2008, -4/+2oh and don't forget the 19th Amendment
- CRCulver, on 11/21/2008, -4/+2You cannot sue the government unless the government agrees to be sued. Basic principle of law.
- URnotheonly1, on 11/21/2008, -4/+2that is so stupid
- URnotheonly1, on 11/21/2008, -7/+3release them in San Francisco
- BannedEagle, on 11/21/2008, -4/+0True they aren't terrorists, they are enemy combatants and as such can be held captive for the duration of the war.
- rossnyc, on 11/21/2008, -9/+4No more ***** Meat Sandwiches for them...
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is