The Other Gitmo: Where's the Outrage?

[Slyspy]

Thats because I have no proof that the US is actively torturing people and at no point have I said otherwise. I would like not to have to even consider the possibility. I believe, however, that the very existence of Gitmo and its ilk is a problem that has to be addressed if we are ever to be the good guys (maybe even the just the winners) in the so called war on terror. That has been my opinion from the beginning, which is why I brought my original post to your attention.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Thats because I have no proof that the US is actively torturing people and at no point have I said otherwise.

And at no point have I accused YOU of it. But many here seem to think its a foregone conclusion.

would like not to have to even consider the possibility..

We agree again.

I believe, however, that the very existence of Gitmo and its ilk is a problem that has to be addressed if we are ever to be the good guys (maybe even the just the winners) in the so called war on terror. That has been my opinion from the beginning, which is why I brought my original post to your attention.

I agree in spirit. However I put the saftey of the US above the so called rights of terrorists and unlawful combatants.

[Slyspy]

I don't care much for the rights of terrorists myself. I don't care much for paedophiles either but certainly wouldn't lynch anyone merely suspected of it. The extra-judicial nature of Gitmo pisses all over the sense of justice of which the West should be rightfully proud. How can we know that they are terrorists if there has not been due process? More importantly, will this establishment ever be shut down? The term unlawful combatants is also one with which I am uncomfortable. The war in Afghanstan, for example, is over (apparently). Either send them back or prosecute them as criminals. The same goes for suspected terrorists.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

The extra-judicial nature of Gitmo pisses all over the sense of justice of which the West should be rightfully proud

Mere specualtion on your part.

How can we know that they are terrorists if there has not been due process?

There was under the articles of the Geneva convention. Would you give them access to US courts?

The term unlawful combatants is also one with which I am uncomfortable.

Again thats how the Geneva Convention classifies them. Once more these rules are made to discourage people from fighting in such a manner. If we all listen to people like Tribesman they would be treated the same as US soldiers. This is ludicrous and makes the conventions worthless. If your not going to be punished for not following the rules why follow them at all?

[Slyspy]

So innocent until proven guilty according to the law is something that should be discarded when it is deemed expedient to do so? Free, open and public trials, the use of juries and access to legal representation are mere frippery? Oh dear.

It was my belief that not all of the inmates at Gitmo are in fact "unlawful combatants" picked up in various warzones. I thought some were handed over by other countries and have as such been denied their full rights under US law while also not being covered by the Geneva Convention. I may be wrong of course.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

So innocent until proven guilty according to the law is something that should be discarded when it is deemed expedient to do so? Free, open and public trials, the use of juries and access to legal representation are mere frippery? Oh dear.

For US citizens no. For enemy combatants yes.

Watchman mostly all youve listed is allegations and most of them by the detainees themselves. The next part of your post indicates that the US indeed is looking into these allegations. There is no doubt that some prisoners have been abused. But when proof of this is shown those responsible are punished. Try that In Cuba. There they probably get rewarded for coming up with better means of torture.

[Slyspy]

[QUOTE=Gawain of Orkeny]For US citizens no. For enemy combatants yes./QUOTE]

Silly me.

[Watchman]

Watchman mostly all youve listed is allegations and most of them by the detainees themselves. The next part of your post indicates that the US indeed is looking into these allegations. There is no doubt that some prisoners have been abused. But when proof of this is shown those responsible are punished. Try that In Cuba. There they probably get rewarded for coming up with better means of torture.

Yeah, except for example those by the detainees' lawyers, or those by the FBI...
I'd suggest you take a look at the admittedly imposingly large document quoted. It has easily enough on the legal and political side of things too to make one seriously doubt the Adminstration's sincerity in the issue...

Anyway, I take it you're satisfied on the "exactly what torture is he in favor of" side of things ?