our prison system is so bad

The last paragraph of the article above is important enough to be reproduced again:


In any event, Mr. Obama deserves credit for accepting that the civilian courts are largely unsuited for the realities of the war on terror. He has now decided to preserve a tribunal process that will be identical in every material way to the one favored by Dick Cheney -- and which, contrary to the narrative that Democrats promulgated for years, will be the fairest and most open war-crimes trials in U.S. history. Meanwhile, friends should keep certain newspaper editors away from sharp objects. Their champion has repudiated them once again.
***********************
HE(obama)HAS NOW DECIDED TO
PRESERVE A TRIBUNAL PROCESS THAT WILL BE IDENTICAL IN EVERY MATERIAL WAY TO THE ONE FAVORD BY DICK CHENEY.

What is even more fun is the great concern express here about being fair to terrorists and by that I do not mean finding out the truth but instead dotting every i and crossing every t in our legal system even if doing so make zero sense and could result in clearly guilt mass murderers going free to try to repeat their killings in the future.

A fool who will remain nameless then tell us here that this is just the price that he is willing to pay!

My father instead pay the real price of walking around knowing of a death sentence on himself for a year or so as his commander had orders to kill him before allowing him to be capture by the enemy due to secrets he had in his head.

Seem a double standard here in war time we can kill our own men for the greater good but we somehow should not harm known mass murderers if every legal standard and safe guard not design for dealing with this situation is not fully in place.

Not in every way. Inexperience has replaced experience.

So.. in other words you are arguing that we should allow any testimony into the courts even if it is made up?

I only said the rules of evidence should be the same as the constitution requires. Should we be allowed to make up evidence or present evidence that can't be cross examined?

Lets assume you are flying back into the US Bill and someone on the plane accuses you of having a bomb. Do you think we should be able to convict you based solely on that and not give you any chance to defend yourself? Of course you don't if it is YOU, but you are willing to use that standard for others. Why can't we use the SAME standard for EVERYONE? Are you arguing that the law isn't strong enough to be used in certain cases? If it isn't then change the law.

Great concern about being fair to terrorists?

That is a laugh Bill. What is great fun is your willingness to convict people without any facts or standards to judge those facts. If the facts exist to show that someone is a mass murderer why on earth would a court let them go free. You seem to think that courts throw out all the evidence on whim. No such thing happens. The courts merely applies standards of what is and isn't evidence.

I don't think you know the meaning of "clearly guilty" Bill if you think courts will let "clearly guilty" terrorists go.

You seem to think you know who is guilty and who isn't Bill. Since you know, could you tell us the names of those that are guilty and the evidence against them? I would be particularly interested in the 200 or so currently held in Gitmo. Please provide us with the evidence that shows that every one of them is guilty of mass murder.

Requiring standards does NOT and NEVER WILL mean that the guilty will all get off. You seem to think there is no one in jail in the US because everyone gets off because of the court's evidence standards.

Parados wrote:

You seem to think you know who is guilty and who isn't Bill. Since you know, could you tell us the names of those that are guilty and the evidence against them? I would be particularly interested in the 200 or so currently held in Gitmo. Please provide us with the evidence that shows that every one of them is guilty of mass murder.
******************************************

Parados thinks we cannot see his distortion of facts. he wrote--Guilty of Mass Murder.

He knows that is not the charge for ALL the GITMO people.

Parados would have made a wonderful defender for the morons at Nuremberg.

But Parados spouts useless drivel. It is clear that Barack Hussein Obama is following Bush's terrorist policies almost to the letter.

I believe that the spurious phrase "guilty of mass murder" was first suggested by BillRM. Parados is merely replying in the same terms.

genoves would never let the facts get in his way Merry.

Telling him facts will only mean he knows you are reading his posts so he will spend several attacking you personally.

Really? I can't find it. Can you? Nevertheless, Barack Hussein Obama has capitulated to Bush's position on Gitmo.


Guantanamo will join the growing list of security tools that BHO once criticized as out of keeping with American values but HAS SINCE DISCOVERED ARE VERY IN KEEPING WITH PROTECTING THE NATION.

Wiretapping, renditions,military tribunals.

BillRM wrote:(emphasis mine)

That's what BillRM wrote. Half a dozen posts back You couldn't find it?

Isn't it wonderful that parados is willing to take the risk.

Since, statistically, the chances of him or his loved ones being killed by terrorists are very, very slim, it's quite heroic of him.

God forbid such a tragedy ever occurs but if it does, what are the chances that parados will be satisfied with the efforts the US government has expended to protect him and his family?

And if he is A-OK with these efforts, does this set the standard of acceptance for the families of all the other victims?

BillR, you are exactly right: If there is a way to ensure that parados and his loved ones are at the greatest risk, then his willingness to take the risk might actually mean something.

My neighbor's grandkid might grow up to be a terrorist. No way to be certain, since he is only 18 months old. But! Do we really want to take a chance?

Well you people seem not to wish to discus this issue in good faith so I am about done with it and will let the readers of this thread the task of making up their own minds.

In any case first I did cover my concerns about such gentlemen as KSM who I am not aware anyone here is trying to claim is not the master mind behind the 911 attack.

However we did not treat this mass murderer nicely and according to the rules of the Federal court system and therefore evidences might very well be thrown out not because there is any question of it being truthful but due to the safe guards to protect criminals from bad treatment from our law enforcement.

Safe guards design not with the battlefield in mind or with a leader of an arm foreign group who goal is to kill as many of our citizens as possible.

Simple points that I had not seen so far directly address except for once with the comment by Parados that it is the price we need to pay for our freedoms or some such nonsense.

Thank You, Merry Andrew, but BillRM is correct. The blood of anyone killed, especially American citizens due to the moronic policy of releasing them and allowing them to go back to the Middle East, is on the hands of liberal idiots.

Note:

Pentagon: Some released detainees return to battle
LARA JAKES, Associated Press Writer Lara Jakes, Associated Press Writer " Tue May 26, 7:54 pm ET
WASHINGTON " Five percent of Guantanamo Bay detainees have participated in terrorist activities since their release from the U.S. Navy prison, the Pentagon said Tuesday. An additional 9 percent are believed to have joined " or rejoined " the fight against the U.S. and its allies, according to Defense Department data released amid a simmering political battle over where to send the detainees if the prison closes in January as planned.


The Pentagon maintains that all the suspects held at the Navy-run detention center in Cuba were captured and, in most cases, held for years, because of suspected ties to al-Qaida, the Taliban or other foreign fighter groups.

"What this tells us is, at the end of the day, there are individuals, that if released, will again return to terrorist activities," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said Tuesday.

As of April 7, the latest data available, 74 of approximately 540 detainees who have been released have since taken up the fight, or are at least suspected of doing so.

The Pentagon says it has fingerprints, DNA, photos or reliable intelligence to link 27 detainees to the war since their release. The other 47 detainees are believed to be involved with terrorist activity because of what the Pentagon described as significant reporting or analysis, or unverified but plausible information from a single source, suggesting it.

Terrorist activity includes participating in or funding attacks, plots or training camps, Whitman said. Speaking out against the United States, or participating in other anti-U.S. propaganda alone is not considered terrorist activity, the Pentagon said.

A list of 29 of the released detainees the Pentagon distributed with the data shows that five of them have since been killed and three retaken into custody. The Pentagon did not release the list of all 74 detainees, citing security concerns about classified information.

Others on the partially released list included:

_Said Mohammed Alim Shah, who was sent to Afghanistan in March 2004, where he was released. The U.S. says it has linked him to the kidnapping of two Chinese engineers, an Islamabad hotel bombing and an April 2007 suicide attack that killed 31 people.

_Mohammed bin Ahmad Mizouz and Ibrahim bin Shakaran, both released in Morocco in July 2004. They are accused of recruiting for al-Qaida in Iraq.

_Timur Ravilich, sent to Russia in March 2004. The Pentagon says he was involved in an unspecified gas line bombings.

**************************************************
Names, Places, Dates, specifics...

Do you have a link,Edgarblythe? I don't believe a word you are saying.

But, Merry Andrew and Parados do not know that the release of enemy prisoners has a precedent.

Note:

Home / Browse / World War II Prisoner of War Camps

World War II Prisoner of War Camps


During World War II, the United States established many prisoner of war (POW) camps on its soil for the first time since the Civil War. By 1943, Arkansas had received the first of 23,000 German and Italian prisoners of war, who would live and work at military installations and branch camps throughout the state.

The presence of POW camps in the United States was due in part to a British request to alleviate the POW housing problems in Great Britain. Initially, the U.S. government resisted the idea of POW camps on its soil. The huge numbers of German and Italian POWs expected to occupy the camps created many problems for the federal government and the military. The military did not have the experience or manpower to maintain camps with large POW populations. Most of the skilled military personnel fluent in German and Italian were fighting overseas. Government officials feared that housing so many prisoners could create security problems and heighten fears among Americans at home.

Establishing and managing POW camps in the United States was challenging on many levels, but organizing prison camps overseas created problems of its own. Supervising large groups of prisoners in Europe while adhering to the POW treatment policies established by the Geneva Convention diverted food, transportation, and medical resources from the American war effort overseas. Eventually, the United States reasoned that keeping prisoners of war in the United States would be an efficient use of military resources.

To alleviate some of the security concerns in metropolitan areas and calm citizens’ fears, the United States housed prisoners in military installations and federal facilities throughout the South and Southwest. About 425,000 captured Axis troops were sent to the United States for internment in more than 500 camps. Nearly 23,000 captured troops, mostly Germans and Italians from Erwin Rommel’s Afrika Korps, were sent to POW camps in Arkansas. Camp Robinson in North Little Rock (Pulaski County), Camp Chaffee in Fort Smith (Sebastian County), and Camp Dermott in Dermott (Chicot County) were the state’s primary centers for Germans. The remote locality of Camp Dermott in southeast Arkansas, previously the Jerome Relocation Center for Japanese Americans, made it the perfect site to house German officers, while Camp Monticello in Drew County housed Italians.

Camp Robinson was regarded nationally as a model camp. Living conditions in the camps were pleasant under the circumstances and included barrack housing, recreational activities, and creative and educational opportunities. Soccer was a popular sport among prisoners. POWs also performed theatrical plays and musical concerts. But it was not all fun and games. The POWs were required to work in and around the camp, earning eighty cents a day for their labor. Their duties included working in the camp cafeteria, in grounds maintenance, and on local construction projects. POWs could use their wages in the camp store to buy toiletries, candy, cigarettes, and even beer.

Many young men left Arkansas during World War II to serve in the military or find jobs in defense-related industries. Consequently, a labor shortage occurred in the farming and timber industries. To alleviate these shortages, prisoners supplemented the farm and labor forces at branch camps throughout Arkansas, mostly in the Delta and southern regions. In many cases, facilities from the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) served as barracks for the POWs at the branch camps. Each day, trucks of prisoners were transported to farms and timber sites to chop cotton, cut wood, and perform other chores to help stabilize the economy.

There were few escape attempts because of the remote location of the state. Most POWs resigned themselves to a relatively comfortable existence in the camps. This lifestyle caused many citizens to accuse the military of coddling the enemy. Americans were subject to rationing of food and other items, while POWs were provided a steady diet of good food and access to many name-brand items, such as cigarettes, that were unavailable to the general population. Additionally, many Americans whose relatives were killed or captured overseas were hostile to the prisoners

*****************************************************************

I am sure that Parados and Merry Andrew are not aware that the US did not repatriate the German and Italian Prisoners until after the war.

You'd be dead wrong, of course, but that never stopped you from posting non-sequiturs in the past.

One German submariner did escape the US camps if I remember correctly and return to the war by the way of Mexico.

But just this once I need to agree with you that the subject does not bear on this thread.

Do you really think this tissue thin analogy has a shred of relevance?

At least parados has staked out a position that, while a piece of ethical Swiss cheese, has actual relevance to the issue in question.

He asserts he is willing to take the risk of terrorist attacks rather than allowing the practice of what he (and many others) believes to be torture to be an acceptable option for our government.

You, on the other hand, have trotted out this glib piece of silliness as if it is somehow on point; somehow insightful.

You're an intelligent person, but, like the rest of us, are more than capable of a shallow throw away post that for, at least, a moment seems quite smart. That's all we have with this latest of your posts, and you can be forgiven if you admit to its vacuous nature.

Will you?

If not, then by all means explain and defend it.

It's about as smart as anything you've posted.