0
   

Court Vicrtory against terrorists.

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 12:18 pm
Just want to make sure I understand your position.

I state

Quote:

So, you presume that anyone the US gov't says is guilty, is guilty?


You say

Quote:
Nope. Not at all. I presume that the prisoners in Guantanamo bay are guilty.


To which I respond

Quote:

So, you presume that anyone the US gov't sticks in Guantanamo bay is guilty?


and you say

Quote:
No.


You are contradicting yourself; you go from saying that you presume the prisoners in Guantanamo are guilty, to saying you don't believe that anyone the US imprisons in Guantanamo is presumed guilty. Which one is it, McG?

Answer a simple question - do you presume that being placed in Guantanamo has any bearing on one's guilt or innocence, or not?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 12:22 pm
You are a native English speaker, McG. YOU should understand that. Don't disappoint me.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 12:33 pm
That's cute Walter, always nice to have your sarcasm thrown in.

I state "I presume that the prisoners in Guantanamo bay are guilty."

You come back throwing in qualifiers that mean something else so as to change what I said into something else that you can argue. You wonder if "anyone the US gov't says is guilty, is guilty?" You wonder "that anyone the US gov't sticks in Guantanamo bay is guilty?"

You want so bad to have what I said be something else besides what I said.

I am not contradicting myself, you are having difficulty grasping what I said. The prisoners in Guantanamo Bay were arrested in Afghanistan as illegal combatants. You want that to mean that anyone stuck in Gitmo, or anyone charged by the government and that is simply not what I written. It's what you want me to have written.

I am sorry that what I wrote doesn't fit into your cookie cutter Cyc. I didn't realize it was going to be such a difficult idea to grasp. Even for non-native speakers.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 12:39 pm
It's a difficult idea to grasp because you keep changing what you've said. It isn't me that wrote

Quote:

Nope. Not at all. I presume that the prisoners in Guantanamo bay are guilty. They are not anyone.


It was you. Normally when you read something like that, you believe that the person is telling the truth. Were you telling the truth?

When pressed, you switched it to -

Quote:
The prisoners in Guantanamo Bay were arrested in Afghanistan as illegal combatants.


But, there are prisoners in Guantanamo from all over the world, not just captured in Afghanistan. This is a disingenuous answer on your part.

I'm not trying for a 'gotcha'; just trying to get you to admit that you honestly believe an accusation of guilt by the US gov't is the same thing as proof of guilt. Your hair-splitting about where the people in Guantanamo come from is immaterial to the conversation.

Simple question - do you, or do you not, believe that an accusation of guilt by the US gov't is the same thing as proof of guilt - that those who are held by the US gov't are guilty until proven innocent?

I bet you cannot honestly answer without contradicting your earlier position.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 12:41 pm
Re: Court Vicrtory against terrorists.
McGentrix wrote:
If they were not guilty, they would have been released with the rest of the chaff that has been released.

I was going to post something like that, but as an ironic aside to illustrate how stupid that position is. Then McG comes along and posts it as a serious statement to prove how stupid that position is.

These days, absurdity has a tough time keeping pace with reality.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 12:43 pm
Re: Court Vicrtory against terrorists.
joefromchicago wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
If they were not guilty, they would have been released with the rest of the chaff that has been released.

I was going to post something like that, but as an ironic aside to illustrate how stupid that position is. Then McG comes along and posts it as a serious statement to prove how stupid that position is.

These days, absurdity has a tough time keeping pace with reality.


Too true Joe.

McG, presumably before the 'chaff,' which by the way numbered in the hundreds of people, were released, you would have presumed that they were guilty as well. But you would have been completely and utterly wrong. This doesn't bother you at all?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 12:48 pm
McGentrix wrote:
The prisoners in Guantanamo Bay were arrested in Afghanistan as illegal combatants.


Some dozens were captured in Bosnia, the United States, Pakistan and "elsewhere".
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 12:57 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
The prisoners in Guantanamo Bay were arrested in Afghanistan as illegal combatants.


Some dozens were captured in Bosnia, the United States, Pakistan and "elsewhere".


No, Walter, you must be wrong. In fact, I've been told that we've always been at war with Eastasia.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 12:59 pm
I would like to see some evidence that prisoners being held in Guantanamo Bay were not arrested in either Afghanistan or Pakistan (As part of the war in Afghanistan. I haveto include Pakistan or else Walter gets to have a Waltism (tm))

Being released does not prove ones guilt or innocence. It proves they were no longer worth holding.

I have not changed what I said. I clarified it so you could better understand as it was evident you were having issues with my first statement.

You wanted to include "anyone" in my statement when I did not say "anyone". You want to include any future detainees, I did not say future detainees.

I have not seen evidence that "there are prisoners in Guantanamo from all over the world, not just captured in Afghanistan. "

If you have it, I would enjoy reading it and expressing my surprise.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 01:04 pm
I'll look for that, and be right back.

But I want to clarify - those who have already been captured are different than those who will be captured and put in Guantanamo in what way exactly, that those in the past are guilty and those in the future presumably aren't?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 01:09 pm
McGentrix wrote:
I would like to see some evidence that prisoners being held in Guantanamo Bay were not arrested in either Afghanistan or Pakistan

<snip>

I have not seen evidence that "there are prisoners in Guantanamo from all over the world, not just captured in Afghanistan. "

If you have it, I would enjoy reading it and expressing my surprise.


do you accept U.S government as a valid source of evidence?

how will you be expressing your surprise?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 01:10 pm
Here's a list of the nationalities of those there -

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/guantanamo/

Also, I'd like to address the 'captured on the battlefield in Afghanistan' meme, and specifically state that I don't believe that most of the prisoners in Gitmo from Afghanistan were actually captured during battle, but turned in to the US for money by tribal leaders.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 01:15 pm
Then you agree with me that the prisoners held in Gitmo were captured in Afghanistan and Pakistan as a result of the war in Afghanistan, right?

I did know that many nationalities were involved, but you and Walter have said they were captured all around the world. Especially Walter's "Some dozens were captured in Bosnia, the United States, Pakistan and "elsewhere"."
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 01:22 pm
I'm still working on finding out that info, McG.

Though I did come across this nugget -

Quote:
Only 8 percent of detainees at Guantanamo were labeled by the Defense Department as "al Qaeda fighters," they found, and just 11 percent had been captured "on the battlefield" by coalition forces.


I agree that the vast majority seem to have come from Afghanistan, though we didn't capture but about 10% of them ourselves; the rest were turned in by the Pakistanis for money, and the vast majority of those people were in fact found to be innocent.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 01:24 pm
For McG.

Quote:
Ait Idir is one of six Algerians who lived in Bosnia for about a decade before being arrested shortly after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, on suspicion of plotting to bomb the American and British embassies in Sarajevo.

The men were held for three months, until Bosnia's Supreme Court acquitted all of them. Ait Idir and the others tell the tribunal that when they walked out of the police station as free men, they were quickly arrested again by Bosnian and U.S. officials, put on a plane and sent to Guantanamo.

Learning of the Accusations Against Them

Hadj Boudella, one of the other detainees, tells the military panel at his tribunal that this is the first time he's heard some of the accusations against him.

"I've been here for three years, and these accusations were just told to me," Boudella says. "Nobody or any interrogator ever mentioned any of these accusations you are talking to me about now."

What's striking is that, despite not knowing fully why they're being held, enduring open-ended detentions and sometimes harsh interrogations, the detainees on these audio tapes express faith that truth will prevail. Boudella tells the panel that his lawyers -- at the Boston firm Wilmerhale -- sent him a letter telling him not to participate in the tribunal for fear of incriminating himself.

"I want to show you that I am really innocent, and I want you to see I can defend myself," Boudella says on the recording. "If you're innocent, no matter how people try to cover your innocence, it will come out."

Unclassified Evidence Is Slim

The detainees question the panel about the evidence against them and ask for proof, rather than just allegations. The audio recordings and transcripts show that the unclassified evidence is slim; for example, just a rundown of allegations, petitions for habeus corpus, which challenges the prisoners' detention, and affidavits attached to those petitions; one has a letter from Ait Idir's wife. At one point, Ait Idir expresses disbelief over the lack of proof and tells the panel he hoped it had more evidence it could give him.

"If I was in your place, but if a supervisor came to me and showed me accusations like these, I would take these accusations and I would hit him in the face with them," he tells the panel, apologizing for being so blunt.

Ait Idir, Boudella and the others on the recordings all ask that they be allowed to provide the tribunal with additional evidence, such as a copy of the decision by Bosnia's Supreme Court, showing their acquittal.

One detainee asked that his supervisor at the Red Crescent Society in Bosnia testify at the proceeding. He is told that a request was made twice to the U.S. State Department, which handles the matter; each time, the date of the tribunal was emphasized. The tribunal president says there was no response from the State Department to either request.

In some cases, the detainees' representatives don't know what efforts have or are being made to locate requested evidence. The only witnesses available to Ait Idir and Boudella are the other men they were arrested with. Boudella asks one witness the most pertinent question: "Do you know if I belong to any terrorist organization or if I am a terrorist?"

In a simple, almost naïve answer, the witness tells the tribunal that Boudella is not a terrorist. "All I know about this person is that he is a very nice and very good person. He takes good care of his family," the other detainee says.


http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6514923
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 01:25 pm
Yep, I read that too. That must mean that their cases are being heard by someone and being investigated.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 01:29 pm
No. That was a report by NPR on the tribunals. They have no access to US courts, remember?

Are you expressing your surprise?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 01:31 pm
I was answering Cyc's post.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 01:33 pm
McGentrix wrote:
I was answering Cyc's post.


My mistake.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2007 01:34 pm
I was not aware of the 6 Bosnians being held in Gitmo.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 08:45:54