Double D

US plans death camp in Guantanamo

WASHINGTON: The US has floated plans to turn Guantanamo Bay into a death camp, with its own death row and execution chamber.

Prisoners would be tried, convicted and executed without leaving its boundaries, without a jury and without right of appeal, The Mail on Sunday newspaper reported recently.

The plans were revealed by Major-General Geoffrey Miller, who is in charge of 680 suspects from 43 countries, including two Australians. The suspects have been held at Camp Delta on Cuba without charge for 18 months.

General Miller said building a death row was one plan. Another was to have a permanent jail, with possibly an execution chamber.

The Mail on Sunday reported the move is seen as logical by the US, which has been attacked worldwide for breaching the Geneva Convention on prisoners of war since it established the camp at a naval base to hold alleged terrorists from Afghanistan.

But it has horrified human rights groups and lawyers representing detainees.

They see it as the clearest indication America has no intention of falling in line with internationally recognised justice.

The US has already said detainees would be tried by tribunals, without juries or appeals to a higher court. Detainees will be allowed only US lawyers.

British activist Stephen Jakobi, of Fair Trials Abroad, said: “The US is kicking and screaming against any pressure to conform with British or any other kind of international justice.”

American law professor Jonathan Turley, who has led US civil rights group protests against the military tribunals planned to hear cases at Guantanamo Bay, said: “It is not surprising the authorities are building a death row because they have said they plan to try capital cases before these tribunals.

“This camp was created to execute people. The administration has no interest in long-term prison sentences for people it regards as hard-core terrorists.”

Britain admitted it had been kept in the dark about the plans.

A Downing St spokesman said: “The US Government is well aware of the British Government’s position on the death penalty.” —The Courier Mail
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...8-5-2003_pg4_2

I'm really too flabbergasted to comment on this other than to ask, how can this be justified?

VirFighter

The right to a fair trial and what not is granted by the constitution to US citizens, not to prisoners of war or foreign terrorists. I'm all for executing guilty terrorists. As long as we don't start taking American citizens or innocent citizens of other nations there then I don't care if they kill them.

Calling it a "Death Camp" is what I'm flabbergasted about, comparing something like this to the horrors of the death camps is Nazi Germany is simply not justified or warranted. No one in Washington has ever called this a death camp and probably never will. I wonder if the author considers death row prisons in the US "death camps"?

I may sound cold or heartless but no tolerance for terrorists seems like the only thing that will work.

__________________
"The South is gonna boogie again"
- Disco Stu

viveleroi0

I agree... if they have the ability to plan and attack my country... the last thing on my list is to feel sorry for them.

__________________
"It's not that I don't understand, it's that I don't care"
- Homer Simpson

Mr. Mojo

Yeah, its been hell for these guys...

<a target=new href=""><b>The Guantanamo Thirteen - Packing on the pounds at America's toughest prison</b></a>

Is America the only country in the world that could run a prison camp where prisoners gain weight? Between April 2002 and March 2003, the Joint Task Force returned to Afghanistan 19 of the approximately 664 men (from 42 countries) who have been held in the detention camps at the U.S. Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay. Upon leaving, it has been reported, each man received two parting gifts: a brand new copy of the Koran as well as a new pair of jeans. Not the act of generosity that it might first appear, the jeans, at least, turned out to be a necessity. During their stay (14-months on average), the detainees (nearly all of them) had gained an average of 13 pounds.


Double D - This is a old thread somewhere in this fourm - its been done, its all BULLSHIT

__________________
When I jerk off I feel good for about twenty seconds and then WHAM it's right back into suicidal depression

Sun Tzu

I think they should use the rehab that was used in a Clockwork Orange. Then anytime they feel like doing any act of terror or similiar direction they get sick to their stomach.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Double D

Sorry, this is the only thread that came up when I did a search on Guantanamo:
Children as young as 13 held at guatanamo.

I posted this in the general discussion btw, & it was moved here.

Phaenx

They should get the ACLU in there to let the detainees go and have the military apoligize for arresting terrorists. No I'm just kidding, but it seems a lot of liberals don't like Guantanomo, I think the gaining 13 pounds, clean (although bright orange) clothes, and suitable housing is proof enough for me they're being treated fine. And they should be, until they are crucified for being asshole terrorist scum-whores.

__________________
"I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

Daval

I have no issues with Guantanamo bay camps existance.

What I take issue with is how the US are making up rules as they go along. How they deny the prisoners due process, no access to the red cross, no access to representation.

If they are terrorists, and proven to be. Fine. Try them and fry them. But give them representation.

__________________
"It is impossible to obtain a conviction for sodomy from an English jury. Half of them don't believe that it can physically be done, and the other half are doing it."
Winston Churchill

Double D

So everyone here is absolutely certain that all 680 detainees from the 43 countries, are guilty of the crimes for which they are accused? Call me naive, but I thought this was America, not Amerika.

And that gaining thirteen pounds thing means nothing. Many poor folks in the west are fat simply because of a diet heavily based on starch & fat.

Just saw Daval's post-finally a voice of reason!

Simple_Min

I am against everything that it is.

Imagine, America, trying to spread democracy....by torture, secrecy, and murder.

What we, America, is doing is tit-for-tat what Osama Bin Laden was doing. The only difference is Bin Laden is smater than our Commander in Theif.

What a novel Idea, though: democracy!

__________________
If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.

Simple_Min

Double D....check this out as well...

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...&threadid=2792

Yep, there is a lot of common sense and compassion in America and its citizens. MORE BLOOD! KILL THEM!!

And ofcourse round and round we go.

__________________
If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.

seretogis

You cannot reason with people who believe that their god thinks America should burn. These aren't just casual criminals who were "forced to crime in order to feed their families" -- these are deranged terrorists who have been brainwashed.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

Simple_Min

You don't know that. They could simply have a mistrust of their government much like I do. That mistrust does not mean they should be arrested without any rhyme or reason. So now political dissension should be opressed, is that the moral of the story?

By the way, get back to me when these "deranged terrorists" are eliminated. Or when this "War on Terror" is won. War on terror is a oxymoron.

__________________
If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.

The_Dude

hmm...how about the ok city bomber, how about john walker lindh? how about the olympic park bomber?

they all had similiar anti-government views, and they're getting a fair trial.


this is complete bull shit, just cuz we dont call 'em "pow's", we dont have to give 'em any rights?? might as well torture them, and sell their body parts then.


i'm not saying give 'em full rights of a US citizen, but treat 'em as POW's, that's what they are!

they were fighting for taliban, the govt of afghanistan. just cuz we dont recognize a govt doesnt mean it doesnt exist!


this is basically us going over there, capturing them, bringing 'em to cuba, and killing them.

this reminds me of the chinese justice system, where the accused are both defended by and prosecuted by the people's procreaterate (i slaughtered that word).

that coud possibly explain why they have a 99% conviction rate.....

__________________
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

Mr. Mojo

Sorry this is so long, but i had to nexis search for it

Gitmo Prisoner: "They Treated Us Very Well"

Source: The Chicago Tribune
Date: Wednesday, March 26, 2003
Headline: Kabul Frees 18 Held in Cuba; Ex-Guantanamo Inmates Go Home
Byline: By Kim Barker, Tribune staff reporter
Dateline: Kabul, Afghanistan

They sat in their cells in Guantanamo Bay for months, reading books in Pashtu, doing sit-ups and push-ups, and playing soccer for maybe 15 minutes every other day. Most of the 18 men just released from the U.S. military prison in Cuba said the only torture they encountered there was boredom. Even the food was decent.

On Tuesday, after being held in a Kabul jail for three days by Afghan authorities, the men were cleared of being dangerous terrorists and allowed to go home. They grabbed their new bags and walked off in their new white Riddell tennis shoes. Both were parting gifts from the United States.

<B>"There is no need to lie," said Sayed Abasin, 21, whose record from Cuba shows he was seen 37 times by the medical staff, for everything from knee pain to sinusitis. "I'm telling you the facts. They treated us very well."</B>

As many as 650 men, suspected of being members of Al Qaeda or the Taliban, have been held at Guantanamo since the start of America's war on terror. Human-rights groups and some former detainees have called the prison conditions inhumane and complained of torture.

Several of the 18 men freed in Afghanistan said they resented having been held for so long, without charges. They complained about being cramped in individual cells, about 6 1/2 feet by 5 feet, with their toilets and sinks next to their beds. Some said that on the rare occasions they were allowed to leave their cells, their hands and wrists were shackled.

<B>Still, the men were generally reluctant to criticize the Americans. Although they had no watches, the men said they were told when to pray in prison, five times a day. They said they performed ablutions with the water provided in their cells. They said they were fed fish and vegetables and given books to read. Several men said they were treated much worse at military bases in Afghanistan than in Cuba. Here, they said, they were thrown to the ground and repeatedly questioned.</B>

Afghan authorities initially said they planned to keep the men in a jail in Kabul for as long as needed for a thorough investigation. The officials said they needed time to determine whether any of the men might be dangerous and whether all the men were indeed Afghans.

But on Tuesday, all 18 were released, after they were paraded up to the chief of police's office, out to a lobby in front of reporters and down to an interrogation room. The men were told they were free only after they were walked back to the jail.

At least two of the men admitted that they fought for the Taliban, but they said they were forced to fight. Mortaza, who like many Afghans uses one name, said he had been taken by the Taliban to fight against the Northern Alliance in Kunduz province.

Others said they were victims of old grudges and thieves. Abasin said he was driving his taxi, taking a boy and a young man from Kabul to their mother's funeral in Khost. He said he picked up a third passenger on the way, just before thieves pulled him over, stole his car and turned him over to the Americans.

Despite being held in Afghanistan and Cuba for almost a year, Abasin was most concerned about his missing car: a 1991 yellow and white Toyota Corolla, with the license plate number 423.

After the men found out they were released, they hugged one another next to a garbage dump beside the jail. They picked up their bags, stuffed with new jeans and shirts given them by Americans and with their copies of the Koran and other holy books.

Abasin gave away his 24,000 afghanis, made worthless by new currency introduced since he was detained. He flipped through all his papers - the tax stamp for his taxi, his car registration - but his driver's license was no longer there. He said he planned to go home to Khost, take a bath, change clothes and cut off his beard.

"I don't know about my car, I want my car back, my taxi," he said. "And I need my driver's license."

Just before Abasin and the other men walked off, a police official called them back. He said the men's official release cards from Guantanamo Bay were locked up, and that the key was not available. They needed to come back the next day.

GRAPHIC: PHOTOPHOTO: Two Afghans who had been held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, talk with a taxi driver Tuesday after Kabul authorities released them. AP photo by Amir Shah.

__________________
When I jerk off I feel good for about twenty seconds and then WHAM it's right back into suicidal depression

The_Dude

look, that's a very small percentage of the people that are there.

__________________
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

Mr. Mojo

good comeback. Facts trip you up?

Your so blinded by your own bias for Bush you'll never see anything else. No matter how truthful it is. I'm sure you'll something else untrue to harp on.

__________________
When I jerk off I feel good for about twenty seconds and then WHAM it's right back into suicidal depression

archer2371

They will be tried in a WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL for committing WAR CRIMES against the U.S. If the people that they hold there are found to be not terrorists then they will let them go. It's not a Death Camp, they're not hearding these people into shower rooms by the thousands and then gassing them. The fact of the matter is, War Criminals have no rights to due process of law, because they committed an act of war against the United States, they will get the equivalent of a Court Martial because in effect they are POWs, however, they are War Criminals at the same time (if they are found to be). Read up on your military law, this is how it's done, most of these people being held at Guantanamo will be released, albeit gradually. However, some of them will be found guilty for conspiring and committing an act of war against the United States, and they will deserve to die because they had a hand in killing thousands of civilians, not just one, but thousands, if that's not a capital offense that deserves capital punishment, then I don't know what is. And look, you'd figure that if anyone was being treated badly in that camp that someone would come out and say, "Oh they're brutally treating us, they're beating us, giving us a crust of bread and a small glass of water a week" etc. etc. Give me a break, these guys are probably being treated better than they ever have been, and they probably have better living conditions than some AMERICANS. We shouldn't coddle these guys if indeed they had a hand in the 9/11 attacks or other attacks on the free world.

__________________
"This ain't no Ice Cream Social!"

"Hey Grif, Chupathingy...how bout that? I like it...got a ring to it."

"I have no earthly idea what it is I just saw, or what this place is, or where in the hell O'Malley is! My only choice is to blame Grif for coming up with such a flawed plan. Stupid, stupid Grif."

The_Dude

18/680 wow

__________________
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

Mr. Mojo

Prisoners killed by the US - 0/680


Lets not miss the source your basing your allegations on. The Pakistani Daily Times – don’t you think that would have something to gain by spreading anti-US propaganda to a Muslim audience?

__________________
When I jerk off I feel good for about twenty seconds and then WHAM it's right back into suicidal depression

Mr. Mojo

My mistake, i swear to jebus i though i replied to this some where else.

__________________
When I jerk off I feel good for about twenty seconds and then WHAM it's right back into suicidal depression

mirevolver

Did anyone notice where this aritcle came from?

I hardly believe that the Pakistani media is unbiased.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

KillerYoda

The Aussies got the story too:
http://news.com.au/common/story_page...55E401,00.html

And whether they gained weight and have pretty orange jumpsuits or not, when you shoot someone in the back of the head, they die.

__________________
"So you're Chekov, huh? Well, this here's McCoy. Find a Spock, we got us an away team."

mystmarimatt

man, i had so had an awesome point i was going to make on this, about at least treating them as bonafied POW's. but it's 2:30 in the morning and it all just shot straight out of my head

__________________
Words of Wisdom:

If you could really get to know someone and know that they weren't lying to you, then you would know the world was real. Because you could agree on things, you could compare notes. That must be why people get married or make Art. So they'll be able to really know something and not go insane.

Double D

Is _any_ media unbiased?

The_Dude

just cuz it's a pakistnai newspaper doesnt mean it's false.

yes, i bet they're biased, just like fox news is. but i'm not accusing fox of making up stuff.

__________________
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

Liquor Dealer

It really doesn't matter about the source - It's total bullshit. Guantanamo is a naval station. There is absolutely nothing there that a person with the lowest level of clearance - or probably no clearance at all cannot go look at - Guantanamo has neighbors that are only a few feet away that would damn sure exploit this to the hilt if there was anything at all to it! Think about that!

__________________
Life isn't always a bowl of cherries, sometimes it's more like a jar of Jalapenos --- what you say or do today might burn your ass tomorrow!!!

Mr. Mojo

<b>LD</b>
We're wasting our time. The Dude <i>wants</i> to believe that the US is going to kill these terrorist (who killed 3,000 Americans and untold Afghans. i guess he forgot that). So no matter how many facts we have, he's still going to find something to complain about. Not one terrorist has been executed – anywhere (except in the field of battle), but that doesn't matter – the Pakistani Daily Times says Gitmo is going to!

Every news account I have seen from Gitmo says the prisoners are treated extreamly well.

__________________
When I jerk off I feel good for about twenty seconds and then WHAM it's right back into suicidal depression

Peetster

I was there when it was full of Haitians. I wonder where they put them? It's a pleasant enough place. ;-)

Liquor Dealer

It's a beautiful place - only thing wrong with it so far as military duty is that relations with Cuba keep Havana from being the type of liberty town it once was. I realize that being a prisoner is not a pleasant experience under any circumstance but they could have built a pen over in the hole they came from - that would have been much more unpleasant.

__________________
Life isn't always a bowl of cherries, sometimes it's more like a jar of Jalapenos --- what you say or do today might burn your ass tomorrow!!!

Daval

My complaint is not how they are being treated while in Gitmo. My complaint is that they are in limbo and are not allowed access from red cross, their own countries diplomatic missions, or legal representation.

The fact that the US arbitrarily invented a term called 'illegal combatant' and placed anyone they felt like under that umbrella and can keep them in limbo indefinately is what bugs me.

Either charge, prosecute and imprison them or let them go. None of this limbo bullshit.

__________________
"It is impossible to obtain a conviction for sodomy from an English jury. Half of them don't believe that it can physically be done, and the other half are doing it."
Winston Churchill

mirevolver

The people being held in Gitmo are Al-Qaeda combantants. And according to the terms of the Geneva convention Al-Qaeda combantants don't qualify for POW status nor do they qualify for the protections and amenities that POWs recieve. So we don't have to give the red cross access, nor do we have to give them access to their countries' diplomatic missions and legal representation doesn't need to be provided.

And because they don't qualify as POWs, they are 'illeagal combantants.' So they should consider themselves lucky that they haven't been lined up and shot by now because I'm sure that's what would have happened to them if they were in the custody of a nation like China.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

smooth

You reversed cause and effect here.

Since we defined them as "illegal combatants" (a legal construct that we created) they do not qualify as POWs.

destination mar

fuck em

mirevolver

Actually they don't qualify as POWs so therefore we must classify them as something else and 'illegal combatant' is the best description.

(a) Osama Bin-Laden may or may not be responsible for the members of Al-Qaeda, most likely not.

(b) Al-Qaeda members do not have a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance. e.g. uniforms, flag

(c) Al-Qaeda members do not carry their arms openly.

(d) Al-Qaeda members do not conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. Last time I checked, hijacking civilian planes and using them to bomb civilian targets is not in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

In order to be classified as POWs, Al-Qaeda members must meet all four of those requirements. At best they meet the first requirement. At worst, they don't meet any. Therefore, under the Geneva convention, Al-Qaeda members cannot be called POWs and because of that, they are not protected by the Geneva convention. So we had to come up with a fitting term for the people at Gitmo and 'illegal combatant' is the best term for them and under the circumstances, I think they are being treated better than they deserve to be at Gitmo.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

smooth

You reasoning is called "retrospective reinterpretation." This occurs when one "remembers" things from the past and uses them to reinforce the definition of the situation being used.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

mirevolver

"Remembers" what? I went and looked up the Geneva Convention and directly quoted it.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

smooth

You are selecting things from your memory that reinforce the decision to regard these prisoners as illegal combatants and then concluding that those were the reasons the decision was arrived at--even though they weren't.


Here is more context:

US President George W Bush has made it clear that prisoners captured in Afghanistan - and those who are now being held in Cuba - will not be treated as prisoners of war.

After weeks of international criticism, the White House spokesman, Ari Fleischer said there would be no change in the way they were being treated.

The row over whether the Guantanamo Bay detainees qualify for the special provisions afforded to prisoners of war (POWs) has centred around the Geneva Conventions on the rights of prisoners.

The key principles grew out of an original agreement dating back to 1864.

They are established in one of four conventions adopted in 1949 and ratified by 189 countries.

A later set of rules, the "Additional Protocol" was drafted in 1977. It significantly alters the criteria of eligibility for POW status, but neither the US or Afghanistan are among the 159 signatories.

The relevant sections of both documents are summarised below:

Geneva Convention (III)

According to Article 4 of the third Geneva Convention, POWs include individuals in the following categories who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

Members of the armed forces of a party to the conflict or of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces

Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organised resistance movements as long as they:
(a) are commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates
(b) have a fixed distinctive sign recognisable at a distance
(c) carry arms openly
(d) conduct their own operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war

Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognised by the detaining power

Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory who have spontaneously taken up arms to resist an invading force, provided that they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

Article 5 of the convention states that, "should any doubt arise" as to whether detainees fit these categories, they "shall enjoy the protection of the present convention" until "their status has been determined by a competent tribunal".

Additional Protocol

According to Article 43 of Additional Protocol I, "any combatant... who falls into the power of an adverse party shall be a prisoner of war".

Article 44 then clarifies the definition of the term "combatant".

According to paragraph 2, while all combatants are obliged to comply with the laws of war, violations of these rules "shall not deprive a combatant of his right to be a combatant or... to be a prisoner of war".

The only exceptions to this are in relation to the use of clothing and symbols to make combatants identifiable.

Paragraph 3 recognises that it is not always possible for combatants to distinguish themselves from the civilian population, as they are obliged to do under international law.

It states that a fighter "shall retain his status as a combatant, provided that, in such situations, he carries his arms openly" during each military engagement and while visible to the adversary while preparing to attack.

According to paragraph 4, if he fails to do this, he forfeits his status as a POW, but "shall, nevertheless, be given protections equivalent in all respects to those accorded to prisoners of war".

Precedents

Uniform and identification
Viet Cong fighters captured during the Vietnam War were eventually given POW status, despite the fact that they wore nondescript black clothing with no insignia.

Recognised regimes
Although the US did not recognise the Chinese regime diplomatically, it still treated Chinese captives from the Korean War as POWs.

Some legal experts have suggested that a distinction should be made between al-Qaeda and Taleban prisoners, as the Taleban were the military force of the de facto government of Afghanistan - even though it was only recognised by three governments - while al-Qaeda are a stateless militia.

Rules of war
While some German air squadrons broke the rules of war by attacking civilian targets during World War II, this did not discount all captured members of the country's air corps from POW status.

--http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1787511.stm (emphasis added)

Daval

What about the Taliban? The Taliban was the recognized government of Afghanistan and should recieve legitimate POW status. Yet they are not.

Don't get me wrong here, i'm not defending either al qaeda or the taliban. If they are guilty of war crimes and whatnot - CHARGE THEM. Let them rot in prison. But the keyword is charge them. Don't just make up rules as you go and leave them in limbo.

__________________
"It is impossible to obtain a conviction for sodomy from an English jury. Half of them don't believe that it can physically be done, and the other half are doing it."
Winston Churchill

geep

Why doesn't common sense enter into any of these arguments. The fact that they are still alive speaks volumes in itself. And just what exactly are we supposed to do with them? Let them all go? Will the ACLU take responsibility for their actions if they come back later and kill another 3,000 innocent people? Who's the flippin' genius that knows all the answers? Not me. But here's the real question- do YOU want the responsibility to decide their fate? Next time I think the military should take no prisoners. Is that a better idea? "Is Gitmo a death camp?" I think the question is a tremendous oversimplification of the matter.