Enough. We want our Bahraini detainees at Guantanamo back in Bahrain. The government here can give the assurances that the US administration needs to release them to our care and then put them in a fair trial. If convicted, let them be imprisoned in Bahrain, if they are not, release them back into the community where they belong and let them feel the love of their families once again.
Staying there for so long without trial and without clear evidence is not fair. And it does the US no service whatsoever to keep them at Gitmo any longer.
Enough.
Another Gitmo hunger-striker very ill
WASHINGTON DC, Oct. 19 (UPI) — A Guantanamo Bay terror suspect has been hospitalized as a result of hunger strikes.Isa Almurbati is one of six Bahraini prisoners being held at Camp Delta at the Navy base in Guantanamo, Cuba, Adnkronos International news agency reported.
Almurbati’s lawyer, Joshua Colangelo-Bryan, said that Almurbati is now being force-fed by feeding tube.
Colangelo-Bryan said in a letter to the Bahrain Center for Human Rights after visiting the Bahraini detainees for a fifth time, “He has lost a tremendous amount of weight and looks exhausted. There is nothing to suggest that he will end this hunger strike.”
The U.S. Department of Defense says that only 24 prisoners are still on hunger strike out of the estimated 200 who began refusing food last month.
The hunger strike began Aug. 8, with participants protesting conditions and their lack of legal rights.
The current hunger strike is the most widespread of all the protests the prisoners have staged since the detention facility opened in January 2002.
UPI
Comments
A fair trial
Mahmood,
Every detainee has had a trial. They are brought before a US military tribunal. They have a JAG lawyer as counsel. Those deemed to be low risk or no risk are released. Some have been re-captured after being released.
A fair trial
I have no sympathy for the murdering Al Qaeda scum who make war on America. Isa Almurbati is not a terror suspect up on charges in a court of law. He is terrorist captured in a war against the United States, a war in which subhumans such as himself target innocent men, women, and children and then celebrate their deaths. I have perfect contempt for such an Islamist dirtbag who demands every protection from infidel law who at the same time wanted every advantage from operating outside the law in taking his war to the civilized world. These scum believe such man-made laws are blasphemy until they can use them to their advantage to escape their just punishment.
The Geneva Convention specifies that combatants captured in war shall be released when the war is over. Unfortunately, Almurbati, having not identified himself as a combatant in accordance with the Geneva Convention is legally classified a spy who can be shot. Even more unfortunately, the Islamists have no intention of ending their jihad. Therefore, their war will never end and Almurbati will die of old age in Gitmo, unless he can find a way to end his own miserable life sooner. The idea of releasing one of these Islamist scum to a hero’s welcome back home is too revolting to even contemplate.
In the meantime, we can use these remaining hard core evil terrorists as a living data bank to compare information extracted from new captures to old captures so as to validate it and defend against future threats.
However, America would gladly release Almurbati if he can return to us one of the 2986 people Al Qaeda butchered on September 11, 2001. Every guilty breath of life he takes is an insult to those innocent dead and a measure of American mercy he does not deserve.
Steve
A fair trial
You can have them back after 1) they have been deemed no longer a threat or 2) they are dead.
When you mess with the bull you get stuck with the horns.
A fair trial
Context, it’s all about context. You have several prisoners for which there is no context within international law. Therefore you feel like you can do as you please with them. America, you’ve mad your point. If you wanna f*ck, wear a condom; if you wanna fight, wear a uniform!
Here’s the problem people, what context are we in currently? If you were serious about keeping these people imprisoned to combat a war against terror, then where is this war? America has clearly abandoned the pursuit of Osama Ibn Laden, satisfied instead with the detention and denigration of the handful of Arabs it could find in Afghanistan.
If Washington were serious about the war on terror and serious about keeping the public safe, instead of MAKING it think that it is in danger, then at least make public the charges against them. In the war of information, America is losing out. Near every single Arab/Muslim has heard over and over again how each of the men in Gitmo were doing charity work or some ther plausible story (improbable, but VERY plausible). With no other word beside that, ESPECIALLY considering that there seems to be NO progress toward finding Osama Ibn Laden, well, you just do the math!
You’re not in Texas anymore. Thinking is now a requirement….
A fair trial
DIB
. Bahrain can have them back when we are done with them or when they die. PERIOD. That is the context. Frankly they are lucky to be alive as we could have SHOT them when we caught them legally under the law. If you have a problem with that then that is too bad.
I would remind you not to flap your gums about what the US is or is not doing. You have painfull little knowledge of the subject and the hunt for UBL.
Re(3): A fair trial
Race-baiting is not rebuttal, but demonstrates the weakness of your argument, racist.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
A Saudi
Spend your time cleaning up your own WASTA filled nation and you will find less time to lay blame on the US when the real problem is in your own backyard. The boys at GITMO are there because they chose to pick a fight and they lost. PERIOD. You should be worrying about stopping your fellow Saudi brothers and now sisters from doing more of the same in Iraq.
The boys is gitmo are being treated better than they deserve. If they choose to starve themselves….. They have been vetted and continue to be. You might as well accpet they fact MANY will NEVER leave. They are too dangerous. You would blame us for that too. Damned if we do damned if we don’t.
Why all the love for murdering scum? Or do you subscribe they are all just innocent bystanders with AK47s and kilos of C4? If I had any faith in Saudi perhpas I might support sending some of them “home” but I don’t. I know many would be let loose to continue their war or put up on a propoganda display. No thanks we don’t need that headache. The onus is on the ARAB/Saudi world to build a bridge to the West. Not on us. We didn’t start this “war” But damn sure we are going to clean it up.
For a country that has no freedom you sound like you want your cake and you want to eat it too. Blame the evil Americans while ignoring your own mess. Freedom isn’t FREE. YOU earn it.
A fair trial
What a tragedy! The United States of America has set a precedent that has emboldened regimes like China, Uzbekistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and many more to detain dissidents indefinitely and with impunity.
Among those imprisoned and being tortured in those countries you will find people who have devoted their lives to freedom and democracy and in the same breath have worked to make the world a more safer place by doing so … They can now be packed up with criminals and terrorists. Whose to ask for their release or at least a fair trial now that the nation who in the past and deservedly so was considered a bastion of freedom turned its back on the basic tenants of human rights?
The US has been instrumental for a very long time in promoting a more stable and indeed just world-From the defeat of Nazi Germany to the fall of the Berlin Wall- to deny that would be naive and in some cases just plain vindictive…this is not one of its prouder moments. I think Irene Khan’s description of Guantanamo bay as being “the gulag of our time” is a regrettable exaggeration, but I do believe it might be inspire for a regime with less scruples to create one.
A Saudi
Re(1): A fair trial
I understand your antipathy and frustration with Saudi as a country. You share the same feelings as the majority of Saudis.
However, the question at hand really has nothing to do with Saudi or Bahrain. The simple question is to do with fairness. Do you think it is fair to incarcerate human beings, guilty as they might be perceived to be, without recourse to basic rights as in a fair and public trial to ascertain their guilt and culpability?
Even criminals, much as we hate the fact, have rights. Throwing that tenet of human decency and human right out of the window will have dire consequences, the least of which is the US’ repuation globally.
Re: A fair trial
I disagree, Mahmood. It is impractical to gather evidence against combatants during hostilities as you would against a criminal committing a simple murder. That is too high a standard to be practical in a war where confusion reigns on the battlefield. The international standard has always been to hold the combatants until hostilities end. It’s been fair in other wars. It’s fair in this war.
I also disagree that public trials are better than secret tribunals in the case of terrorists. Public trials are much worse because they provide lots of information for the enemy to exploit. For example, the public trial of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers produced a lot of information about the structure of the buildings, their vulnerabilities, and their security. Much of that info could be accessed by buying a copy of the New York Times. All of it could be accessed by buying the court record. It seems likely that information helped the second, more successful, attack. Treating the 1993 bombers as simple criminals and trying them in open court led to the deaths of thousands of Americans by giving the next set of terrorists information they needed to perfect their attacks.
It would have been much better to try them as foreign combatants in secret tribunals, just as we did the Nazi spies who landed by sub in New Jersey during WWII to blow up war production. Because their prosecution was held in secret, none of the details of how they were captured leaded back to Germany. Not knowing how their agents were caught, the Nazis sent no more.
It would be crazy to give away secret methods, names of agents, and tactics we used to capture terrorists by publicizing it in an open court trial of terrorists. It’s crazy even to let a terrorist know how we caught him.
I also disagree that laying the evidence out against terrorists would sway the minds of the Middle East. Nothing leads me to believe that public opinion in the Middle East is based on facts or reason. Most of what I see from the Middle East leads me to believe that public opinon is based on private prejudice and that Middle Easterners will believe whatever confirms that prejudice.
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
I dispute your contention that they have the right to a trial. They don’t. They are illegal combatants who are imprisoned, precisely as they deserve. They are not criminals, but rather combatants in an illegal war.
As for global public opinion, those who think America unjust for imprisoning terrorists who seek to butcher as many of our people as possible, well those are people whose opinion is to far gone to ever sway. The perception I prefer to project is that America will punish those who attack it without relent.
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
But it does Mahmood. We can’t trust the Saudi’s and somewhat even Bahrain to do the right thing if we let your “boys” go home. Look at Bahrain. Within a 10 min walk from YOUR office sits a great human rights abuser. Forget the Brit IAN as well. Now if Bahrain can’t deal with that why should we believe you will keep a lid on you home grown terrorist? One who is a Royal Family member is he not?
The “boys’ have been vetted and many have been releases and many more will be as time goes by. The real tenet of human rights is to protect HUMAN RIGHTS. By releasing this scum back into the world to do what? KILL SOME MORE. I don’t think so. Do you want the bearded wannabes running around Bahrain? I don’t. I say right now the best place for them is where they are.
It is time for the Arab world and the Saudi’s in particular to step up to the plate and deal with the mess they live in. Take some responsability instead of playing the blame game.
Re: A fair trial
A Saudi;
[quote]What a tragedy! The United States of America has set a precedent that has emboldened regimes like China, Uzbekistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and many more to detain dissidents indefinitely and with impunity[/quote]
Those countries were abusing their dissidents way before any Taliban fighter saw Gitmo. Please don’t blame their misbehavior on the US.
Aliandra
Re: A fair trial
I note your sympathy for the terrorists at Gitmo. I also note the absence of sympathy for their victims. The rest of it is just word games. The Gitmo prisoners should be thankful that they are in an American prison, not an Arab one. Reports from the guards at Gitmo reveal that Gitmo prisoners become terrified and beg not to leave when they are taken to the airfield to be transferred to Middle Eastern prisons. What hypocrisy that you castigate America for inhumane treatment toward its prisoners when you are the worst offender.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
Well, you better get started on your war because prisoners are already being held in much worse conditions in Arab jails than at Gitmo and have been for centuries. Please grab a rifle now and proceed to your nearest prison and attack it. Let us know how it works out.
Steve
A fair trial
A Saudi
Try cleaning up your own mess of a nation before you worry about the US and the murdering scum at GITMO. Do you want these people roaming the street of Khobar? Do you think we can trust the Saudi’s to do the right thing if we let them go? I might consider Bahrain keeping its word if we let their terrorists out but not Saudi. Your country has a LONG way to go to regain any sense of respect with the US.
Re: A fair trial
[quote] i am wondering why gitmo prison?
is that even in the USA soil?[/quote]
Yes and no.
[quote]its ok, they know best, we dont have to talk about america..they own the planet dont they [/quote]
Most of the planet is backward, illiterate, and dysfunctional. America has no interest in owning it.
Re: A fair trial
Remember also that German-Americans and Italian-Americans were also detained. This is a complex issue. Not one that can be simply ascribed to race.
Re: A fair trial
There’s been no trial. Some of them have been formally charged, that’s all. And the tribunal’s rules of evidence are so shonky the British government insisted that none of their citizens be tried under it. They were all sent back to Britain last year. That’s why the Aussie, David Hicks, is currently seeking British citizenship.
Look, I don’t give a toss about these guys. Take them out the back and give them two taps to the back of the head and you won’t see me crying. The problem with this whole incident is that these guys have slipped between the cracks. That’s not supposed to happen. That’s why we have the GCs. It just sets a bad precedent and the good guys are going to bear the brunt of it because the bad guys are going to use this next time. And there’s always a next time. it’s such a gift.
Gotta a dissident or a malcontent? Just declare them an illegal combatant – [i]he came at me with a spoon, sir[/i] – and you can lock them away forever. Oh sure you say you’re going to put them on trial, eventually. You’re just working out the procedures.
What’s worse is next time it might not be some idiot that’s hell-bent on driving the world back to the 7th Century that’s imprisoned there. It might be me. Or it might be you. Remember Joe McCarthy? Or the Japanese internment? Remember, all blue-eyed people are intellectually inferior. We have to lock them up or they’ll destroy our way of life.
Do you remember a time when the US at least pretended to be the bastion of freedom and justice?
Re: A fair trial
I won’t disagree that the lack of information on OBL is indeed painful, it’s too bad that such important information is buried under the news about a Phony War, a Jack-in-the-Box Supreme Court candidate, real estate price bubbles and Britney Spears.
We didn’t have a problem finding Osama when we had to deliver him weapons. Hell, we found Gadhafi when he was on camping trip!
You’re right that the public doesn’t know what is going on in the mountains of Afghanistan. What we do know is that young men are dying in Iraq with less than adequate armor, so that Saddam Hussein can eat Doritos and swear at Kurdish judges.
Priorities man, priorities.
Re(3): A fair trial
You’re saying that just because there is no provision under law for an illegal combatant that you can toss their rights and dignities out of the window?
If that’s the case, they’re better off dead!
You’re just a little too formulaic in your approach to decency
Re(3): A fair trial
Congratulations, you just proved our point!
Bahrain doesn’t have the credibility to conduct a fair trail and mete appropriate justice. Now considering the US has done NOTHING to legally define the roles and responsibilities of enemy combatants, guess what, your credibility is shot too.
Welcome to the club!
A fair trial
All Mahmood is asking for is a fair trial. Nobody said we want murderers out on the streets, nobody said they are or arn’t terrorist. But everyone deserves a fair trial. I met many of the families of these “terrorists” and those families are asking for the same. Either prove these people are guilty or let them go. Afterall even Saddam Hussein is getting a trial!!
It really irritates me when some Americans wear the mask of democracy only when it suits them! By the way even prisoners who ARE guilty have rights!
Zainab Alkhawaja
http://www.dreamer83.blogpost.com
A fair trial
If they are guilty, try them then hang them. We can bust people for downloading music but we cant make a case against these people?
billT
Re: A fair trial
[quote]you americans are all for democracy and yet you think that feeding someone food with scorpions in it is ok??? [/quote]
Food with scorpions? Huh?
Re: A fair trial
So what is he proved to have done in a court of law. That’s the problem Steve. Secrecy does nothing but alienate us to the rest of the world and causes more harm down the road. Try them and hang them if we have enough evidence I’ll even turn on CNN to watch it but I cant condone holding people without trials.
billT
[Modified by: billT (billT) on October 19, 2005 07:31 PM]
A fair trial
The rule: if you wanna fight, wear a uniform!
This rule applies to everyone? Then why do CIA agents & Special Ops not wer uniforms when conducting important operations.
If one wants to defeat terrorism… war is not the solution. Need to address the causes, what led these men to hate America, didn’t happen out of the blue. Hint: Foreign Policy
A fair trial
I am a human-being first before any religious, gender based or nationalistic affiliation. To me the fact that Saudis are heavily involved in this particular situation is a detail. What is not a minor detail is the violation of human rights by the world’s sole super power and leader and the message it sends to other countries. To put it into context –yes-I am actively “trying to clean my own mess of a nationâ€? as you so eloquently and politely put it, the US government’s actions in Guantanamo bay is not helping in the least in instilling a respect of human life and dignity in Saudi Arabia’s regime.
It’s funny that you mentioned al-Khobar, I’m originally from there and my parent’s home is still there. As you can imagine I can give you a first hand account on how terrorism can devastate what was a once a quiet and generally peaceful community. Yet I will always be a firm believer in the view that if the rights of the individual are not respected those of the society as a whole has no chance, nor is its ultimate safety and stability.
“Do you think we can trust the Saudi’s to do the right thing if we let them go?â€?
“The right thing� In my opinion is to give the prisoners a fair and transparent trial in accordance to international law. The venue is immaterial, and if convicted of crimes they should be punished accordingly. It is absolutely absurd to assume that every single one of the detainees are hardened ruthless murderers. Do you realise that according to the BBC the youngest inmate was 11 when first imprisoned? Yes 11 years old!! I dare say I find it highly probable that a boy that young might just be innocent and does not deserve to “die of old age� in a prison. Returning to your question, in this scenario it is thankfully irrelevant what the Saudi Government might or might not do. Personally I wouldn’t trust it.
The current situation is an absolute travesty, and even more sadly it truly is a missed golden opportunity in a world where so precious few arise. A fair and open trial would have sent a clear message to the world. No matter how desperate and extreme a situation gets, individuals and governments alike must never ever sacrifice justice, respect for human life and the rule of law, to basic urges of revenge -no matter how strong they are. That to me would be a true victory in “The War against Terrorism.�
A Saudi
A fair trial
They are called KITES pal and they are often own their own if caught. The string is cut once the operation is blown. All they get is a little start on a wall at HQ.
Quit making excuses for the Muslim worlds problem by blaming the US. Clean up your house and backyard.
A fair trial
Thank you DIB, A Saudi, Zainab and BillT for understanding my point. You all know that I am completely against terrorists and terrorism and think that its perpetrators should rot in hell on earth and the hereafter. However, in order for us to recognise that these animals are in fact in the wrong, they have to receive a fair trial. That’s all that everyone is asking for. That’s their basic right.
Putting them in secret tribunals is most definitely not the way to go. For one thing, had the trials been public and were real trials, then I think the vast majority of people would have accepted their fates, and on top of that, the outcome of these trials might deter other would-be terrorists from carrying out their acts of terror simply because they would know that they would be punished severely, but fairly.
Again I reiterate, if they are guilty then they should serve whatever the law can throw at them, if they are not then they should be released and compensated for wrongful imprisonment. The only way to know if they are in fact guilty is to allow them to stand fair trials.
Is islam against Self-Harm?
For once, I agree with Steve the American. let’s not be under illusion, these people were there for one reason alone. They claim they are in a war – this is the result of war. It’s not a civilian court.
Also, what sort of trial would they get (if any) in Bahrain – fair and free?
But more importantly, can someone advise whether killing yourself through starvation is haram or not? What about inflicting self harm? This is what the hunger strikers are doing.
Johnster
A fair trial
Perhaps this guy can clarify things for you:http://www.ejectejecteject.com/archives/000125.html%5Burl%5D
A fair trial
[url]http://www.ejectejecteject.com/archives/000125.html[/url]
A great read
A fair trial
i hope they all die
Re(1): A fair trial
The terrorists held at Gitmo are in limbo precisely because they waged war in such a way that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to them so as to gain an advantage in killing infidels. That is their doing, not the US. We have complied with all laws applying to them, even granting them treatment as legitimate combatants, even though they do not qualify.
The argument that holding terrorists at Gitmo will lead to bad treatment of prisoners held by the Islamists is absurd. The Islamists kill their prisoners. There is no captive of Al Qaeda who has survived.
Joe McCarthy did not take any prisoners of war. You demonstrate considerable confusion about the treatment of Japanese in America in WWII, which was just. These rhetorical devices are a lame attempt to reassign the burden for the extralegal tactics of terrorism away from Muslim terrorists to America.
Steve
Re(1): A fair trial
Bill,
Should we have tried the German soldiers we captured at Normandy in a court of law and, if guilty of killing Americans, execute them? Should Americans captured by the Germans have been tried and executed? You are attempting, wrongly, to treat terrorists as simple murderers rather than illegal combatants. None of the German, Japanese, nor Italian combatants we captured in WWII were given trials to establish their guilt. Do you think we should have released them to their home countries while they were still fighting a war against us if we did not try them and produce evidence of individual guilt? If so, why? If not, why should illegal combatants be kicked loose while legal combatants are held until the war is over? Why, in your view, should terrorists deserve more rights than soldiers behaving in accord with the Geneva Convention?
The most applicable precedent for the terrorists is the treatment of Skorzeny’s German commandos in WWII who penetrated American lines disguised as GIs to perform sabotage and create confusion. Those caught were given a military hearing, as the Gitmo jihads have, and then shot. The Gitmo jihadis are alive due to American mercy and because their knowledge is useful.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
DIB,
Since when have we stopped chasing Bin Laden? He will know no rest until the day he dies. Just because there is not a press release every day on what has been accomplished today on the search for Bin Laden does not mean nothing is being done. I doubt a day goes by that special operators are not wandering the mountains of Pakistan or a UAV is not photographing villages in the tribal areas. I wouldn’t advise Bin Laden to book a vacation to Rio for Carnival yet.
I grant you that America may be losing the war of information in the Arab world, largely because it is awash in anti-American propaganda. However, I disagree that that any amount of truth-telling would make a dent in Middle Eastern prejudice. It would just inspire a new round of lies from local sources to a deeply bigoted population who would swallow them whole, however ridiculous.
The crack about Texas is foolish. You would not be able to write such nonsense were it not for Jack Kilby, who invented the integrated circuit. He worked for Texas Instruments, not New York Instruments nor California Instruments nor Middle Eastern Instruments.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
The United States has complied with the law. The countries you criticize do not. And I am little impressed with the typical Saudi attempt to shift blame for Saudi misdeeds to America. Take responsibility for your own country instead of trying to blame everyone else for what you do. Be a man for once in your life.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
Zainab,
The rights of the Gitmo prisoners are defined by law, which we have complied with. We are willing to comply with international law and release them when Bin Laden ends his war on America. I recommend that you address your concerns to Bin Laden and ask him to give up the jihad so that his boys can go home.
By the way, you do not have to prove combatants caught in a war to be guilty or to give them a trial. If so, please provide a link to the trials of Israeli prisoners of war taken by Egypt in any war. Or provide a link to any trial of any POWs taken by any Arab nation in any war.
When can I expect you to get back to us with that info?
Steve
Re: A fair trial
There are fundamental differences between firing on American troops in Afghanistan and downloading music, Bill. If you need for me to explain these to you, I can.
As I pointed out before, combatants taken in war are not tried but rather held until hostilities end. That’s what we are doing. Your demand that international law should change so that evidence be presented to justify the holding of combatants and convict them would lead to worse situations in general for such prisoners. You are foolishly trying to treat soldiers like felons, attempting to apply civil law to war. It is impractical. When we invaded Normandy, should we have expected the soldiers landing on the beach to collect evidence against the German soldiers they caught so as to prove their guilt in a later trial? Should we have sent in lawyers with the Rangers to facilitate that? Maybe parachuted them in with the Airborne?
Sheesh,
Steve
A fair trial
I was appalled this morning after reading the paper about the Guantanamo prisoners. my thoughts and prayers go out to these fellow human beings and their families. and i hope and pray that these people be given a free and fair trial. I could only imagine the pain that their families have to go thru if they read the paper today. whether they are guilty or not is not the important question today. it is the humane treatment that every prisoner, guilty or not, deserves. you americans are all for democracy and yet you think that feeding someone food with scorpions in it is ok??? I Dont think so,,
AS
A fair trial
i am wondering why gitmo prison?
is that even in the USA soil?
if you ask me i will be pleased to tell you that if any other country specially the middle east and specially a muslim one
if they did like that and kept prisioners in that way
Religeon wars on islam will start and protestors from every inch of planet earth are going to go out in long protest to clear and wipe out this islamic middle eastern country that puts those prisoners in such condition and treats them in this manner, just because its an arabic muslim country.
but if all free democratic america does it
its ok, they know best, we dont have to talk about america..they own the planet dont they?
A fair trial
[quote]Staying there for so long without trial and without clear evidence is not fair.[/quote]
If this war was fair Danny Pearl, Nick Berg and Margaret Hassan would be deciding between Orange-glazed chicken, fresh fruit crepe, steamed peas w/ mushrooms, and rice pilaf or a hunger strike.
If this war was fair we would be selling these prisoners back to you for a ransom.
When it comes to this war FAIR is NOT a word that can be used, and is rather insulting to see it used when comparing prisoners isn’t it?!
Re(2): A fair trial
Yes, because it is always just to forcibly imprison your own citizens based solely on the colour of their skin. Thank you, you just proved my point.
Re(1): A fair trial
“when you are the worst offender.”
We? Steve we are not democracies, we do not support the monarchies in our countries. And we dont try to make it ok for our governemnts to torture prisoners. Thats the difference.
You, on the other hand, you’re supporting what is happening to the prionsers at Guantanamo.
You heard Senator Dick Durban comparing Gitmo to the Gulags, is that what you want to be compared to? Yes after alot of pressure they made him shutup but what he said cannot be erased. Well maybe he is like us middle eastern people who dont think with reason. But then what about Amnesty, who said the same. Maybe Amnesty International has been taken over by arabs filled with their prejudice.. ??
Steve you should have sympathy for the prisoners who could be innocent, and for their families who cant do much for them. What makes you believe that all the prinosers are guilty? Since when did simply being an Arab in Afghanistan make you a terrorist?
Zainab Alkhawaja
Re(1): A fair trial
Oh and Steve, one more thing. Are you a supporter of what happened in Abu Ghraib as well?? Afterall its war, so anybody can be caught and tortured and kept in prison. According to you, innocent or guilty is not the question.
Zainab Alkhawaja
A fair trial
These men have been found guilty of nothing, nor have they been charged with anything. I find it sick that people are talking as if they are convicts. A good portion of them were sold to the US forces when it was made clear that any Arab in Afghanistan was worth large money from the Americans.
But hey, maybe they are lucky. They could have been shot and then burned, all of it being video taped by US forces to try and scare the locals. It would seem that the old American sport of lynching has been exported from the USA.
Re: A fair trial
Sorry that logic of yours I find objectionable. You seem to condone the fact the terrorists like Al-Qaeda and its affiliates murdering civilians “because they can’t get to the military”? Is that what you’re getting at? So because they can’t get to military targets then its ok to go and kill civilians?
If this is your view then I’m afraid you have to re-evaluate your moral stances because I believe that you have it wrong in a major way.
Re(1): A fair trial
Oh, sorry I just remembered that they were trying to avoid civilian casualtie when they shot down the Iranian airplane killing 290+ innocent civilians or the hundreds of billions of dollars they spent on developing their smart weaponary, wasn’t enough to build a radar system that differentiate a passenger jet from F-14?!!
Sorry sir, but we are not stupid.
Re(2): A fair trial
Zainab;
You said:
[quote]America is an imperialist country, which wants to make sure that the rest of the world is backward illiterate and dysfunctional so that its easier for them conquer, or emm “Liberate”. [/quote]
The world does not need any help from America to be backward, illiterate, and dysfunctional. There is no interest in conquering it. America never had any colonies nor did it ever keep any country it invaded.
Aliandra
Re(1): A fair trial
“Most of the planet is backward, illiterate, and dysfunctional. America has no interest in owning it.”
No interest?? what are they doing in Iraq then? Liberating?
America is an imperialist country, which wants to make sure that the rest of the world is backward illiterate and dysfunctional so that its easier for them conquer, or emm “Liberate”. :p
Wake up!
Zainab Alkhawaja
Re(1): A fair trial
No Mahmood this is not what I meant,,, my point is that Al Qaeda and the Americans are alike if they couldn’t finish the job in the known way they will not hesitat to kill as many civilians as they can. Americans did it in Japan (they nuke them after the japanies army anounced the cease fire) and they did it with Iran when shooting down their civilian jet and they did it in Iraq killing 300 kids in Al-Amiria Shelter and they will do it again and again.
A fair trial
Steve, we don’t need to hear about “american mercy.” If you’re that sure they’re all guilty as not-formally-charged, please shoot them down. Why are you trying so hard to keep the guy alive, when he’s a cold blooded murderer that wants to kill himself and rid this world of his evil? To me, the whole deal is they’re the closest thing that looks like bin ladin, but not exactly him. Keeping them around is the administration telling people, we don’t have the guy but we do have someone. After a trial; it could be a judge judy episode, there are two outcomes. Either dead or free… and that leaves you guys with no one in guantanamo…
basically the administration is buying time with Isa Almurbati until they yell bingo and find osama!
And about illegal combatants… whats a legal combatant anyway? Sounds to me like you’re saying these are the rules I’ve just made up, and I’m backing them up with this big gun….
I would never compromise my stand against terrorism and religious fanatics… but I really don’t want to see examples of civil rights fold one after the other.
The Joker
Re(2): A fair trial
Zainab;
[quote]You heard Senator Dick Durban comparing Gitmo to the Gulags, is that what you want to be compared to? Yes after alot of pressure they made him shutup but what he said cannot be erased. Well maybe he is like us middle eastern people who dont think with reason. But then what about Amnesty, who said the same[/quote]
Both wished they hadn’t said what they did because it showed some pretty obvious ignorance. Gulags were forced labor camps that imprisoned millions. That clearly is not what is going on at Gitmo.
The prisoners were not arrested because they were Arabs or because they were selling cookies. They were arrested because they were fighting for Al-Qaeda.
Aliandra
Aliandra
Re: A fair trial
[quote]but don’t deny us the right to cry the hundred of thousands of innocent people butchered by the Americans in Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan and all over the warld[/quote]
Hundreds of thousands of innocent people, eh? I sure would like to see the source for this wisdom. Would you mind providing it?
Re: A fair trial
Hi Ash
What planet are you living on?
“only 520”. Well lets look at it this way, if one of those 520 prisoners was your father, then it would matter more to you. But the key word here is “foriegn” they are foreigners to you, so you dont give a damn!
“As for being given trials, I don’t really think they should be given any” Why? what makes you think that they are KNOWN terrorists. who is it that you are trusting to make that decision? The same government who go on a witchhunt everytime they make a war. Look at your history!
“allowed to follow their religion” Thats the part where I really think u live on another planet, or maybe you just dont read the news, your news. Flushing Qurans down the toilet, I dont really call that freedom of religion.
“Yeah, we interrogate them, but we do not torture.” maybe you should look arund you, your fellow americans are trying to say its ok that they’re torturing them. I dont think they’ll support torure when its not really happening. There is proof that they are being tortured.
“hunger strike, it’s just a way for these people linked to terrorism to get attention and for people to feel sorry for them ” thats the first time I hear this definition of hunger strike. I’m sure you would be willing to die of starvation just to get some sympathy form Amnesty International.
ANd if they’re being fed and kept warm and treated so nice, I dont think they would want sympathy.
Zainab Alkhawaja
Re(2): A fair trial
Hi Zainab;
[quote]You think with reason and facts, and we don’t? Well lets look at that for a moment shall we. And after all the lies that the Americans believed and then found out to be bull, Bush gets re-elected. WMD’s, HA dont make me laugh. [/quote]
Every major intelligence agency believed Saddam had WMDs. That includes the British, Egyptian, and American, as well as some of Saddam’s own generals. While that might well be called faulty intelligence, a lie it was not.
[quote]And after all the lies that the Americans believed and then found out to be bull, Bush gets re-elected. Yes you think with reason, and we dont![/quote]
It was not the Americans who originated the “reasonable” notion that 3000 Jews did not go to work on 9-11.
[quote]You know that the polls show that many Americans think that the hijackers in 9/11 are Iraqi. What does that tell you?[/quote]
Huh? What poll would that be? Even the Saudi government acknowledged that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi.
Aliandra
Re: A fair trial
“A good portion of them were sold to the US forces when it was made clear that any Arab in Afghanistan was worth large money from the Americans.”
This was a fact that surprised me but it is true. Most of the families we spoke to in the human rights center mentioned this. Their relatives were sold to the Americans, Some were actually kidnapped form Pakistan and sold, because any arab was worth money. One of the prisoners had actually gone to Pakistan to be an arabic teacher and he had taken his wife with him, and he was kidnapped too. I dont think a “terrorist” would take his wife with him.
If you think about it, any one if us arabs, if we were in Pakistan or Afghanistan at the time, we were in danger of being kidnapped and sold to the Americans and we could be in Guantanamo now.
“You cant prove you’re not a terrorist! YOU ARE AN ARAB, then you’re GUILTY!”
Zainab Alkhawaja
Re(1): A fair trial
Zain
Loosen your hijab girl and get something to eat. The combination of no food and lack of o2 to your brain is causing your to loose rational thought. Your not PMS ing as well are you?
Re(3): A fair trial
As I explained above, virtually all Japanese on the West Coast held dual citizenship, Japanese and American. Those people who held dual citizenships with any of the countries which declared war on us, such as dual Italian and American citizens and dual German and American citizens, were also ordered relocated away from the West Coast. It was based on holding citizenship in a country making war on us. There were nearly as many dual German-American and Italian-American people relocated as dual Japanese-American citizens.
Your charges that this relocation was based on racism is based on ignorance. You have not done your homework on this issue and make these accusations out of intellectual sloth.
Steve
Re(1): A fair trial
Congratulatons! You have won the prize for cramming the most misinformation in your post of all the people on this thread.
We did not supply Osama with weapons. He is a Saudi creature. And Osama did not make much use of weapons. He was a money man who financed construction projects for the Afghan resistance. He was a conduit for the billions the Saudis routed to the Afghan mujahideen. The Americans did their business with the Pakistanis.
Likewise, you remain stubbornly uninformed about the armoring of the Humvees, which was accomplished a year ago.
The only thing you got right in your post is that Saddam likes Doritos.
Steve
A fair trial
[quote](The Bahrainee detainee at Guantanamo Bay) Juma Mohammed al-Dossary claims he was stripped naked, then humiliated by a female interrogator, who squatted nude over him and smeared him with her menstrual blood, the paper said.[/quote]
i dont believe this ..
since when are the investigators or the interrogators are prostitutes that is sick and disgusting these guys want to get out by any way .. and they will NOT they will die there because that what they deserve.
Hashem
Re: What’s fair anyway?
Mahmood;
Not sure if the news made it to Bahrain but there have been trials and jail sentences for some of the people involved Abu Ghraib.
The accounts of torture I’ve heard about Gitmo involved playing loud music, sleep deprivation, cold rooms, the mentruating woman, isolation, and stuff like that. I’ve heard no accounts of people getting electrical shocks or their limbs amputated.
Unfortunately, we do subcontract more “aggressive” interrogation techniques to countries like Egypt because it would look pretty bad if we did it ourselves. It’s an awful practice and it’s been going on for years. During the Cold War, when the Soviets had a few thousand nukes pointed at the US, the US treated some people in pretty bad ways. All very secretly, of course. When it comes to national security, all the idealistic notions about good behavior go out the airlock. We are not flawless and will act improperly when our safety is at stake.
The world was subjugating it’s own people way before Gitmo.
Aliandra
Re(2): A fair trial
🙂
Thats the best you could come up with? Come on, did you run out of good arguments?? you must have something logical to say. You’re making it too easy for me.
By the way, when it comes to discussions, insulting the other person doesn’t serve you much. It is much better if you give some information that proves what I am saying is wrong.
This way you give a bad impression of yourself, that must be why you prefer to remain anonymous.
ZainAB Alkhawaja
Re(1): A fair trial
Hey hey, calm down, there’s no reason to get rude here. You know, people can post comments here so they can state their opinion. Just because they may not be the same as yours doesnt mean you have to get mad about it.
I really hate that, “well what if it was one of your family members?” question, if one of those 520 was my father then I would care because I would be disappointed in him and mad at him for even being suspected of being a terrorist. I’ll admit, a good few of my family members have gone to prison or have done stupid things, does it mean love them less? No. Does it mean I respect them less? Yes, a lot. And don’t you dare say that because they are foreigners that I “don’t give a damn”. I care deeply for people of the world and hope that every good person can have a normal peaceful life. You shouldn’t be so ignorant in your comments and assume that I don’t know any foreigners, because I know quite a good amount. And anyway, I don’t judge someone on their nationality, but on their individuality.
I highly suspect that they are “known” terrorists because there are 520 of them. Now how many people are living in the world? That’s a pretty small number; I don’t think we just randomly picked 520 people. There are Middle Eastern people and Muslims living here (some of which my family knows) and they’ve never been questioned, detained, or anything of that sort because they aren’t doing anything to make them suspected, they’re just regular people like most of us.
About the freedom of religion thing, they do have it. Yeah, there are a few, excuse my language, assholes who work as guards there at Guantamano. Who sometimes act stupid and in turn do stupid things. Just like the guards at Abu Ghraib who took those photos. But you have to remember that those are a few individuals and do not represent the army or Guantamano personal as a whole. If the detainees didnt have freedom of religion they wouldnt be allowed to pray, celebrate Ramadan, or even [i]have[/i] a Qur’an. Just because of a flushed down Qur’an doesnt mean the whole idea of freedom of religion is flushed down with it.
All the things I’ve read and heard about the torture I’ve never heard about them physically abusing the detainees. Although, just like I stated above, a few individuals may have abused their power and done some things to the detainees. But as far as I know, the only thing remotely close to that is that supposedly a woman interrogator had something that looked like menstrual blood (it was actually red marker I think) and wiped it on one of the detainees, which is kind of gross, but far from being compared to striking a detainee.
Of course they would want sympathy, because they don’t want anyone knowing that they are part of a terrorist network. What criminal ever wants to actually be caught for his crimes? Prisoners in American prisons have it pretty good, TV, beds, warm food, all kinds of stuff, but do you really think they want to be there still? These detainees at Guantamano want any sympathy so that they might be let free, so they can return to their “friends” and continue doing their “work”.
-Ash
[url]http://ashleysthoughts89.blogspot.com/[/url]
Re: A fair trial
DIB: “If Washington were serious about the war on terror and serious about keeping the public safe, instead of MAKING it think that it is in danger, …”
We invaded Afghanistan and destroyed the Al Qaeda base of operations. That is serious. We have captured or killed two thirds of the Al Qaeda leadership. That is serious.
The American mainland has suffered no more Sep 11 attacks. Perhaps you were snoozing that day, but that attack made some of us suspect that the American public might be in danger. So did the announcements by Al Qaeda that the entire American public was a legitimate target and that they had the right, THE RIGHT, to kill two million of our children. So did the discovery of documents where Al Qaeda had cased American targets for destruction. Now why is it that you think the bloodthirsty jihadis do NOT endanger America.
I might also point out that Washington under the Bush administration has kept the public safe. No more jihadi attacks have been made on our soil. Whatever they are doing, it worked.
Steve
Re(4): A fair trial
They are being treated in accord with the Geneva Convention, even though they don’t qualify for such treatment. That rebuts your false contention that we have denied them their rights or dignity.
And I note that you make no complaint that these same terrorist scum were intent on destroying the rights and dignity of their victims. Why is your sympathy so weighted toward the killers and not toward the innocent who suffer at their hands?
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
That was uncalled for. If you have an argument with any poster’s comments or points of view, then present your arguments in a civilised form please, rather than attacking the person.
Zainab does have a very valid point of view that I share completely here. What we’re asking for is simply a fair trial for these people and we have categorically stated that should the trial be free and public and proves their guilt, then let the prisoners rot in goal.
So stay off the personal attacks please, that will keep the discussion civilised.
Re(2): A fair trial
You’re an idiot to say America supported Bin Laden. It is typical of the Middle Eastern culture of lies that you lack the manhood to accept the blame for your crimes and the Muslim criminals who commit them. We don’t respect you precisely because of this type of nonsense.
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
[quote]One more thing, would you Americans do the world a favour and stop supporting terrorists like Bin Ladin and then make us pay the price for it!
[/quote]
Bin ladin needed no one’s support. He was a self-made millionaire, who got rich in the construction business. If the middle-east could do the world a favour, and clean out the religious radicalism that creates terrorists, we would surely appreciate it. So would the Iraqis.
Re(2): A fair trial
Zainab: “Well lets look at that for a moment shall we. The Amercan public falls for the link between Saddam and his enemy Osama.”
Saddam had a relationship with Bin Laden that was hardly secret. It was published in Arabic and Western sources. Those open sources have been compiled by a young kid, Ryan Mauro, in a book, Death To America: The Unreported Battle Of Iraq.
Here is Mauro in an interview giving an overview of the Iraq-Al Qaeda relationship drawn from open sources:
“The Iraqi Intelligence Service deputy director Farouq Hijazi met with Ayman al-Zawahiri, head of Egyptian Islamic Jihad who would eventually become the second-in-command and “brains” of Al-Qaeda. According to Iraqi intelligence documents, Bin Laden “also requested joint operations against foreign forces.” It should also be mentioned that a group now closely tied to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi began cooperation with the Iraqis at this time.
“Iraqi intelligence documents seem to identify the Somalia ambush as the first incident of cooperation between Sudan, Iraq, and Osama Bin Laden. An Iraqi document signed by Saddam’s secretary shows that the regime demanded that action was made to “hunt the Americans” in Somalia using “Arabian elements, or Asian (Muslims) or friends.” The Iraqi documents list a range of groups available for participation in the operation. Muhammad Farrah Aidid, who led the ambush, even met with Iraqi intelligence in Khartoum.
“From then on, there are periodic meetings between the Iraqis and Al-Qaeda officials. Training of Al-Qaeda operatives began in 1995 as a result of meetings between the Iraqis and Abu Hajer al-Iraqi, known as Osama Bin Laden’s “best friend.” From then on, there would be a great number of meetings, participated in by many different leaders and officials of the Iraqi regime and Al-Qaeda. A stream of defectors would report cooperation between the two, as would many intelligence services.
“Cooperation from the mid-1990s up until the war steadily increased, eventually culminating in Iraqi training of Al-Qaeda members in document forgery, bomb production, WMD development, and other activity. On more than one occasion, the Iraqis would go on alert and then an Al-Qaeda terrorist attack would be attempted. Iraq would also actively work with Al-Qaeda (and Syrian intelligence) to prepare the guerrilla war we’re facing today.
“I’m aware of new evidence that Iran played a direct role in 9/11 and sponsoring Al-Qaeda and this is not contradictory. In fact, documents brought to light by Ken Timmerman show that Imad Mughniyah of Hezbollah, high-level Iranian officials, high-level Iraqi intelligence officials and high-level Al-Qaeda operatives met in Iran in October 2001. So Bin Laden relied on several avenues of support, which made sense, as this meant he couldn’t be held down by one state’s interests.”
Zainab: “WMD’s, HA dont make me laugh. And after all the lies that the Americans believed and then found out to be bull, Bush gets re-elected. Yes you think with reason, and we dont!”
Dozens of WMDs were in fact found, though not the thousands everyone believed. One of them was used to attack our troops, a binary artillery shell containing about a gallon of sarin nerve agent. The Duelfer Report found that Saddam had disposed of most of his inventory of WMD until the heat was off from inspections. His lieutenants reported that he intended to start producing them again as soon as the inspections ended. To that end he maintain a covert network of labs, found by Duelfer, to produce WMD. They also found documents of a plan to ship ricin and sarin to Europe and America in perfume bottles. Had Bush not invaded, that plan might well have been carried out.
Zainab: “You know that the polls show that many Americans think that the hijackers in 9/11 are Iraqi. What does that tell you?”
It tells me you have your facts scrambled. No Americans believe the Sep 11 skyjackers were Iraqi nor are there any such polls that do. What many Americans do believe is that Saddam may have played a role in the atrocities of Sep 11. The main reasons for that is that Czech intelligence has maintained without faltering that they saw Atta meet with Iraqi intelligence in Prague; and because an agent of the Iraqi government arranged and attended a meeting of terrorists in Kuala Lumpur with two of the Sep 11 skyjackers.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
Anon: “These men have been found guilty of nothing, nor have they been charged with anything. I find it sick that people are talking as if they are convicts. A good portion of them were sold to the US forces when it was made clear that any Arab in Afghanistan was worth large money from the Americans.”
They are illegal combatants. They don’t get a trial any more than POWs captures in war get a trial. When they decide to give up their war of terror on the West, then consideration can be made for their release.
It appears true that your Muslim brothers have sold some of you out, passing them off on us as Al Qaeda. All of those innocent and not-too-guilty people have been discovered during interrogation at Gitmo and released. Only the hard core remain.
Anon: “But hey, maybe they are lucky. They could have been shot and then burned, all of it being video taped by US forces to try and scare the locals. It would seem that the old American sport of lynching has been exported from the USA.”
You have your facts scrambled. Those Taliban were not hanged but shot in combat. Their bodies were set afire after a couple days when they began to decompose and threaten to spread disease. The decision to use the event to terrorize the terrorists appears in poor taste from my comfortable chair, but it may have made perfect sense if I had been fighting these scum for months in the mountains and seen their handiwork up close.
So far, the only lynching done has been by the people of Fallujah, hanging charred contractors from their bridge. I think your preferred sport, head cutting and snuff videomaking, is safe from American competition.
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
Zainab: “We? Steve we are not democracies, we do not support the monarchies in our countries. And we dont try to make it ok for our governemnts to torture prisoners. Thats the difference.
You, on the other hand, you’re supporting what is happening to the prionsers at Guantanamo.”
In fact, you do support your monarchies passively. Your governments are expressions of your popular character. It is not a coincidence that all the Arab countries are tyrannies. It is a choice. Arab nations tend to tyrannies. The greatest problem with fostering Arab democracies is that, given a choice, they would immediately vote themselves back into tyranny.
I support the holding of prisoners at Gitmo because: 1) They would kill innocent people if released, as some released Gitmo prisoners have already done; 2) They suffer largely from boredom, 3) and uncertainty over their fate.
Zainab: “You heard Senator Dick Durban comparing Gitmo to the Gulags, is that what you want to be compared to? Yes after alot of pressure they made him shutup but what he said cannot be erased. Well maybe he is like us middle eastern people who dont think with reason. But then what about Amnesty, who said the same. Maybe Amnesty International has been taken over by arabs filled with their prejudice.. ??”
Zainab, I’ve heard dirtbag Democrats defame America before. He shut up because he could not back up his wild talk with facts while his critics made him look like a fool with the differences between Gitmo and the Gulag. I doubt any of this reached you because Middle Eastern media only carry such wild talk that confirms their prejudices.
Amnesty International is not exactly an unbiased source, either. They have a left of center agenda as well.
Zainab: “Steve you should have sympathy for the prisoners who could be innocent, and for their families who cant do much for them. What makes you believe that all the prinosers are guilty? Since when did simply being an Arab in Afghanistan make you a terrorist?”
I have confidence in the officers that run Gitmo because I have intimate knowledge of the US military, having served in it. I know that once they examined their prisoners more closely through interrogation, it would become obvious which prisoners were clueless civilians who got caught in the big net. Dozens were so found and released. Hundreds of somewhat guilty parties were also detected, but released as harmless. Those who remain are the pure evil guys.
My reading has confirmed what I thought would happen. I have read frequently of various Gitmo military complaining that they were wasting their time interrogating some clueless mope who obviously didn’t know anything and was there by accident. I have read of several cases where officers and enlisted guys lobbied to spring a Gitmo prisoner. The only frustrating thing here is that it took a long time to spring some obviously innocent prisoners.
I know the prisoners at Gitmo will get a fair shot because I have served overseas in the military as an officer. Though it is true that we look down on foreign cultures which are corrupt and screw over their own people and foreign people who are satisfied with mediocrity and incompetence, there is no racial animus as you seem to believe. Everyone got a fair deal with us. The major problem with the locals is that many wanted more than a fair deal.
No officer is going to hold a prisoner just because he’s Arab. There’s no point to it unless he has something to offer in the way of intelligence on the enemy we face. The US military is not like Iraq’s secret police, where you get paid for torturing prisoners into false confessions. The US military rewards competence, which means focusing on the real threat and weeding out the dross.
There is a culture of fairness in the US military which may be alien to you, coming from a culture where fair play is not a virtue, where the state and every organization is predicated on pressing every advantage to the max to benefit its particular tribe or family or religion. That fairness in the US military extends to the foreign people with whom we deal. That means foreign vendors in most cases, tailors and woodcarving and welding shops in the Philippines, for example. It also means captives. The prisoners in Gitmo have gotten exactly what they deserved. The kids and innocent adults have been sprung. The evil terrorist residue remain. They do not deserve your support.
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
Shooting down the Iranian airliner was a mistake. The United States admitted that it had shot down the aircraft in error and offered to make restitution to the families. That money was paid to benefit the families, but the last I heard, the Iranian government never passed it on to them. That is what a civilized nation does when it commits a grievous mistake.
Quite frankly, you are ignorant when it comes to air combat. I have flown some 500 sorties in US Air Force fighter jets in which I have performed thousands of aerial intercepts. I can tell you from experience that it is very difficult to identify another aircraft. Errors are common. Sometimes they are whoppers. I have misidentified a helicopter as a fighter jet because the Doppler effect off its rotor blades made it appear on my radar as moving five times as fast as it really was.
In the case of the Iranian airliner, it took off from an airfield shared by the Iranian air force, which began the confusion. It emitted electrical signals that could have been from a fighter jet. And you don’t have much time to make a decision against an aerial threat. A few seconds. The crew on the Vincennes had to make a big decision with not enough info and not enough time. It was the wrong one.
Now tell me when Al Qaeda killed a bunch of civilians, admitted they were wrong, and paid restitution to the victims’ families.
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
Zainab, you are lying about what I said. I have quite specifically pointed out that the innocent at Gitmo have been sprung along with the not so innocent, while the guilty remain.
I don’t support what happenned as far as the abuses at Abu Ghraib. Neither does the military, which has investigated, tried, and convicted the offenders. That would be a good model for Arab countries to follow. Your prisons are rife with abuse that would put Abu Ghraib to shame. And I note that Iraqis prefer Abu Ghraib, run by Americans, to prisons run by Iraqis.
I might also point out that the Abu Ghraib prisoners were not exactly tortured, as you claim, unless you consider being taunted or stripped down or embarassed as torture. The prisoners of Abu Ghraib under Saddam do not, and laughed at claims that this was torture. The prisoners who were abused were all petty criminals who had done wrong to other Iraqis. For example, the prisoner who was threatened with the dog had raped a fellow prisoner, a 16 year old boy. Now I don’t condone what the guard did, but I’m not exactly upset about it either. I see a rough justice there. But I don’t think that’s the way to run a prison.
Steve
What’s fair anyway?
Reading a number of comments here from some of our American friends suggest that America has and should continue to use the same moral standards as terrorists would. If this is indeed the case then at least in my mind, the United States has descended to the same level it is fighting against and the obtuse thinking of “do what I preach not as what I do” comes into effect.
The United States of America is and should be much better than that. The United States of America has been the shining light of fairness, humanity and creativity virtually throughout its history simply by amalgamating disparate peoples who have made her their home. To me, it has now thrown all of the gains of the previous 200 years by going back on its principles.
Yes, these prisoners can in fact be as guilty as you think they are, however as there is always a chance that even one of them has been wrongly imprisoned, you bear the responsibility of proving without a shadow of a doubt that they are what you claim. And as the whole world is watching, and unfortunately emulating your processes to subjugate their own people illegitimately, the onus is on the United States of America to bring these charges and trials public to show the world that is has not in fact lost what made it once great.
Re(3): A fair trial
Forget it Steve, Zainab’s an Islamist. They all use the Gitmo stuff to talk human rights to disguise where they are coming from.
A fair trial
From a news report on Hurricane Wilma: [i]”More than 5,000 people were evacuated from eastern Cuba, where two days of rain caused floods and mudslides in the provinces of Guantanamo, Santiago and Granma.”[/i] I wonder how the detainees fared.
This story, however, was even grimmer:
[url]http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1820593,00.html[/url]
[quote](The Bahrainee detainee at Guantanamo Bay) Juma Mohammed al-Dossary claims he was stripped naked, then humiliated by a female interrogator, who squatted nude over him and smeared him with her menstrual blood, the paper said.[/quote]
Weird! If this is true, it doesn’t do the USA any favours, if it is an invention of al-Dossary, then he shouldn’t be in a prison – a mental hospital would be better. This would be pretty unpleasant for most people, but I wonder if there is a religious reason why such an action would be so utterly horrific for a Muslim detainee. Is a menstruating woman “unclean” or something?
A fair trial
Its fairly obvious that there are not going to be any public trials because those in power dont want them. I would prefer to see them happen because I think its the right thing to do and better for our country in the long run.
I cant agree though with remarks like we deliberately shot down a civilian airliner. Although Im not 100% about how this works all radar does is show a target which is then for a better word pinged for friend or foe. Its entirely possible to make an attack fighter look bigger than it is and respond as a civilian airliner. Air corodors and approach vectors are also taken into account before firing.
I was around the military for much of my life and know the morals of those in the military. People who make posts like that should watch cbs evening news where they are profiling kids killen in iraq. The one common thread they all have a highly developed sense of morals. American officers are also told they dont have to obey a unlawfull order and any military court would rule in their favor for not obeying an order to shoot down an airliner.
billT
80right80left
A fair trial
No matter if they go to trial or not these guys are being treated in a humane way compaired to american pows. Ask or read about how Americans were treated as pows in vietnam, japan, north korea or god forbid russia where they wont even admit they had any.
billT
80right80left
A fair trial
You keep telling us that they fought an Illigal war, like if there is a ligal one!
As far as I know the war that the American waged against Iraq to “LIBERATE” it, is not ligal too and it’s been opposed by the UN, so Iraqis are free to kill Americans there the way they like!
You keep crying your 3000 fellow Americans killed in 9/11 and you have all the right to do so, but don’t deny us the right to cry the hundred of thousands of innocent people butchered by the Americans in Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan and all over the warld (I’m talking about innocent civilians not combatants, innocent people that you kill in cold blood and if you want a proof, I can fill this page with 100s of photos of children, women and old people butchered by Americans)
You have the right to do what you do only because you have the power and you don’t need to justify it dear as it is unjustifyable.
Re: Is islam against Self-Harm?
For once? How come when anybody says this, it sounds like they’re gritting their teeth? It should be cause for celebration. You should be dancing in the streets when you agree with me.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
Finally, somebody from the Middle East that doesn’t fall for the Gitmo prisoner’s bogus stories. One bright light in the night.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
Anon: “I think Al Qaeda aimed to kill as many American civilians as possible because they don’t have the power to inflict damage on the US army and all know that the Americans will nuke the hell out of any nation if they feel that the conventional weapons don’t achieve their job.”
Al Qaeda publicly declared any American who paid taxes was a legitimate target. That means they publicly targeted civilians. They also claimed the RIGHT to kill two million American children. I don’t know how they could make it any clearer to you that their target is civilians.
If Al Qaeda’s intent was to attack the US military, they could have targeted any number of military bases in the northeast instead of the World Trade Center. Again, they targeted civilians.
This is in keeping with the Islamic code of warfare as written in the Koran which focused on believers vs unbelievers rather than soldiers vs civilians. The Muslims who make war on us wish to conquer us for Islam. Bin Laden’s primary demand when opening this war was for America to convert to Islam. Traditionally, in their long jihad against the West, Muslims have shown no discrimination in slaughtering civilians. It was common for them to annihilate villages of unbelievers. The current jihad is merely an extension of that long Islamic tradition.
And if we gonna nuke nations we didn’t like, there would be plenty of smoking holes around the world.
Anon: “Yes There’s a moral equivalence, except that Al Qaeda publicly announce that it targets civilians while the Americans kill civilians and then deny it, at the end of the day both kill civilians in cold blood. on top of that, I’m sure if we compared the number of civilians killed by the Americans with those killed by Al Qaeda in the last decade only, I’m sure those killed by the Americans will out number those killed by Al Qaeda.”
No, there is no moral equivalence to a suicide bomber who detonates himself in a crowd of Iraqi children and an Iraqi child who dies from the blast of an American bomb falling on an Iraqi tank parked next to his home. The Al Qaeda maniacs purposely target Iraqis to terrify them into acquiescing to their Wahhabi theocracy. America purposely strives to avoid killing civilians. Iraqis may hate infidel occupation, but they don’t want the US military to leave just yet. Many call for us to stay until Iraq is secure. There are no Iraqis begging Al Qaeda to protect them.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
[quote]
As far as I know the war that the American waged against Iraq to “LIBERATE” it, is not ligal too and it’s been opposed by the UN, so Iraqis are free to kill Americans there the way they like!
[/quote]
No they aren’t – and for exactly the same reasons that Americans don’t have the right to indefinitely detain people at Guantanamo.
There’s no moral equivalence between the US and Bin Laden and co – Al Qaeda on 911 aimed to kill as many American civilians as possible; if the Americans wanted to do the same to Somalis, Iraqis or Afghans they could have launched the ICBMs within three minutes of the first plane going into the WTC. While the US invasion of Iraq was illegal and an obvious mistake, they did a lot of good in Afghanistan getting rid of the Taliban and cleaning out Al Qaeda. They had the potential to help out Somalia but they didn’t know what they were getting into and screwed up.
Whether you agree or disagree with US policy in these countries its action isn’t motivated by amassing civilian body count scores, which is clearly what determines success or failure for Al Qaeda.
Re(1): A fair trial
Quite right. Internments and relocations in WWII were determined due to nationality, not race. Nearly half of all those foreign citizens interned and relocated were white Italians and Germans, something the race-baiters and ignorant anti-Americans neglect to mention.
Steve
Re(4): A fair trial
Pot. Kettle. Black. Now, do you wish to explain why you feel that the internment of 70,000-odd of your own citizens for no other reason that they had different colour skin than the majority of the US citizens (after all the majority of Italians and Germans that were similarly detained were non-citizens) was just?
Re(1): A fair trial
Anon: “There’s been no trial. Some of them have been formally charged, that’s all. And the tribunal’s rules of evidence are so shonky the British government insisted that none of their citizens be tried under it.”
Not quite right. The Gitmo detainees have had hearings to review their status. They have no right to a trial, no more than a legitimate prisoner of war has a right to a trial. It’s absurd to demand the same rules of evidence for a military tribunal making the decision on the imprisonment of a detainee caught on the battlefields of Afghanistan as a murderer arrested domestically. It is impossible to track the individual actions of a mass of combatants engaged in hostilities. The military tribunal is the best solution to this problem.
I might also note that the tribunals have weeded out the innocent and the minor guilty parties at Gitmo and set them free. Only the truly hard core bad guys remain at Gitmo. They should never leave. For example, one Gitmo prisoner was asked what he would do if released. His answer was that the first thing he would do is drink infidel blood.
Steve
A fair trial
I think Al Qaeda aimed to kill as many American civilians as possible because they don’t have the power to inflict damage on the US army and all know that the Americans will nuke the hell out of any nation if they feel that the conventional weapons don’t achieve their job.
Yes There’s a moral equivalence, except that Al Qaeda publicly announce that it targets civilians while the Americans kill civilians and then deny it, at the end of the day both kill civilians in cold blood. on top of that, I’m sure if we compared the number of civilians killed by the Americans with those killed by Al Qaeda in the last decade only, I’m sure those killed by the Americans will out number those killed by Al Qaeda.
Re(2): A fair trial
Anon,
You don’t know what you are talking about. We are not targeting civilians in Iraq. Besides the obvious moral problem, it doesn’t work. Killing civilians does not have any effect on the warmaking capability of a nation. It does turn popular opinion against you, as can be seen in the Iraqi hatred of the suicide bombers. The jihadis are losing their war because they made the civilian population their target. They’re stupid. We’re not.
Your history of WWII is scrambled. Japan announced no cease fire. They intended to fight on until they bled the American invasion force until we accepted their terms. They did not surrender until they were nuked. They would not have surrendered for months at least otherwise. I have explained this at length in a previous thread. Go read it and learn.
Shooting down the Iranian jetliner was a mistake which we immediately admitted, as I have mentioned before.
The bombing of the shelter in the first Gulf War occurred because the Iraqis mixed the use of the facility with military use. If you are a civilian in a country at war with the US, you are well-advised to stay clear of any military facility. You are much safer in your home than a military bomb shelter. We won’t bomb your home except by accident.
The Iraqis knew this when we started bombing at the opening of this war. They came out of their homes to watch the government facilities get bombed. They knew the US did not target them.
By contrast, Al Qaeda targets civilians to terrify them into submission. When America saw civilians standing in the opening when we bombed Baghdad, we avoided them. When Al Qaeda sees civilians standing in the open in Baghdad, they drive into them and detonate themselves. That’s a big difference.
Steve
Re(1): A fair trial
Ah, yes, the old ‘they did it first defence’. I repeat the question I asked earlier: Do you remember a time when the US at least pretended to be the bastion of freedom and justice?
Re(3): A fair trial
Bin Laden was only self-made in that he picked a rich father to be born to.
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
And yet 62% of the Japanese detained were US citizens. If it wasn’t race-based then why not detain all those US citizens that were of German or Italian descent?
Re(5): A fair trial
You are obviously ignorant of the history of this. When Japan, German, and Italy declared war on us in WWII, America interned Japanese, German, and Italian citizens. That included about 30,000 Japanese citizens who were interned in what amounted to minimum security prisons a little looser than what non-violent white collar criminals go to today. Easier than Martha Stuart’s prison.
About 100,000 people with dual Japanese and American citizenship were ordered to relocate from the West coast, where the great abundance of war production could not be defended against sabotage. This was done because of secret intercepts of radio traffic between Japanese espionage rings in California and the Japanese intelligence services and the fact that some Japanese had spontaneously aided Japanese attackers at Pearl Harbor.
Japanese immigrants to America in the early twentieth century maintained their ties to their mother country. Japanese law considered their children to be Japanese citizens. All they had to do is present their children to the Japanese embassy to register them as Japanese citizens. Virtually all Japanese parents did so. That is why nearly all people of Japanese descent in California were dual citizens of Japan and America. Their parents commonly sent them to the equivalent of Sunday schools which taught them to worship their god emperor Hirohito and to defend Japan.
The Japanese immigrant population contained some potentially troublesome people. For example, many retired Japanese military officers lived in the US and even formed a military officer retiree organization. One of their actions was to raise money and supplies for the Japanese troops carrying out the slaughter in China. There was also a large body of second generation Japanese who returned to Japan for study and came back radicalized, something akin to the radicalization of Arab students who study abroad and become radical Muslims. They were a very dangerous group.
The people with dual Japanese-American citizenship were not interned, but ordered to relocate basically to the other side of the Rocky Mountains. If they had no place to go, they could go to a relocation camp built for them. Generally, these camps were in semi-remote locations but if there were towns nearby, the Japanese-Americans living there could freely travel to those towns. About 5000 kids from the camps left them to attend college. If you snagged a job in the middle of America, you were free to leave the camp to move to your job. Food and medical care was provided free in the camps with the result that the life expectancy in them was better than American citizens outside. Some Japanese groups lobbied to keep the camps open after the war ended.
Ignorant anti-Americans confuse those Japanese citizens who were interned with those Japanese-American citizens who were relocated. They don’t understand the difference between internment and relocation and they are ignorant of the history of the two. You appear to be one of those ignorant critics.
People with dual Italian-American citizenship and German-Italian citizenship were similarly relocated. For example, the father of Joe DiMaggio, the famous baseball player, was an Italian-American citizen who fished out of San Francisco Bay. He was relocated. Some of the relocation camps for them were in Texas. The anti-Americans who falsely claim these relocations were racist acts fail to mention the Germans and Italians relocated because that would obviously defeat their bogus charge.
Now that I have explained the facts, why don’t you explain to me why, when you have made no study of this issue and are virtually completely ignorant of the facts, you choose to make bogus accusations of racism against America? What exactly drives your prejudice?
Steve
Re(4): A fair trial
Another bogus claim. The case of the Gitmo detainees continues to be examined by federal courts and their status challenged and defended by masses of lawyers on both sides. Do you anti-American critics EVER do your homework or is every one of your bogus charges just molded out of your prejudice?
I might also point out that the burden of acting legally is on the terrorists, not America. If Muslims commit crimes that are not covered by existing law, they bear the risk of an uncertain fate as the perpetrators. Its pretty crazy to castigate the victims of terror for not having law ready to apply to new categories of crime produced by Islam.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
[quote]
all know that the Americans will nuke the hell out of any nation if they feel that the conventional weapons don’t achieve their job.
[/quote]
Yeah, that’s right like they did in Vietnam and Somalia. I remember now.
You still don’t get it do you? While its wrong to kill civilians in any circumstances, there’s a huge moral chasm between trying to avoid civilian casualties in war by spending hundreds of billions of dollars developing smart weaponary in the case of the States and OBL/Zarqawi making massacring as many civilians as possible they’re objective in life. Judging by your inability to distinguish between the two sides its this moral chasm that you’ve fallen down. Have a good trip.
A fair trial
Hey Mahmood,
Well, this is a pretty “icky” topic huh? It’s hard to say what’s right or wrong because every individual’s moral standards are different; besides, whatever you say there will be people who agree and disagree. The detainees at Guantanamo Bay (there are about 520 foreign terrorist suspects being held, which isn’t really that many) are there because they are without a doubt linked to terrorist organizations around the world. I don’t think that Guantanamo Bay should be compared in any way to how prisons operate in the USA. Prisons here are used to rehabilitate criminals so they can be sent back into society and (hopefully) not cause anymore trouble. The same cannot be said about terrorists, they have shown the world that they have a mind set upon bringing fear and death around the world, and I don’t think they would change their minds so readily. That is why I see Guantamano Bay as more of an establishment to extract information and intelligence from it’s detainees on other terrorist cells and bases around the globe.
As for being given trials, I don’t really think they should be given any. It shouldn’t be seen as not following a democratic way of doing things or “not being fair” because these are [i]known[/i] people who are connected in some way to terrorism, there’s no need to even try them because they aren’t being placed in conventional prisons. They are being, as I said before, used to gain info on the terrorism network. We aren’t trying to put them through rehab; yeah, they’re locked up, but they get warm food, places to sleep, allowed to follow their religion, etc. Yeah, we interrogate them, but we do not torture. Torture does not give good answers, the person, after a while, only says what you want them to. The tactics used for gaining information are precise ways of prying into the mind of the person being interrogated, without exerting physical pain. Many of the detainees have been released too, because they are no longer needed for information and no longer a threat (I don’t think they would be let back into the “network”, or given any other assignments or information, after giving away vital info to Americans).
Guantamano Bay is just using the detainees as long as they have to, to get intelligence and deem them no longer threats. Anyway, this is the least that the people of the world can do in bringing justice to those killed in terrorism attacks and those still experiencing it; the first step to weakening the terror networks is to gain information on how they operate and what they are doing and planning. As for the hunger strike, it’s just a way for these people linked to terrorism to get attention and for people to feel sorry for them (like Amnesty International).
-Ash
[url]http://ashleysthoughts89.blogspot.com/[/url]
(P.S. Sorry for such a long comment :D)
Re(1): A fair trial
Nobody said that Egypt or the “Arab nation” is a good model for you to follow, they arn’t democracies. They dont give their own citizens rights, why would you expect them to give rights to anyone else.
There is nothing that proves that the prisoners at Gitmo are “Bin Ladins men”. Thats why fair trials are needed. If they are Bin Ladins men, then we dont want them out of prison even if the “war on America” ends. (Although it doesn’t really seem to be a war on America anymore, does it!)
One more thing, would you Americans do the world a favour and stop supporting terrorists like Bin Ladin and then make us pay the price for it!
Re(1): A fair trial
“Nothing leads me to believe that public opinion in the Middle East is based on facts or reason. Most of what I see from the Middle East leads me to believe that public opinon is based on private prejudice and that Middle Easterners will believe whatever confirms that prejudice.”
Saying that statement tells something about you, not about us. You think with reason and facts, and we don’t? Well lets look at that for a moment shall we. The Amercan public falls for the link between Saddam and his enemy Osama. WMD’s, HA dont make me laugh. And after all the lies that the Americans believed and then found out to be bull, Bush gets re-elected. Yes you think with reason, and we dont!
You know that the polls show that many Americans think that the hijackers in 9/11 are Iraqi. What does that tell you?
The statement that you made just shows your prejudice Steve.
Zainab Alkhawaja
Re(4): A fair trial
Islamist?? They all….?? Hmm I didn’t know I was part of a group. 🙂 Last time I checked I didn’t have anything stamped on my forehead.
But maybe thats your job, thats what you like doing, stamping people and putting them in groups so you don’t even have to try to understand what they are talking about.
Makes your life easier doesn’t it.
Zainab Alkhawaja
Re(3): A fair trial
I’m glad that you made it a point that you dont respect us. So now we know.
As for Bin ladin, go check your governments history. Bin Ladin is rich, but Alqaeda didn’t even need to be rich to get support and weapons from America. These weapons are what put them in power. You actually don’t need to do alot of research to reach that conclusion.
and about lacking the “manhood” to accept blame, well the problem is not that. The problem is you putting the blame on “Middle Eastern” culture, as if somehow you want to blame all of us for 9/11. That is when all this starts to get ugly and racist. I am not trying to say that you are racist but that this kind of talk is what leads to racism.
Zainab Alkhawaja
A fair trial
I miss the heady days of rants and raves on Mahmood’s site. Too bad I’ve been so quiet!
All of my points have already been made, so I’ll just reiterate the logicalities here.
1) The Geneva Conventions regarding prisoners of war state that they only apply to uniformed members of a nations armed forces. This is international law – and those who claim that it is not have not read international law.
2) Al Qaeda members are not uniformed members of a recognized nation’s armed forces. Therefore they are considered irregulars, or illegal combatants. They do not recieve the benefits of the geneva conventions.
3) The US prison at Guantanamo is by far one of the best-run and most culturally sensitive POW camps in human history. Especially considering that it does not hold legally defined POWs. Nowhere else, and in no other war will you see POW’s coddled this much, except, perhaps in the old 1960’s sitcom Hogan’s Heroes.
4) Moral equivalency is incorrect when comparing Islamic Fascists with America. Islamic Fascists use the violent verses of the Koran to justify attacks on anyone they deem as ‘unacceptable’ Kuffar. This includes anyone from non-muslims (who are always defined as Kuffar, and have been repressed by Muslims in Islamic lands for 1400 years) to actual Muslims, who are not of the correct sect. It is a dangerous, and quite racist act to assume that the terrorists do not know what they are talking about and are merely misguided politicos. That attitude comes from a cultural imperialism that presumes a set of western universal values on every culture. The Koran does not place equal value on the life of the unbelievers.
5) Terrorists target civilians. American troops do not target civilians. There is no justifiable moral equivalency between first degree murder (with intent) and negligent homicide. The Geneva convention codifies this behavior.
6) It is not logically impossible to both be a dedicated Jihadist who will murder infidels and a loving father or nice friendly person. This type of militarism is pathological stemming from religiocultural factors. It is NO different than other seemingly irreconciliable behaviors – guards that daily sent Jews to their deaths wrote long love letters to loved ones.
7) The solution to terror is the reform of Islam itself. This has been outlined before – but the choice is clear, and the world is at a terrible crossroads: Do we continue an unending war leading to the death of millions? Or do we fess up and look inward, realize that Islam has since the time of Mohammed, promoted death and killing of those who stand in Islam’s way of conquest, while at the same time providing a form of solace and succor to those who join the religion.
–Ethan
Re(3): A fair trial
Steve: Your governments are expressions of your popular character. It is not a coincidence that all the Arab countries are tyrannies. It is a choice. Arab nations tend to tyrannies.
It’s more complex than that Steve. But if you want to belive that when it comes to this we are inferior, well you go ahead. However, if you want to try to understand why it is so hard for us to become democracies, I have a list of books that are assigned in American Universities that you can read. Understanding is always more difficult.
I found it very interesting (and somewhat disturbing) that you would question Amnesty International but you wouldn’t dream of questioning the military. Especially considering the history of your military, I’m sure you’re familiar with it.
One thing I do agree with you 100% is that our states (governments) are unfair. Wont argue with you on that one. 🙂
Re(3): A fair trial
Come one now Aliandra
America doesn’t need to go in like the brits to have colonies. Take some political science classes and you will be told that most of the third world are what is now called neo-colonies. WHich actually means that they are the new type of colonies. Yes America found a smarter way to colonize, but colonizing is afterall colonizing.
I wish it wern’t, but its the sad truth.
A fair trial
Thanks Mahmood for starting these great discussions. I find myself checking your site as often as I can.
Zainab Alkhawaja
Re: A fair trial
[quote]Whilst I agree with you that a reform in Islam is needed badly, I will take issue with you saying that it will be THE solution to terrorism. Certainly, the recruitment of young suicide bombers in the name of Islam will wane – but I dont think all all terrorism/suicide bombing is religious in nature. Sampson in the temple, the japanese kamikaze pilots .. nothing to do with Islam. more – political ideology. I am sure that those political groups who want to recruit terrorists will find some other ‘ideology’ to do so … human nature hasnt changed much in years.[/quote]
There’s a difference between the Kamikaze pilots and the current crop of suicide terrorists, the primary thing being that the Kamikaze pilots attacked solely military targets by flying bomb filled airplanes into Naval ships. Kamikazes were not tempted by dreams of virgins or religious obligation – to a Kamikaze the sacrifice was for Japan and the Emperor and they gained no bonuses in the ‘afterlife’ for it. I’m not against that sort of weapon – suicide missions are part of warfare. So long as the attacks are only made against troops, and made by uniformed members of an actual army, then those things are legal, and fine by me.
Similarily, Samson wasn’t exactly a suicide terrorist in the strictest sense, he did destroy a temple with his bare hands, but that’s primarily a ‘heroic legend’ – if you want to believe that one man pulled down the pillars of Baal, then by all means, beleive that 😀
When I call for reform of Islam, I’m aimed at the ‘Jihad is a religious obligation’ verses. Kamikazes did it as a ‘heroic sacrifice’ to fight against a military enemy, not because ‘God told them to kill the infidels -wherever- you find them’ (as in the case of Jihad terror since 700 AD). Right now, most, if not all attacks aimed directly at innocent civilians are perpetrated by those with a fervent belief in Islamic theology. That has to change – and to do so, the ‘deific legality’ for spilling infidel blood -must- be removed. No human has the right to kill another and claim that God told them/allowed them to. And no God worth worship would call for the death of a human for the vacuous and overbroad reasons laid out in the Koran and Sunnah.
Re(1): A fair trial
Intellectually, what drives a human being regardless of religion to sacrifice one’s life?
It’s got to be for an important reason with a necessary incentive or reward. That reward could be any one of several things: immortality, financial benefit for those one leaves behind, or the promise of a better afterlife or indeed a better rebirth. And as religions for want of a better word blackmail their followers into laying their life to propagate those religions, you will probably find that this principle not quite unique to Islam.
Those kamikaze pilots for instance, were they not Bhuddist? Don’t Buddhist believe in the concept of rebirth? You will probably find that they have been promised, intentionally or subliminally, that they will be reborn into a better life, hence it is alright to sacrifice theirs in this one.
This is not an apology on behalf of the murdering scum regardless of their affiliation, it is a thought that has crossed my mind as I was reading your comment.
The solution then must be the removal of this perceived reward in order to stop these kinds of attacks, and as far as Islam is concerned, its leaders must come out and condemn these acts categorically and unequivocally in order to stem the tide. If these “leaders” climb their pulpits and preach that these acts are not allowed in religion, I am sure it will at least put doubts on the would be assassins and thus spare countless lives.
Re: A fair trial
I hope though that these discussions would at least allow both sides of the equation to recognise that there are more shades than just black or white.
Re(4): A fair trial
Zainab,
That’s bullshit. Al Qaeda is a product of Saudi Arabia. America did not create it. Saudi Arabia poured billions into Afghanistan through Al Qaeda. Not America. I don’t respect you because you turn the truth on its head like this, reassigning the blame to America for a purely Muslim organization like Al Qaeda when its character becomes too shameful to admit.
Al Qaeda was not much of a fighting force in the war against the Soviets. The Afghans did the fighting. The Saudis who went there mostly did the soft jobs that Afghans couldn’t do, like drive trucks. Al Qaeda’s main weapon was Saudi money, with which they built the camps and roads needed to support the Afghan fighters.
Zainab, the blame for Sep 11 begins to spread over all Muslims when I see video of them celebrating in the streets that thousands of Americans have been butchered by Muslim jihadis, when I read in translations of the Arab press writers openly jubilant about Sep 11, when I read accounts of people in Cairo privately expressing satisfaction over it, and when I see documentaries showing students in Kuwait saying America deserved it. It doesn’t get any better when I continue to read Muslims TO THIS DAY deny that Muslims perpetrated Sep 11 and forward the theories that Jews did it or we attacked ourselves. This is no local phenomenon but one that dominates the Muslim world. It inspires my contempt. Most Middle Eastern people would rather lie about this shameful slaughter than summon the courage to look America in the eye and admit the truth. Such low dishonesty and cowardice demonstrates an inferior character.
By contrast, you did not see any Americans dancing in the street when Muslims died in the great tsunami or the earthquake in Pakistan. You did not read any American journalists celebrating their deaths. What you did see is hundreds of millions of dollars of supplies sent by America to relieve their distress along with men and equipment.
That is a great difference between our two cultures. Yours comes up short on morality and decency. It’s pretty obvious that Middle Eastern culture hates outsiders, hates non-Muslims, hates, hates, hates. It is that hate which brought your suicide skyjackers to America and continues to fuel more Islamic plots of mass-murder around the world. It is a hate you should abandon and learn to accept those who live differently than you, have different values, and worship different gods.
Steve
Re(2): Is islam against Self-Harm?
Jasra,
I could feel you lurking out there, ready to launch your mockery upon me. Don’t think I don’t know you are there, even when you keep quiet.
Steve
Re(1): A fair trial
Why didn’t you say that when I argued with you?
Steve
Re(5): A fair trial
Steve
So you think its a war between cultures huh?
the decent moral culture (which is yours) and the hating terrorist murderers on the other side, (ofcourse us, the inferior race).
You should stop and think about this, dividing the world into good and evil. Thats Bin Ladins way of thinking you know. If he didn’t see you as an evil then he couldn’t have justified killing innocent Americans.
It’s exactly this way of thinking that creates terrorists!
Zainab Alkhawaja
Re(2): A fair trial
Well Steve, JJ brought up some very good points that I know are facts, for example
“US domestic governance is something most people would kill for. Which is why so many people want to emigrate to the US.”
and I liked this piece of advice, it is logical and makes sense to me : “Open your eyes and read and learn about history and how power is used, mainpulated, taken and abused. So – before you take extreme positions .. just go back in time and learn from the past.”
and its actually what I’m doing now, and I personally dont think I am taking extreme positions, I am against US foreign policy and not America. But good advice is good advice
Also I respect people who have discussions without using words such as “idiot” and such, and it helps if they don’t call my people and culture inferior.:)
(But I dont hold a grudge, if you say something that I find convincing and logical, I will surely let you know)
Zainab Alkhawaja
Re(1): Is islam against Self-Harm?
Steve!
Well said. Just like Saddam or bin Laden said before you. The Republic of Steve doth rule .. who knows, you may even get a 99.98% voter turn out!
JJ
A fair trial
Ethan ..
Whilst I agree with you that a reform in Islam is needed badly, I will take issue with you saying that it will be THE solution to terrorism. Certainly, the recruitment of young suicide bombers in the name of Islam will wane – but I dont think all all terrorism/suicide bombing is religious in nature. Sampson in the temple, the japanese kamikaze pilots .. nothing to do with Islam. more – political ideology. I am sure that those political groups who want to recruit terrorists will find some other ‘ideology’ to do so … human nature hasnt changed much in years.
Zainab ..
Your passion is charming, but also very dangerous. Whilst US foriegn policy may be described as unwise at times, I dont think your attidue of ‘black and white’ against the US will give you the whole picture. The US is today’s superpower, much like the British empire was at one time, and much like the Chinese will become one day! I think when talking to learned and devoted students of history, you will see, that in relative terms – the US is actually much less knowledgable and capable of maintaing their ‘super power’ status than the British were before them! Also – beleive it or not – US domestic governance is something most people would kill for. Which is why so many people want to emigrate to the US. The US may have been unwise in rushing to war in Iraq without really planning for peace .. (says something about the training that is needed in the US army) – but truth be told, their actions are not that out of wack with those of any super power in history who feels that their interests are being threatened!
And, quite honestly, as an Arab and a Moslem, I dont give a damn about those at Gitmo. I am not going to waste my own energy on fighting for their rights. They didnt give a damn when they were recruited into this nasty web of terrorism. They were so zealous – they thought they were doing this for God .. well, quite frankly, let God save them. If the US is not behaving with moral authroity – then that will be on the US’ conscience. Not mine. And that is the end of that.
Use wisdom Zainab. Open your eyes and read and learn about history and how power is used, mainpulated, taken and abused. Read about the role of religion – nd you will find NOTHING new in the world today that didnt exist 2 centuries ago. The only difference is that you are living in it. So – before you take extreme positions .. just go back in time and learn from the past. Beleive me, it will humble you.
JJ
Re(2): A fair trial
[quote]Those kamikaze pilots for instance, were they not Bhuddist? Don’t Buddhist believe in the concept of rebirth? You will probably find that they have been promised, intentionally or subliminally, that they will be reborn into a better life, hence it is alright to sacrifice theirs in this one.[/quote]
Just a note about this:
The primary religion of most Japanese is Shinto, which does not have a concept of the afterlife or reincarnation. The Kamikaze pilots went on suicide missions for honor and the Emperor and Japan, even though they knew they would not get anything out of the deal. Also, Buddhist teachings (though you will find much variation in them) do not forbid suicide, but they are also pacifist.
[quote]If these “leaders” climb their pulpits and preach that these acts are not allowed in religion, I am sure it will at least put doubts on the would be assassins and thus spare countless lives.[/quote]
I agree to a point, but to join the Malikian chorus, who should be the one who stands on the pulpit? A fatwa is only as good as the people who follow it, and even if Al-Azhar came out against Al-Qaeda, Hamas, or any of the innumerable permutations, how can you be sure that the upper echelons, the fanatic leaders won’t claim that they have been ‘taken over by infidels
A fair trial
I’m slowly looking at how other people and references look at this situation, particularly as to the legality or otherwise of convening some sort of tribunals to ascertain the detainees’ guilt. What I found in my brief reading so far is that this is not the question of paramount importance, but the one which is is the determination of the status of the detainees of whether they are “illegal combatants”.
This of course does not bode well to the authorities of the United States when the solitary case of Kurnaz is taken into account, and its ramifications on the some 540 people detained at Guantanamo. Further:
To my mind, regardless of the “war on terror” which I do support, some of those people held at Guantanamo might well be innocent and it is the full responsibility of the United States of America, the leader of the world, to publicly find out that this is not the case. If we continue to allow this situation to linger without voicing opposition, it would have set a world president that would ruthlessly be exploited by despots to incarcerate innocents for a very long time to come.
The solution is clear: do the honourable and right thing by publicly putting these people on trial or in a tribunal to determine whether they are in fact guilty.
There is much more material on this issue on the Amnesty International website.
Re: A fair trial
Thanks for the advice JJ.
Zainab Alkhawaja
Re(3): A fair trial
You’re taking my joke seriously, but then that’s OK. I don’t agree that some of your positions are not extreme. You seem poisoned beyond reason against America, as most Middle Easterners seem to be. When you argue that Al Qaeda is an American invention, it does not inspire respect. It’s an argument cut from the same cloth as “the Jews didn’t show up for work at the WTC on Sep 11” or “Americans are killing Iraqis to transplant their organs.” It deserves scorn.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think Arabs as people are inferior. I’ve lived too long, seen too many people, kicked around the world too much, to ever believe there is a difference in the races. You could grab an Arab kid from the Middle East, who in my opinion, doesn’t have much of a life to look forward to, and plug him into America, where he would thrive without much problem.
I do believe the flaws in your culture have created the current crisis. We would not be at odds if your culture accepted other religions, tolerated other beliefs, abandoned its foolish prejudices, and lost its love for rhetoric above reason. It is hard to think of anything more stupid than killing people over religion, but that sentiment holds sway over the Muslim world.
Beyond the threat such flaws pose for the lives of Americans, it seems to me the culture of the Middle East wastes the lives of its own people. It denies them the full lives that should be theirs for the taking. They should have control over their own lives to live as they please, think as they please, say as they please, but they give all such control to live like free men and women up to ignorant clerics and vicious strongmen rulers. It is pure waste.
Steve
Re(6): A fair trial
Zainab,
Yes, I believe this is a war between cultures, not races. When I see some rejection of Wahhabism and the nastier impulses of Islam, I will be persuaded to think of the Muslim world as something other than largely evil. You could make a good start by condemning the head-cuttings in public and turning Muslim popular opinion against them. Then take action to stop such religious murders. Have some Muslim clerics condemn them in the mosques with the same thunder with which they now endorse them.
As it is, the current crisis is a clash of cultures, a struggle between organizing nations under Sharia or in the Western liberal tradition, or more specifically, a fight between letting individuals rule their own lives as they see fit or having the state rule their lives strictly in accordance with one religion. Living under Sharia is quite obviously inferior. History demonstrates that Sharia mires its people in ignorance and poverty, punctuated by violence and war. The whole notion of religions running nations should end.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
On a theoretical level, I agree with you Mahmood – there should by now be procedures, and even new laws, in place to prosecute these men, establish their status, and then act accordingly. Emotionally, however, the truth is that as a Briton I simply do not care about the “British” detainees in Gitmo. All have histories of extremism, connections with the darkside, and suspicious trips to dodgy places. All were apprehended in places where no ordinary British citizen had any business to be. Their evident allegiance to a global religious fascist movement itself reveals them to be traitors and enemies of my country and of everything I believe in. In WWII we locked up, also without trial and in some cases for years, those British citizens who supported the Nazis. Oswald Moseley, for example, was imprisoned for three years then released on ill health grounds and kept under house arrest for a further two years – even though there was no evidence of actual treachery, beyond his political beliefs. Proven traitors were executed, sometimes after trial and sometimes summarily. We are gentler today, of course, but in some situations the stakes are so high that countries have to do what is necessary rather than what is desirable.
Re(4): A fair trial
[quote]Anon: “However, if you want to try to understand why it is so hard for us to become democracies, I have a list of books that are assigned in American Universities that you can read. Understanding is always more difficult.”[/quote]
You’ll never have a better chance than this to make your argument. Summarize the reasons and present them.
[quote]Anon: “I found it very interesting (and somewhat disturbing) that you would question Amnesty International but you wouldn’t dream of questioning the military. Especially considering the history of your military, I’m sure you’re familiar with it.”[/quote]
I am defending the US military against the biggest slanders and misperceptions. No large organization can be perfect. No good organization can become so without valid criticism. However, valid criticism of the US military is not offered in this forum very often.
The US military operates under many levels of oversight. There are many layers of command, each of which maintains a tight grip on its subordinate layers. Commanders are fired all the time for screw ups, very often for screw ups that would be ignored or swept under the rug in the business world. Each commander is strictly accountable for what happens in his unit, even for things that seem unreasonable and beyond his control. There is also a code of military law, the UCMJ, which is strictly enforced. It is overseen by the Supreme Court. Beyond that, there is political oversight by Congress and the President, which strictly spells out the military’s mission, reviews its expenditures, and appoints its generals. The US military is a very democratic institution, its agenda set in public amidst great debate by elected representatives. Also, its leadership is incorruptable.
By contrast, who oversees Amnesty International? There is no oversight mechanism to guarantee the quality of its actions and products that I can see. Can you name an Amnesty International manager who has been fired for any reason? Who sets its agenda? It is set behind closed doors by a handful of people who are not responsible to the people. These circumstances and lack of quality controls make Amnesty International an inferior organization in many respects to the US military.
While AI does continue doing good work publicizing atrocities and abuses around the world, it has given up its apolitical stance and adopted a leftist slant. For example, Amnesty International made a foolish charge that Gitmo is like the Soviet gulag, a charge it backed off under criticism and ridicule and the rebuttal of some Gitmo detainees themselves. This is not an isolated incident but rather a trend to abandoning neutrality to support the agenda of the Left.
My speculation as to why Amnesty International has politicized its products is that they are following the money. Such anti-American propaganda plays well with the Left, which is more likely to open its purse to support such nonsense. The more strident the attacks on the Left’s pet subjects, the more donations come in the mail, the nicer offices the Amnesty International can afford for its leadership, and the more first class accomodations they can make on their junkets abroad. In short, its pursuit of cash corrupts its neutral stance. The US military, by contrast, does not set its agenda nor influence its opinions by cash donations.
That said, my question for you is this: Why do you accept Amnesty International’s positions unskeptically? Perhaps you should disturb your assumptions and do so.
Steve
Re(5): A fair trial
Zainab,
Have you ever considered switching to decaffeinated coffee?
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
Nope, I don’t remember a time when America only pretended.
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
Zainab: “No interest?? what are they doing in Iraq then? Liberating?”
Actually, yes, that’s exactly what we are doing, now that we have removed Iraq as a threat to the US. We’ve liberated the Iraqis from Saddam. Now we are liberating them from what’s left of his Baathist mafia and the jihadi headcutters. We are methodically installing a democracy. The Iraqis just voted on a constitution. Really. Read the papers and see. I’m not making this up. Maybe even Al Jazeera has mentioned it.
Zainab: “America is an imperialist country, which wants to make sure that the rest of the world is backward illiterate and dysfunctional so that its easier for them conquer, or emm “Liberate”.”
Oh, please, Zainab, put down the anti-American Kool Aid. America has no colonies nor are we interested in acquiring any. What foreign countries we conquered, we set free except for those, like Hawaii, who voted to join us as a state. Those foreign countries we hold now, Afghanistan and Iraq, we intend to leave as soon as they can stand on their own. There is no desire by Americans to set up colonies anywhere in order to establish an American empire. We’ve already got a nice life here. Going anywhere else to live is a step down. There are no Americans hankering for a summer house in Baghdad.
What we would like is to establish a trade network with the rest of the world, which is not establishing an empire except in the rhetorical sense that anti-Americans prefer. It does not serve America’s interests for foreigners to be backward, illiterate, nor dysfunctional because then they don’t have any bucks to buy our stuff, nor do they make any stuff for us to buy. If you are an illiterate villager living in a mud hut in Binladenstan, Bill Gates won’t be selling you any software nor will Detroit be selling you any Ford Explorers nor will Hollywood be selling you tickets to its latest blockbuster nor will you be buying any of the latest rap albums. Poor people do not create wealth. They consume it.
It is in America’s interest for people around the world to be educated, to live well, and be productive members of stable societies. Our trade with such people benefits us both, building up the wealth of the world which makes life worth living. And really, once a guy gets a good job, a family, and a home, his enthusiasm for making mischief diminishes. He has a stake in building things up rather than destroying. That is good for the world.
However, if the local mullah convinces you that the Happy Meals at the local McDonald’s is a plot to destroy Islam and your culture and must be destroyed, that screws everything up.
Steve
Re: A fair trial
Joker,
If we were holding prisoners at Gitmo because of the way they looked, we wouldn’t have released a third of them, about 250 out of some 750 total held. Releasing the innocent is an example of that American mercy of which you seem to be unaware.
A legal combatant is one who complies with the Geneva Convention. More specifically, in the case of Wahhabi terrorists, it means that you identify yourself as a combatant by your dress, usually meaning a uniform, and target only other combatants. The Wahhabi terrorists disqualify themselves by dressing as civilians and targeting civilians. This is not something I dreamed up in my spare time but rather a set of international treaties which you can educate yourself about by clicking on the link I provided you above: “Geneva Convention”.
Steve
Re(1): A fair trial
“I note your sympathy for the terrorists at Gitmo. I also note the absence of sympathy for their victims. ”
We’ve only got the word of your leaders that they’re guilty. That’s not
good enough, cheerleader boy.
The world knows the names of the Bahrainis in that illegal torture chamber
you call Gitmo. Now name one of their victims. Name one person that any
of those Bahrainis are supposed to have killed before your brave boys
caught them in the illegal invasion of Afghanistan. You filthy hypocrite.
Anybody with a brain can see that Guantanamo Bay is your newest
installment of your School of the Americas. Anybody with a brain can
see that your kangaroo tribunals are just the updated version of your
old Star Chamber. You are nobody and nothing to lecture anyone else
about freedom.
The name “AlQaeda” means “the database”. Did you know that? The first
use of this label to describe terrorists was in the CIA database of known
terrorists. This wasn’t an organisation, just a list. This story can be
found in your own American media, cheerleader boy. Some spook came
up with the clever wheeze of saying “He’s a member of AlQaeda.” This
implied that it was more than just a list. Instantly the myth was created.
Now it’s been reified and solidified by all those Muslim fundamentalists
who want to join and until your efforts were stuck waiting in the woodwork.
A self-fulfilling prophecy – and all your own government’s work!
Americans like you come on to forums like this one and tell us that
Muslims attacked the US because they hated your freedoms. Wrong,
cheerleader boy. If freedom was an issue, then trust me, Muslims would
have gone for a target in Northern Europe, or maybe Holland. You
know, one of the places where people are much freer than in America.
America was judged once by the World Court to be a supporter of
terrorism. You have no idea why, do you, cheerleader boy? Do words
like “Savak” or “Contra” or “Pinochet” mean anything to you? Does the
name of Sister Ortiz mean anything to you?
Wherever you Americans go, you are a poison. Right now you are
supporting a dictator in Uzbekistan who suppresses dissent by
boiling dissidents alive. How long would the monarchies of the
Middle East last without American support, cheerleader boy?
How long would Rafsanjani be able to wheel and deal without
you? How long do we have to wait before your military men
stop making “military-grade” anthrax? How long before the
depleted uranium your boys use in their shells ceases to cause
hideous cancers in newborn Iraqi children – forms of cancer
and teratoid distortion that were simply never before seen in
Iraq prior to 1991? How long before Madeleine Albright changes
her mind from the position she adopted when, on a broadcast
of the American TV show “60 minutes” she said that the deaths
of approximately 500 000 Iraqi children due to sanctions was
“worth it”? How long before you stop propping up dictators?
How long before your leadership stops spraying its hypocrisy
all over an undeserving world?
You, sir, are a sanctimonious bucket of boiling shit, overflowing
with feculent nonsense. You parade your hamburger-fed,
Neocon-nurtured, hate-filled delusions on this forum like a little
toddler proudly displaying the contents of his potty for all to see.
Re(3): A fair trial
even if it is a nicety, it must be done. This to my mind is an extremely important step, if these leaders of all shades and colours come out jointly or individually banning the expenditure of life in such a manner, declare it haram, then those who crave to be cannon fodder would probably think twice about mounting such a useless exercise.
True. This is also the major difference between the Shi’a and Sunna. The Shi’a does have central figures, the “marj’a”iyah who the Shi’a look to to emulate and to follow, and these learned scholars actually talk between them as well. If a Shi’a selects who s/he wants to follow, s/he cannot just pick and choose rules and regulations from one marji’ and others from another. They would have to stick to the full interpretation of the marji’ they chose to follow. Having said that, a Shi’a can declare that he will now follow another marji’ and then abide by the the new marji’s interpretations. The majority of the Shi’a also forbid following a dead marji’ but must choose another of their own free will to follow. This ensures that the religion is always looked at with fresh eyes and interpreted necessarily within the context of the day and age.
The Sunna on the other hand are missing this phenomenon which gave rise to this fragmented approach to various issues of the religion and its interpretation. I don’t know what specification they apply to a “learned scholar” who deserves to be followed or who would even lead prayers. I hope that someone would let us know.
As this is the major problem, you are right, Al-Azhar might come out with a fatwa that might well not be followed, while some bloodthirsty warlord like bin Laden can come up with one that lays waste to centuries of knowledge and tolerance, and people will flock to him.
and now for something completely different
Mahmood, when is the next bahrain bloggers get together?
johnster
Re: A fair trial
[quote]Jasra: “… I dont think all all terrorism/suicide bombing is religious in nature. …, the japanese kamikaze pilots .. nothing to do with Islam. more – political ideology.”[/quote]
There was an element of Shinto religion involved. Peer pressure played a large role as well as societal pressures. When a commander asked a group of pilots who wanted to volunteer to be a kamikaze, any individual pilot would have lost face by not volunteering. Also, the family of a Japanese pilot who opted out of the chance to be a kamikaze would have been ostracized. Surviving Japanese kamikazes have mentioned this as real considerations in their decision.
There is also the element of ignorance. Suicide bombers are usually young men. Young men tend to bravery out of ignorance. They don’t really understand they can die or be hurt.
There was a former kamikaze pilot who immigrated to America and worked at the airplane factory where I worked. He was probably one of the kids who would have flown against the Allied invasion of Japan. Some of his coworkers asked him in jest if he would fly a kamikaze mission today. He said no, he was too chickenshit now.
[quote]Jasra: Zainab, Your passion is charming, ….[/quote]
Jasra, how come Zainab’s passion is charming but mine never is? You’re clearly playing favorites here. I intend to sulk the rest of the day because of it.
[quote]Jasra: “The US is today’s superpower, much like the British empire was at one time, and much like the Chinese will become one day!”[/quote]
Not convinced that’s true at all. The British conquered vast swaths of the world and made it into an empire, complete with British vice-roys, judges, and administrators. America won’t be doing any of that. What power we have derives from our better economic system, not from looting colonies.
While nothing is impossible, China does not strike me as a modern power nor does it seem likely to become one anytime soon. It carries a lot of baggage which stops it from being competitive. It needs a lot of reform before it can be competitive with the major powers.
[quote]Jasra: “I think when talking to learned and devoted students of history, you will see, that in relative terms – the US is actually much less knowledgable and capable of maintaing their ‘super power’ status than the British were before them!” [/quote]
I disagree, Jasra. I think the point you are trying to make is that the British are better at understanding local customs and influencing foreign people on their own terms, which is true enough. They acquired these skills through hundreds of years of administering conquered lands made into colonies which supplied raw materials to British industry.
The British Empire derived its power from an entirely different model than America derives its current superpower status. The British Empire was largely coercive in that its components were incorporated into it unwillingly and at a cost to themselves. By contrast, America’s interaction with its foreign partners for the most part is voluntary and mutually beneficial.
For example, we don’t have a colony in Africa to produce palm oil. We buy it from the Africans in a mutally benefical trade: we get palm oil, the Africans get dollars to buy finished goods. Now, an American sales representative in Africa may not acquire as much local expertise as he might have had we taken over an African country and made him administer it, but I’m convinced the price of that expertise is too high for both parties.
Our superpower status derives from our political and economic system, which requires no colonies, in which colonies are inevitably expelled from the political system. It derives from the development and constant refreshment of our own human intellectual capital, in a system which has no equal in the world.
We did not require colonies supplying raw material to develop Microsoft Windows. We did not need to send our military abroad to force reluctant foreigners at gunpoint to use it. They eagerly adopted it. They voluntarily pay for it (China excepted) because they profit greatly from their purchase. We’re not selling them opium like the British.
The power of America is based on Americans thinking up the best ideas first and making them into products fast that benefit the whole world. In this endeavor, we are very knowledgeable, much more so than those Brits you’re so fond of, and perfectly capable of maintaining our superpower status indefinitely.
[quote]Jasra: “And, quite honestly, as an Arab and a Moslem, I dont give a damn about those at Gitmo. I am not going to waste my own energy on fighting for their rights. They didnt give a damn when they were recruited into this nasty web of terrorism. They were so zealous – they thought they were doing this for God .. well, quite frankly, let God save them. [/quote]
Will you marry me, Jasra? I don’t think we will ever agree with each other more than this precious moment.
Steve
Re(1): A fair trial
Exactly so. There are red, white, and blue shades to be considered.
Steve
Re(1): A fair trial
I don’t believe the military will keep a detainee at Gitmo without cause. It may take a long time to clear a detainee because of the difficulty of proving a negative but ultimately the military is not going to waste its time on warehousing non-combatants.
I’m not convinced that all the relevant records regarding a detainee will be kept in even a top secret file that a judge could access. Some evidence will be very closely held because it would reveal the secret methods by which it was acquired.
For example, there was a case of a woman living in Washington back in the 1950s who was charged with espionage and imprisoned. She had a romantic relationship with a spy. J. Edgar Hoover stage managed her trial which civil libertarians condemned as a sham, and correctly so. The evidence was phonied up. She later wrote a book about how she had been framed and was innocent, unjustly persecuted by Hoover’s FBI.
The only problem with her story was she was guilty. The CIA had intercepted messages from her spy lover which led them back to her and her espionage activities. However, the FBI could not present the evidence because it would lead back to how Soviet message traffic was being tapped and deciphered. So they made a phony case against her and made it stick.
Now there is an interesting moral argument about whether this was bad or good, ultimately harmful or helpful. But my point is that the government was not acting out of hysteria or McCarthyism, but in an informed manner and in the public interest, despite appearances.
Some of the guys who run the military now are guys I knew twenty or thirty years ago as cadets or lieutenants. I know four guys closely who became generals in the Air Force. There are probably more I knew who are wearing stars now of whom I have lost track. Those four guys are honest, responsible, moral guys. I could walk up to any of them now, twenty years sight unseen, and put my wallet, car keys, house keys in their hands and walk away without the slightest concern. They can be trusted with any amount of responsibility. That’s not a fluke. They are products of the military’s institutions and the survivors of years of intense vetting which culled many a guy who lacked the talent, couldn’t manage his money, liked the girls too much, drank, or just made too many mistakes.
So when complete information is not available, as with the details about each individual detainee’s guilt, and is not likely to be known publicly until long after the event, my instinct is to side with the generals making the ultimate calls. I trust them.
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
Mahmoodski: “Intellectually, what drives a human being regardless of religion to sacrifice one’s life? It’s got to be for an important reason with a necessary incentive or reward. That reward could be any one of several things: immortality, financial benefit for those one leaves behind, or the promise of a better afterlife or indeed a better rebirth. And as religions for want of a better word blackmail their followers into laying their life to propagate those religions, you will probably find that this principle not quite unique to Islam.”
I think you are thinking of reasons that would make sense to you to become a suicide bomber. Those may not be the reasons that drive the real suicide bombers, who probably do not follow a rational line of thought to their suicidal destination.
If I can draw a thought from Eric Hoffers “The True Believer,” I’m wondering if the first condition for a suicide bomber, like a revolutionary, is to believe that his current existence is irreparably damaged, that it can only be salvaged by extraordinary action. Perhaps part of that consciousness of an irreparably damaged existence is brought about by media illustrations of the life in the West. The suicide bombers don’t know their life is bad until they see people whose lives are better.
Suicide bombers seem to come from places with good media penetration, Palestine, Syria, Saudi Arabia. Places with poor media penetration don’t seem to produce the volume of suicide bombers, ie Afghanistan and the Sudan.
Just an idea.
Steve
Re(1): A fair trial
Steve ..
I might consider it. Would you be willing to convert?! You can choose whether you want to be a Shia or a Sunni .. I am not fussed myself …
JJ
Re(2): A fair trial
Not much blue any more mate, or at least, not enough …
JJ
Re(2): A fair trial
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: “The world knows the names of the Bahrainis in that illegal torture chamber you call Gitmo. Now name one of their victims. Name one person that any of those Bahrainis are supposed to have killed before your brave boys caught them in the illegal invasion of Afghanistan. You filthy hypocrite.”[/quote]
The Gitmo gang are not being tortured, unless you consider too much glazed chicken as torture. In fact, the Gitmo prisoners gained, on average, five pounds in the last year. Generally, abused prisoners lose weight. Gitmo is far too busy hosting the Red Cross and congressional observers to be torturing anybody.
The Gitmo prisoners are classified as illegal combatants, not charged with murder, which they may or may not have done. Their illegal combatant status suffices to keep them behind bars.
Afghanistan hosted the Al Qaeda bases which attacked us on Sep 11. Only obtuse Muslims, of which there are many, would consider it outrageous when Muslims kill infidels in their own homeland, for the infidels to strike back. Self defense is considered by the civilized world as a legitimate casus belli. The fact that you don’t demonstrates the primitive morality of radical Muslims.
And I assure you that I am quite well scrubbed and mean everything I say. Honest, I used Coast which gives me a rather refreshing scent.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: “Anybody with a brain can see that Guantanamo Bay is your newest installment of your School of the Americas.”[/quote]
Hmmm. It looks like you’re another one of those goofballs who believes they skin innocent people alive in the School of the Americas, which is actually a command and staff school for foreign officers, much like the command and staff schools the US military runs for its own officer corps. By the way, its name was changed to the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation. Here is its catalog of courses. I don’t see anything in here about Guantanamo. Could you please ask anyone with a brain to point it out for me? I’ve misplaced mine.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: “Anybody with a brain can see that your kangaroo tribunals are just the updated version of your old Star Chamber.” [/quote]
I’m sure that any proceeding that kept Muslim terrorists behind bars might well be called a kangaroo tribunal by the likes of you. I regret to inform you that the Star Chamber is English, not American as you hoped. It doesn’t really apply to us because the tribunals, unlike star chamber proceedings, are not final, but are reviewed in federal and Supreme courts.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: “The name “AlQaeda” means “the database”. Did you know that? The first use of this label to describe terrorists was in the CIA database of known terrorists. This wasn’t an organisation, just a list. This story can be found in your own American media, cheerleader boy. Some spook came up with the clever wheeze of saying “He’s a member of AlQaeda.” This implied that it was more than just a list. Instantly the myth was created.
Now it’s been reified and solidified by all those Muslim fundamentalists who want to join and until your efforts were stuck waiting in the woodwork. A self-fulfilling prophecy – and all your own government’s work!”[/quote]
Saad Faqih, a doctor for Al Qaeda in Pakistan, agrees with you in as far as he says Saudis generally do not name their organizations. In an old Frontline interview, I remember he said that the origin of the Al Qaeda organization came when Saudi jihadis came through Bin Laden’s guest house in Peshawar and disappeared into Afghanistan, fate unknown. Saudi parents came to Bin Laden looking for their dead boys but he could tell them nothing because he kept no records. So he began maintaining a guest book to satisfy these requests. Perhaps a sixty thousand jihadis signed in.
That guest book became the basis for Al Qaeda. Of course, the overwhelming majority of them had only fleeting association with Bin Laden and were not part of his organization. The real core of Al Qaeda was probably a few hundred, maybe a couple thousand at its peak.
So part of what you said is true, part is distorted, part is wrong. The part that is wrong is that Al Qaeda was a myth, a self-fulfilling prophecy, a product of America. However, I give you credit for ingenuity in attempting to find a new way to attempt to disassociate Al Qaeda from the Muslim world which gave it birth and reassign it to America. Denying parentage of Al Qaeda appears to be a cottage industry in the Middle East, which can not bear the shame of its terrorist offspring.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: “Americans like you come on to forums like this one and tell us that Muslims attacked the US because they hated your freedoms. Wrong, cheerleader boy. If freedom was an issue, then trust me, Muslims would have gone for a target in Northern Europe, or maybe Holland. You know, one of the places where people are much freer than in America.[/quote]
In fact, Muslims have attacked or tried to attack all these places because, of course, in the Islamist view, they all must submit to Islam. Sadly, for your argument, the Islamists quite forthrightly state that freedom is not a virtue. For example, they violently reject freedom of speech where Dutch like Theo van Gogh criticize Islam. So they killed him on a city street in Amsterdam.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: “America was judged once by the World Court to be a supporter of terrorism. You have no idea why, do you, cheerleader boy? Do words like “Savak” or “Contra” or “Pinochet” mean anything to you? Does the name of Sister Ortiz mean anything to you?” [/quote]
The World Court is used by Europe to impose its foreign policy on the US through such slander. That’s why we don’t recognize it as legitimate court.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: “Wherever you Americans go, you are a poison. Right now you are supporting a dictator in Uzbekistan who suppresses dissent by boiling dissidents alive.” [/quote]
We have an agreement with Uzbekistan to operate an airfield there, not to support its government. Just because we buy a stick of gum in a country doesn’t make us responsible for everything that happens in it. We had airfields in Saudi Arabia, but that doesn’t make us responsible for Islam.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: “How long would the monarchies of the Middle East last without American support, cheerleader boy?”[/quote]
Probably as long as they did before we arrived. However, I note the absolute refusal to take responsibility for your own government and the eternal urge to blame The Other for all your ills. That’s why nothing ever improves in the Middle East.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: How long would Rafsanjani be able to wheel and deal without you? [/quote]
Huh? The idea that Rafsanjani is our boy is pretty silly. The idea that anybody running Iran is our boy is far-fetched. If these mullahs are on our payroll, I want my money back.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: How long do we have to wait before your military men stop making “military-grade” anthrax? [/quote]
The US stopped mass-producing anthrax in the 1960s. It destroyed its inventory of anthrax in 1969. That’s 31 years ago. Do you radicals ever update your propaganda or are you just playing a golden oldie here?
And if you are really incensed about mass production of anthrax, why don’t you complain about Saddam’s manufacture of it? Why do you rail against America’s discontinued and destroyed anthrax weapons while not criticizing Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, North Korea, and Cuba for their anthrax weapons?
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: How long before the depleted uranium your boys use in their shells ceases to cause hideous cancers in newborn Iraqi children – forms of cancer and teratoid distortion that were simply never before seen in Iraq prior to 1991? [/quote]
Depleted uranium is harmless except in the fevered imaginations of anti-American radicals, such as yourself. Ordinary dirt emits the same amount of radiation. Military hospitals in the US have tracked US servicemembers for years who have been wounded with DU and found no ill effects, other than those associated with big chunks of metal entering their bodies. The European Union found that you could eat or snort depleted uranium with no ill health effects.
I note that that outbreaks of cancer that Saddam’s Iraq claimed was caused by depleted uranium happenned in parts of Iraq where no combat occurred. If you believe Saddam’s propaganda that DU caused mass cancer in Iraqi children, you probably believed Baghdad Bob when he broadcast that the Iraqis were winning, that no US tanks were in Baghdad.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: How long before Madeleine Albright changes her mind from the position she adopted when, on a broadcast of the American TV show “60 minutes” she said that the deaths of approximately 500 000 Iraqi children due to sanctions was “worth it”? [/quote]
Iraqi children did not die due to the US but because the food and medicine imported in to Iraq were diverted by Saddam to the black market, the proceeds going into his pockets. Go follow the Oil For Food scandal and see how all the UN officials and various Europeans got rich from Saddam’s bribes at the expense of the Iraqi people. Lay the blame where it deserves, if you have the courage.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: How long before you stop propping up dictators?[/quote]
How long before you stop making dictators? There the only kind of government Arab Muslims put in power.
Do I take it that you support America when it takes out dictators like Saddam? Of course, you don’t.
[quote]Anonymous Muslim Radical: “How long before your leadership stops spraying its hypocrisy all over an undeserving world?”[/quote]
I just got off the phone with President Bush and he promises to direct all hypocrisy to you in the future, you being more deserving than the world at large.
Anonymous Muslim Radical: “You, sir, are a sanctimonious bucket of boiling shit, overflowing with feculent nonsense. You parade your hamburger-fed, Neocon-nurtured, hate-filled delusions on this forum like a little toddler proudly displaying the contents of his potty for all to see.”
That’s quite a vivid word picture. But do you agree with me or not?
Thanks for the laughs,
Steve
Re(3): A fair trial
Mahmood,
Here is the full quote from a visitor to Gitmo regarding your innocent Gitmo detainees who would never act on their threats:
“After speaking with soldiers, sailors, and civilians who collectively staff Gitmo, I left convinced that abuse definitely exists at the detention facilities, and it typically fails to receive the press attention it deserves: it’s the relentless, merciless attacks on American servicemen and women by these terrorist thugs. Many of the orange jumpsuit-clad detainees fight their captors at every opportunity, openly bragging of their desire to kill Americans. One has promised that, if released, he would find MPs in their homes through the internet, break into their houses at night, and “cut the throats of them and their families like sheep.â€? Others claim authority and vindication to kill women, children, and other innocents who oppose their jihadist mission authorized by the Koran (the same one that hangs in every cell from a specially-designed holder intended to protect it from a touching the cell floor – all provided at U.S. taxpayer expense). One detainee was heard to tell another: “One day I will enjoy sucking American blood, although their blood is bitter, undrinkable….â€? These recalcitrant detainees are known euphemistically as being “non-compliant.â€? They attack guards whenever the soldiers enter their cells, trying to reach up under protective facemasks to gouge eyes and tear mouths. They make weapons and try to stab the guards or grab and break limbs as the guards pass them food.”
Here is some more from the same guy in a different article:
“While we observed absolutely no evidence of torture of prisoners at Gitmo, it is clear that the daily atmosphere is rife with harsh abuse: The prisoners are constantly assaulting the guards.
“Our young military men and women routinely endure the vilest invective imaginable, including death threats that spill over to guards’ families. All soldiers and sailors working “inside the wireâ€? have blacked out their name tags so that the detainees will not learn their identities. Before that step was taken the terrorists were threatening to tell their al-Qaeda pals still at large who the guards were. “We will look you up on the Internet,â€? the prisoners said. “We will find you and slaughter you and your family in your homes at night. We will cut your throats like sheep. We will drink the blood of the infidel.â€?
“That is bad enough, but the terrorist prisoners throw more than words at the guards. On a daily basis, American soldiers carrying out their duties within the maximum-security camp are barraged with feces, urine, semen, and spit hurled by the detainees. Secretly fashioned weapons intended for use in attacking guards or fellow detainees are confiscated regularly. When food or other items are passed through the “bean holeâ€?â€â€Âan opening approximately 4 inches by 24 inches in the cell doors, the detainees have grabbed at the wrists and arms of the Americans feeding them and tried to break their bones.
“When guards enter the cells to remove detainees for interrogation sessions, medical visits, or any number of reasons, detainees sometimes climb on the metal bunks and leap on the guards. They have crammed themselves under the bunks, requiring several guards to extract them. Some have attacked unsuspecting soldiers with steel chairs. Determined to inflict maximum damage, detainees have groped under the protective face masks of the guards, clawing their faces and trying to gouge eyes and tear mouths.
“Keep in mind that our soldiersâ€â€Âyoung men and young womenâ€â€Âare absolutely forbidden from responding in kind. They are constrained to maintain absolute discipline and follow humane operating procedures at all times, at risk of serious punishment. Documents recently obtained by the Associated Press through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit show that one detainee punched a guard in the mouth, knocking out his tooth, then began to bite the MP. Several guards were required to repel the prisoner’s attack; one soldier who came to the rescue delivered two blows to the inmate’s head with a handheld radio. For this he was dropped in rank to private.
“In a different incident, an MP doused with toilet water responded by spraying the offending inmate with a hose. For this he was charged with assault. Another American soldier was disciplined for cursing at inmates. One guard punched a detainee after being struck and spit on while placing the man in restraints in the prison hospital in October 2004. (“My instincts took over after the hitting and spitting,â€? the soldier wrote in his report.) He was recommended for a reduction in rank to E-4, loss of a month’s pay, and extra duty for 45 days.
…
“Nearly all of these hardened terrorists have been well coached on how to be an American captive. Given any opportunity, they will all claim torture and human rights violations. They have been schooled on counter-interrogation techniques, on how to construct and maintain a cover story, and other subterfuges to fool or deflect interrogators.
“Some detainees, including one classified as a “high value intelligence sourceâ€? that I was able to observe, take pride in discussing their activities and capabilities with interrogators. The man I saw brags about Americans he has killed, other Muslims he has terrorized, attacks he has planned and carried out, and what he will do to the Americans if he has a chance. He is a leader, and affirms his high rank within the al-Qaeda chain. He has started or ended riotous behavior by fellow prisoners on more than one occasion.
“With twisted irony, this individual condemns prisoners who maintain silence for being “ashamedâ€? of their past. “They ought to proclaim their feats as proof of their commitment to the cause of Islam,â€? he tells interrogators, while munching continuously from a box of doughnuts provided by the interrogator. Why the doughnuts? “He throws his food at the guards,â€? General Hood says, “so he loves to eat the doughnuts during the interrogation sessions.â€? ”
How innocent would you say that guy is?
70,000 prisoners were captured on the battlefields of Afghanistan. Over 800 were sent to Gitmo. More than 200 of them have been released. Of those released, ten have resumed their terrorist careers, been recaptured while attacking American forces, or have been killed in combat. Maybe they were innocent too, and just frustrated. Maybe attacking Americans is just a form of relief.
Steve
[Modified by: Steve The American (Steve) on October 24, 2005 07:39 AM]
Re(3): A fair trial
“As God as my witness, and the United States did not put any pressure on me, I am an al Qaeda member,” said Ali Hamza Ahmad Sulayman al Bahlul, 33, of Yemen at his hearing at Gitmo, prior to his case being heard by a five member military commission, a form of trial. He started to tell how he was involved in the Sep 11 attack, but the presiding officer cut him off before he could incriminate himself further.
Now, Mahmood, do you think Ali is innocent?
Salim Ahmed Hamdan, 34, another Yemeni, served Osama Bin Laden as his driver, bodyguard, delivering weapons to Al Qaeda terrorists. He says he never supported terrorism. Should we believe and let him go? After all, he says he didn’t really support terror although he worked for Osama. Maybe he thought Osama was a Koran salesman and all those guns were for target shooting.
The remaining residents of Gitmo include al-Qaeda organizers, bomb makers, financial specialists, recruiters of suicide attackers, and hit men. Your sympathy for them is misplaced.
Steve
Re(4): A fair trial
[quote]Take some political science classes and you will be told that most of the third world are what is now called neo-colonies.[/quote]
Oh, I have my dear. And I never heard any such thing. America is looting no one in the third world. It pays for whatever it needs.
However, I would be interested in hearing your theory about this smarter American trend in colonizing. Some references for further reading would help too.
Aliandra
Re(3): A fair trial
Civilized discussion is a two way street Mahmood.
Comments like this from ZAIN are just as offensive to an American.
[/quote]”You cant prove you’re not a terrorist! YOU ARE AN ARAB, then you’re GUILTY!”[quote]
This comment is bullshit and shows a sterotypical view of Americans or feelings of other “western” nations based on starw arguements that seem to permiate the Arab world. A direct result in the lack of basic freedoms.
If this commet was even close to true the US would have expelled every Arab within its borders. It hasn’t and won’t..
Re(2): A fair trial
Destroying Al Qaeda’s base of operations in Afghanistan stopped them from launching any more big terror operations. Now they are reduced to ordinary bombings. Al Qaeda has not expanded but rather diminished down to nearly nothing. The other Islamist terror attacks around the world are not a product of Al Qaeda but rather a product of Saudi Arabian foreign policy to spread Wahhabism through terror. Osama Bin Laden is not funding the Wahhabi terror campaign in Thailand, for example. The Saudis are doing that.
We’ve dealt with one spawn of the Wahhabi indoctrination machine. Now we need to hit the head of the snake in Saudi Arabia. That’s where all this evil originates.
Steve
Re(5): A fair trial
Not only does America pay for the products of Third World nations, it very often invests considerable time and capital in showing the natives how to make those products.
For example, all the banana plantations of Latin America were built by American companies along with the associated infrastructure that formed the countries. In Thailand, McDonald’s trained farmers how to raise cattle to supply beef for their burger stores. In Russia, McDonald’s trained the locals how to grow potatoes to make good french fries and built huge potato processing plants there. And I hardly need to say what we’ve done for Saudi Arabia with its oil industry.
Where America goes, we grow business locally. That creates the foundation for a good life for the locals.
Steve
Re(4): A fair trial
Steve, there is no doubt in my mind that some of those captured, probably the majority are as guilty as hell and should be left to rot in prison for all I care.
My contention is very simple and I reiterate here once again: justice must not just be applied, but should also be seen to be the applied, ie, the onus is on the USA to show that every prisoner of those remaining at Gitmo are indeed guilty as charged publicly, or at least determine as has been set by the UDHR their status.
That is ALL that we are asking.
Re(4): A fair trial
In a situation like this Steve, I am surprised that there aren’t more dire attacks on the guards, after all, these Al-Qaeda Wahabi scum are like that, raised from birth with an ideology of hate. I am sure that transgressions from the guards happen and are probably unreported, just human nature, you cannot control every single reaction you might experience under these teneous circumstances.
I am for convicting criminals and ensuring that they serve their time prescribed by law.
However, if there is a single person of those incarcerated who might be innocent, then the onus is on the United States to find that person and set him free. One of the ways to ensure that that oversight actually happen is if there are public trials, or at least supervised by an uninterested party. When that happens and the observers are happy enough that justice has been carried fairly, then the whole world should shut up and get on with their lives.
Until then, can the United States with hand over its heart categorically say that all those jailed at Gitmo are guilty?
Re(6): A fair trial
I agree from first hand experience. In dealing almost exclusively with US companies for the last 15 years, I have been treated fairly in the vast majority of situations in dealing with them and they have been unstinting in providing detailed information on products and strategies throughout the relationship. If a disagreement happened, we always found a way to amicably resolve the problem.
Re(5): A fair trial
I still don’t see any reason to give these prisoners any more rights than legal combatants get. They can cool their heels in prison until hostilities end, which is to say, never. As I have pointed out, some 200+ Gitmo detainees have been freed after interrogations revealed they were innocent or kinda guilty but harmless or had told us all they knew.
I don’t agree that public trials would be a good thing, as it would just make more propaganda for them. Even if we tucked them into bed with feather pillows, they will claim torture and the whole Muslim world and the Left will believe it. There is also the problem of the prisoners passing info to their terror masters. For example, they may give them the guard’s names so that their families can be harmed or threatened. Also, a public trial would require us to disclose secret methods used to capture them. That’s not good.
Using a third party observer carries the same security risks with regard to threats from detainees and disclosing secret methods.
The prisoners at Gitmo are getting the same treatment that other prisoners got in previous wars, which is far better than they deserve. I just don’t agree that they deserve more consideration than a legal combatant or public review to release them. The best way to see them released is the traditional way legal combatants are released: End the war against the US.
Steve
Re(6): A fair trial
I think we have to agree to disagree on this one Steve.
While I understand and appreciate your point of view and principal you apply to this situation, mine is held just as strongly in that I believe that everyone has rights and governments must afford them these rights.
The situation in Gitmo is a very thorny one as we have seen and discussed here, however I contend that even that they might be regarded as terrorists and most can indeed be, they must be given their rights to defend their position and if there is a person within that group who is innocent, a trial of a sort that is recognised the world over can hopefully find that and consequently release that prisoner to his country and loved ones.
Re(5): A fair trial
Mahmood
What would be the point of the US holding people at GITMO who posed no threat? There is no reason to hold someone if they pose no threat OR if their “crime’ was minor in nature as to flea on the back of a camel.
Now think just what it takes to get to Gitmo. Some on this board make it sound like roaming bands of armed GI’s randomly pick people up and toss them on a plane heading for Cuba. Gitmo holds for the most part the worst of the worst. Otherwise there would be not much interest for the US to continue holding them. The US has “vetted” each one prior to his arrival and their cases are constantly being reviewed. Many have been sent home or turned over to their home nations. As noted before some have begged to stay rather than leave.
These “boys” can go home when we no longer have any use for them. Not before. Some will never leave the custody of the US and that is just too bad. A war is being waged against the US/World. A war we didn’t start. No matter what the local Arab/Muslim press propaganda machine claim or what is droned at the local Mosque.
The best hope for all of them is for the rest of the Arab/Muslim world to continue to clean up your own back yards first. Your living in a utopian dream if you think any process is perfect. And I will be the first to admit some might have been tossed to Gitmo that shouldn’t have been. Mistakes will happen no matter how good the system is. I have faith that the US will and is doing the right thing. How many in the Arab world can say they have faith in the Governments?
The real onus Mahmood is the Muslim world has to change its attitudes about the West. None of this would be going on now if it wasn’t for ANTI WESTERN attitudes in Muslim nations. Attitudes fostered and cultured by many nations and instilled into many many Mosques. Since the religion and governments are almost interchangeable in many cases this war might take a while. As a curious note what has Bahrain done to ask for the release of your nationals? And can anyone make a case that says they should be released? Other than “they being held illegally” argument. Which there aren’t.
Re: A fair trial
CIA agents are not part of the military. Traditionally, intelligence agents are considered spies when operating in hostile countries and usually do not fare well if caught. Special ops soldiers may wear untraditional uniforms or uniforms mixed with civilian clothes but they rarely go in civilian clothes completely. When they do, they are operating at great risk to themselves.
Actually, our war on Afghanistan stopped Al Qaeda quite neatly. Their base of operations there is gone. Please explain to me how that did not stop them from using their bases there from launching further attacks against us.
Religious bigotry is what led Bin Laden and his crew to hate America. You are right that this did not happen out of the blue. It is part of the murderous religious bigotry that the Muslim world has held from its inception which has led to the 1300 year long jihad against the world Muslims have been fighting. This is just the latest chapter in Muslim violence against non-Muslims, a bloody impulse that is part of the Islamic DNA.
Steve
Re(1): A fair trial
[quote]Zainab: “What planet are you living on? “only 520”. Well lets look at it this way, if one of those 520 prisoners was your father, then it would matter more to you. But the key word here is “foriegn” they are foreigners to you, so you dont give a damn!”[/quote]
If one of those prisoners was my kindly old Dad, I’d ask him why he said, “One day I will enjoy sucking American blood, although their blood is bitter, undrinkable,” like one of the detainees at Gitmo said. Now, maybe you are right, Zainab, maybe these guys are all innocent, and were just wandering around Afghanistan collecting rocks for their Boy Scout merit badges. Heck, lots of ordinary people express the desire to drink American blood, right? Right? I mean, you and your family are completely innocent of any wrongdoing and I’ll bet you all like a big mug of American blood at dinner, right? Right?
Maybe the ongoing threats by the remaining prisoners to kill their guards are also expression of innocence. Like the one detainee who promised when he was released to break into the MPs homes at night and “cut the throats of them and their families like sheep.” Why, if that’s not the voice of an innocent guy, gosh I don’t know what is. He sounds like a wonderful humanitarian. I just don’t why we don’t let guys like that loose.
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
Jasra,
Can I have some more choices, please? I think I might be a good Rastafarian. I might look good in dreadlocks.
Steve
Re(2): 1st Marriage Proposal on Mtv!
Wow, I think this is the first marriage proposal on Mtv! Wow, most excellent! 😆 I hope you both live long and prosper and can I be the best man?
Re(2): A fair trial
You might. The majority of the world question that trust because they do not see justice being done.
I’m not calling individual characters within your military as untrustworthy, none at all. From what I have seen and from the few American military people I interacted with in Bahrain I hold them in much regard, that is not the issue however, the issue is that in the very least justice does not seem to be executed, and that is as bad as justice is not done.
I recognise the security issue around making methods and methodologies public as they might endanger those still in the field, or compromise the state’s ability to retaliate or protect itself, however there must be a way to show that these prisoner are actually in the wrong. How could that be done is the big issue, but I can assure you that should the States prove that these are in fact illegal combatants as you call them, then I for one will pull back and say that may they rot where they are.
Until then, I and many others around the world will be at least suspicious of the States and its military justice system.
A fair trial
Illegal combatants or not I’d rather give them a trial as that’s what we are supposed to stand for. It looks to me like we are saying you have to sit in the back of the bus when it comes to justice. I don’t here people talking about all the murders and rapist who are freed from American prisons and rape and kill again. Is there any difference really between terrorist who kill Americans and Americans who kill Americans except that some can sit in the front of the bus when it comes to justice.
billT
Re(3): A fair trial
😆
Re(1): A fair trial
Wouldn’t it have been better containing them there? They have now literally exploded and have demonstrated how they can actually operate with impunity throughout the world, be that the Philippines, Malaysia, Bali, Saudi, Iraq, UK and the USA among others. That might have been a botched job, unpreparedness it looks like to me.
But then I agree with you, as they follow a murderous Wahabi ideology, they will continue to fight wherever they are, your irradiation of their base of operations might have slowed them down, but it had certainly not disabled them completely. Not by a long shot.
Re(2): A fair trial
Those thoughts and sayings could also be the extreme form of frustration that these people feel.
When you are wronged and you have no way of extracting at least an apology from your aggressor, don’t you get dark thoughts floating in your head? Don’t you lash out at least vocally with threats?
It’s part of human nature I think, it’s a form of relief, but it is rare that anyone would actually act on such threats.
A fair trial
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_combatant[/url]
[quote]It is likely that if they have been found to be “unlawful combatant” by “a competent tribunal” under GCIII Article 5 and they are a protected person under GCIV, that the Party to the conflict will invoke GCIV Article 5. In which case the “unlawful combatant” does not have the “rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State”. They do however retain the right “to be treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention.”
If after “fair and regular trial” they are found guilty of a crime then the “unlawful combatant” can be punished by whatever lawful methods are available to the Party to the conflict.[/quote]
If after “fair and regular trial” they are found guilty of a crime then the “unlawful combatant” can be punished by whatever lawful methods are available to the Party to the conflict.
There seems to be a difference between “a competent tribunal” which just judges if they can be held and a “fair and regular trial” which decides the punishment.
billT
Re: A fair trial
Illegal combatants are not criminal defendants. They fall under different law. Rapists and murderers fall under domestic law and are processed under that law. Combatants in war fall under international law and are processed under that law. We captured the Gitmo prisoners on the battlefield for the most part and have more than complied with the law. They have been given hearings and their status assessed. Now they are sitting out the rest of the war, just like a legal combatant would.
I don’t agree that extra legal provision should be made above and beyond the existing law to give terrorists more legal rights than legitimate combatants. That is the opposite of justice. If terrorists want the same standing as legitimate combatants, they should adhere to international law.
Steve
Re(1): A fair trial
Steve
Nice to know there is a difference between an American killing an American and a terrorist killing an American. Why are you so afraid of trying them in a court of law?
billT
Re(3): A fair trial
Steve
Although Im sure it would give them a platform and not one that I would relish giving terrorist there is one set of words I love. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal”. You say they dont deserve it because of who they are and what they have done, I say they deserve it because of what that Declaration and Constitution mean to me and many in the world.
To me there is no difference between a scum sucking American child molester and a terrorist but one gets a trial and the other doesnt which bothers me.
billT
Re(3): A fair trial
The problem is that not all of the people in Gitmo were taken on the battlefield. Many of them were taken on the word of others, on suspicion, you name it. If they were all caught “in the heat of the battle” I would buy it. But they were not. It would seem that Afghanistan, the whole country, is one battlefield eh? But what about those taken in Pakistan? Is Pakistan an open front with American troops in battle?
Then we can get into the Jose Padilla affair. The man is a born American citizen, yet he is being held as an “enemy combatant”. He was not caught with weapons, explosives, or “in the heat of battle.” This man, as an American citizen, should certainly be given a full and open trial.
If you do not think so, explain why John Walker Lindht, a young man caught in battle, was given the full rights and full trial of an American citizen? Does it have anything to do with the fact that his parents are rich and white? If not, explain why a person CAUGHT actively carrying arms against Americans is given an open trial by jury and Padilla, with circumstantial evidence, is not given the same right? How is Lindht, caught carrying arms in battle against Americans, not an “enemy combatant” and Padilla, caught with nothing, is denied the rights of an American citizen because he is an enemy combatant. Lindhts parents were able to buy a PR machine that Padilla’s family cannot afford.
I suggest the reason is because the state had a real case that it could hope to prosecute with success with Lindht, and with Padilla it doesnt have enough evidence to even bind him over with bail. He would be kicked in 48 hours in the federal or state system.
We cannot hope to give justice to foreigners in Cuba when we arent giving it to American citizens. I also suggest, because of the above, that a comparrison cannot be made with WW2 battle, because, as I have pointed out before, many of the people at Gitmo were not caught in battle. Therefor it is a question of “he said, she said” as to whether or not they are combatants at all. If they are not caught in resistance against the USA, then should they have the right to contests the evidence from which they are held? And why should they, or anyone else, trust that the US military, from which any jury would be made up, would be impartial? The same military that has been involved in murders of prisoners from Iraq to Afghanistan?
At the end of the day the sad fact is that the foreigners, the Arabs and others at Gitmo, will get no justice until we give justice to American citizens at home. The different treatment afforded Padilla and Lindht are a lesson in hypocrisy.
A fair trial
I think this is relevant to the discussion about giving everyone the same rights. The evening news is reporting that Rosa Parks died today. She lived in a dual law society and helped change America for the better.
billT
Re(6): A fair trial
We’re getting to sound like a broken record. I think we just have to agree to disagree on this one as no minds will change it seems.
I appreciate your point of view, which would have been valid to me had the United States had any credibility in this regard. It’s lost it to the majority of the world, or at least to people who oppose it in this particular situation because there is no transparency. Had there been transparency and people could be at least comforted in the knowledge by your own government, military officials or impartial observers, had the military adopted the terms and conditions of the UDHR or the other accepted conventions, then it would have been a different matter altogether.
Let me also reiterate my personal position in this matter: I don’t give a bent fils what happens to the Wahabi terrorist scum and may they rot in hell after you are done with them at Gitmo. My concern however is that if there is a single person within those 540 who are imprisoned there who happens to be innocent then you are doing a major wrong that is inexcusable.
We know the other side are scum, we know that they are terrorists, but that does not give you the right to descend to their level and use their rules of engagement as yours too. The “they did this first” does not become the great United States of America. They are thugs, the USA is not. The onus is still and for ever be on the United States of America’s shoulders to prove that who they imprison they have imprisoned rightly.
Re: A fair trial
May she rest in peace.
She has had a hand in changing the world to the better.
She will be immortal.
Re(4): A fair trial
That’s not what I said, Bill. I said they do not deserve extraordinary effort beyond the law that applies to them. We have complied with all the law that applies to them, as we should. We should not bend over backwards to give them an advantage. You and the others are advocating that we create some new legal process in addition to what stands now to deal with the fact that terrorists do not fight in accordance with the Geneva Convention. Basically, you want to create a loophole for terrorists so they get extraordinary treatment, better than soldiers who comply with the Geneva Convention from nations that recognize international agreements. Al Qaeda does not recognize such international treaties, ie man-made infidel law, and purposely targets civilians, violating the Geneva Convention. Basically, you want to give the terrorists a do-over, hoping it will make their sympathizers admire you. They won’t.
While the rights declared in our Constitution should be preserved, I disagree that terrorists should acquire the same rights and protection as American citizens by killing American citizens.
Steve
Re(4): A fair trial
Neither John Walker Lindh nor Jose Padilla were held in Gitmo, so their cases fall outside this discussion. Both are Americans, legally if not in spirit, and deserve different treatment than foreign combatants. Lindh was caught on the battlefield in Afghanistan. His case is pretty straightforward and incurred no security risk by trying him in open court. Padillo is a different case, in that he was caught largely through secret communications and other covert means. He should receive a trial, but not an open one that would reveal the secret means by which we found him out and intercepted him.
You have a point in that many prisoners were taken on word of mouth, some of which ultimately was false. The majority of those were culled out of the 70,000 prisoners we took in Afghanistan to produce the set of 800 that ultimately were sent on to Gitmo. Another couple hundred were culled out after closer examination in Gitmo. So I think we’ve done a good job at weeding out the innocent.
The innocent bystanders were more likely to be scooped up in the big net in Afghanistan. The prisoners caught elsewhere were targeted by intelligence services. They were not plucked off street corners at random but rather tracked down through covert means. The chances that they are innocent are nil.
The Gitmo prisoners have received far more justice than they deserved, far more than they ever meted out, and far more than they believe in.
Steve
Re(2): A fair trial
Why are you so intent on giving them rights no other legal combatant has? Why do you want to provide a legal escape route for them to rejoin the fight against America? Why do you want to provide terrorists a platform to spout their propaganda?
As I’ve pointed out before, the battlefield does not make a good crime scene for investigators. It is impractical to expect soldiers to collect evidence to prosecute combatants who are trying to kill them in open war. It is a terrible idea to expose secret methods used to identify and capture terrorists.
Lastly, it is just flatly a stupid idea to bend over backwards to court Arab opinion. You’re making the mistake of thinking that they will appreciate an extraordinary demonstration of fair play. They won’t, not the majority anyway. That’s not the way they think. They are simply trying to play word games to free fellow Muslims, cynically playing on our values to manipulate us into getting what they want. You don’t see them calling on Al Qaeda to free hostages, to give them a fair trial, to set them free. They only demand extraordinary concessions from America. They only demand America take the risks. They only demand America bear the burden of making things right. They never task themselves to do the right thing, to make things right, to follow the law.
Steve