ISIS Militant Who Suicide Bombed Iraqi Forces Was A Released Gitmo Detainee

[kallend 2,156]

airdvr

*********Do you ever stop to wonder how YOU would feel if you (or a loved one) were caught up in a "sweep", imprisoned without trial for years in shitty conditions, and tortured?

What would be your feelings towards your captors?

You assume innocence. I make no such assumption.

It's not an assumption. We know there are innocent people in Guantanamo.


Any proof?

That they haven't been found guilty is all the proof that is needed. This isn't a fascist state (yet).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

airdvr

***Do you ever stop to wonder how YOU would feel if you (or a loved one) were caught up in a "sweep", imprisoned without trial for years in shitty conditions, and tortured?

What would be your feelings towards your captors?

You assume innocence. I make no such assumption.

You do realize that presumption of innocence until guilt is proven is one of the basic rights in the BOR, right?

You do realize that the detainees were put in Gitmo (on Cuban soil) to deliberately evade the idea that the rights laid out in the BOR would apply to them, as would happen if they were on US soil, right?

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[gowlerk 2,277]

airdvr

***BHO did not have control over all the D members. He was blocked by fearful congress people of both parties.

I wonder why they were fearful?

Mid-term elections I would imagine. Fear mongering and pandering is very popular in the USA.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[jakee 1,599]

airdvr

*********Do you ever stop to wonder how YOU would feel if you (or a loved one) were caught up in a "sweep", imprisoned without trial for years in shitty conditions, and tortured?

What would be your feelings towards your captors?

You assume innocence. I make no such assumption.

It's not an assumption. We know there are innocent people in Guantanamo.


Any proof?

There are still prisoners there who were cleared for release years ago after complete review of their cases so yeah, there's proof.

Where is your proof that every single past and current inmate at Guantanamo was a genuine enemy combatant?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[airdvr 210]

Quote

That they haven't been found guilty is all the proof that is needed. This isn't a fascist state (yet).

OK. You guys had 8 years to close GITMO. Why didn't it happen?

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[airdvr 210]

jakee

************Do you ever stop to wonder how YOU would feel if you (or a loved one) were caught up in a "sweep", imprisoned without trial for years in shitty conditions, and tortured?

What would be your feelings towards your captors?

You assume innocence. I make no such assumption.

It's not an assumption. We know there are innocent people in Guantanamo.


Any proof?

There are still prisoners there who were cleared for release years ago after complete review of their cases so yeah, there's proof.

Where is your proof that every single past and current inmate at Guantanamo was a genuine enemy combatant?

I'm not the one claiming innocence.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[airdvr 210]

gowlerk

******BHO did not have control over all the D members. He was blocked by fearful congress people of both parties.

I wonder why they were fearful?

Mid-term elections I would imagine. Fear mongering and pandering is very popular in the USA.

That's one possibility. Another might be classified information showing something different.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[kallend 2,156]

airdvr

Quote

That they haven't been found guilty is all the proof that is needed. This isn't a fascist state (yet).

OK. You guys had 8 years to close GITMO. Why didn't it happen?

You have a very short memory, it must explain many of your posts.

Congress. (as Quade posted less than an hour ago).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[jakee 1,599]

airdvr

***************Do you ever stop to wonder how YOU would feel if you (or a loved one) were caught up in a "sweep", imprisoned without trial for years in shitty conditions, and tortured?

What would be your feelings towards your captors?

You assume innocence. I make no such assumption.

It's not an assumption. We know there are innocent people in Guantanamo.


Any proof?

There are still prisoners there who were cleared for release years ago after complete review of their cases so yeah, there's proof.

Where is your proof that every single past and current inmate at Guantanamo was a genuine enemy combatant?

I'm not the one claiming innocence.

No shit, Sherlock. You're the one claiming that every single past and current Guantanamo inmate was an enemy combatant. Where is your proof?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kallend 2,156]

airdvr

***************Do you ever stop to wonder how YOU would feel if you (or a loved one) were caught up in a "sweep", imprisoned without trial for years in shitty conditions, and tortured?

What would be your feelings towards your captors?

You assume innocence. I make no such assumption.

It's not an assumption. We know there are innocent people in Guantanamo.


Any proof?

There are still prisoners there who were cleared for release years ago after complete review of their cases so yeah, there's proof.

Where is your proof that every single past and current inmate at Guantanamo was a genuine enemy combatant?

I'm not the one claiming innocence.

Since when are people required to prove their innocence in US jurisdictions (civil or military)?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[airdvr 210]

kallend

***

Quote

That they haven't been found guilty is all the proof that is needed. This isn't a fascist state (yet).

OK. You guys had 8 years to close GITMO. Why didn't it happen?

You have a very short memory, it must explain many of your posts.

Congress.

The New Yorker article I posted doesn't agree. You must have reading comprehension problems perfesser.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[ryoder 1,590]

airdvr

Quote

That they haven't been found guilty is all the proof that is needed. This isn't a fascist state (yet).

OK. You guys had 8 years to close GITMO. Why didn't it happen?

You know you could google this yourself: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1356/text
Just search the page for "Guantanamo".

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Lawndarter 3]

airdvr

I wonder why they were fearful?

Ignorance, mostly, and being in a the position of trying to dispose of a complete absurdity in the American justice system, the worst outcome of which we've just seen and those who study radicalization and insurgency would find utterly unsurprising.

[billvon 3,121]

>I wonder why they were fearful?

Because the right wing excels in sowing fear.

[gowlerk 2,277]

billvon

>I wonder why they were fearful?

Because the right wing excels in sowing fear.

And because it's easier. Fear is our most basic emotion. Some believe it is our only emotion and that all others are based on controlling it. Doing the right thing based on higher principles is hard. Pandering to fear is simple, and almost always a winning strategy. And Gitmo is and was filled with boogeymen. Scary boogeymen, and Muslim boogeymen at that. Just too easy to sell.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[aphid 0]

kallend

Since when are people required to prove their innocence in US jurisdictions (civil or military)?

Pardon the interruption, but I must respond to that specific question.

Both US Customs & Border Protection and US Border Patrol demand proof(s) regularly. Far exceeding issues of legitimate national security that the average US citizen likely thinks/believes.

[JerryBaumchen 1,469]

Hi Bill,

Quote

Because the right wing excels in sowing fear.

Last night FRONTLINE did a story on one former GITMO prisoner. He was very afraid of just about everything.

People supporting what this country did at GITMO should have watched it.

Jerry Baumchen

[ryoder 1,590]

Something else Gitmo defenders should read.
The account of a US soldier who was assigned to be an undercover prisoner at Gitmo, and was left with brain damage from the beatings: http://articles.latimes.com/2004/jun/16/nation/na-baker16

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Phil1111 1,186]

wolfriverjoe

******Do you ever stop to wonder how YOU would feel if you (or a loved one) were caught up in a "sweep", imprisoned without trial for years in shitty conditions, and tortured?

What would be your feelings towards your captors?

You assume innocence. I make no such assumption.

You do realize that presumption of innocence until guilt is proven is one of the basic rights in the BOR, right?

You do realize that the detainees were put in Gitmo (on Cuban soil) to deliberately evade the idea that the rights laid out in the BOR would apply to them, as would happen if they were on US soil, right?

IMO not EVERYONE in Gitmo or who has been released from there is innocent. BUT this is a classic example of how the setting aside of basic human rights. Combined with politicians avoiding responsibilities, avoiding actions that might "cost them their political careers". Could create a monster, a criminal, where none existed before.

The US Supreme court was absent in its duty to rule on this matter. When the entire process of US law, the constitution, basic human rights, were tossed out the door. Buy using the whole "not on US soil" Gitmo process. All for political expediency.

Bush, Obama, the US military high command for looking the other way, the US Supreme court for looking the other way. All have responsibility. Ronald Fiddler aka, Jamal Udeen al-Harith aka, Abu-Zakariya al-Britani received compensation for what he went through. He could have stayed in the UK and lived comfortably.

There is a picture of him in the link below, presumably in his suicide car. Its easy to brand him as getting what he deserved in the end. But that absolves all those who shepherded him through the pens of the slaughterhouse to his death. Those who prodded him with the cattle prods on his journey by avoiding responsibility, avoiding actions that protects human rights.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-britain-militant-idUSKBN1611A8

Lots of blame all around.

IMO IS, Boko-Haram and Al-Qaeda members past present and future should be tried, fairly, timely and if found to be a member. They should never be freed.

"Islamic State militant Amar Hussein says he reads the Koran all day in his tiny jail cell to become a better person. He also says he raped more than 200 women from Iraqi minorities, and shows few regrets.

Kurdish intelligence authorities gave Reuters rare access to Hussein and another Islamic State militant who were both captured during an assault on the city of Kirkuk in October that killed 99 civilians and members of the security forces. Sixty-three Islamic State militants died."
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-mosul-prisoners-idUSKBN15W1N0

Oh and without derailing this thread too much. But along the same lines of "Bush, Obama, the US SENATE & House for looking the other way, the US Supreme court for looking the other way. All have responsibility. " aforementioned.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/mexican-man-kills-deported-time-article-1.2979233


SAD all around.

[sonnyblu 0]

kallend

Do you ever stop to wonder how YOU would feel if you (or a loved one) were caught up in a "sweep", imprisoned without trial for years in shitty conditions, and tortured?

There have been plenty of people falsely imprisoned for 5,10, 20+ years, some even on death row. When they are finally released, I'm sure they're are relieved and cherish time with their family. They may be angry at the system and even file lawsuits like normal people.

What they typically don't do is start committing the crimes of which they were initially accused. They don't start killing people and blowing themselves up.

Tho I can't necessarily agree with how things may have been handled at Gitmo, This recent suicide bombing more accurately suggests that perhaps officials there were on to something. Maybe they knew something that we didn't, something they couldn't prove.

I know we can't just take the government at their word when it comes to the guilt of another human - the system just doesn't work like that, nor should it.

But as an aside, if you knew somebody was 100% guilty of murder, but got away with it for whatever reason - is it morally wrong to seek justice outside of the law?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

But as an aside, if you knew somebody was 100% guilty of murder, but got away with it for whatever reason - is it morally wrong to seek justice outside of the law?

Killing OJ would still get you sent to jail.

And how exactly was he initially accused of committing a suicide bombing?

[jakee 1,599]

Quote

Tho I can't necessarily agree with how things may have been handled at Gitmo, This recent suicide bombing more accurately suggests that perhaps officials there were on to something. Maybe they knew something that we didn't, something they couldn't prove.

??

Officials at Guantanamo had nothing to do with the reasons the inmates were there, they were in charge of keeping them locked up and beating the crap out of them.

And if the people who processed his release knew something we didn't, then why was he released? Being able to proving he was a bad guy wasn't a concern for them, getting around that annoyance was why they stashed them in Cuba to begin with.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

sonnyblu

There have been plenty of people falsely imprisoned for 5,10, 20+ years, some even on death row. When they are finally released, I'm sure they're are relieved and cherish time with their family. They may be angry at the system and even file lawsuits like normal people.

What they typically don't do is start committing the crimes of which they were initially accused. They don't start killing people and blowing themselves up...

While those sort of things do happen, and are a travesty of justice, at least those defendants had their "day in court."

They also had the right of appeal and humane treatment (well, mostly anyway).

Gitmo detainees have none of these.

They don't even have a legitimate status. The term "enemy combatant" was made up for them. They have none of the rights of POWs, nor those of civilian detainees.

The excuse was given that as terrorists, they were neither civilians nor soldiers. So they didn't fit those categories.

Unfortunately, the Geneva Convention covers civilian irregulars (partisans or guerrillas).

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[kallend 2,156]

sonnyblu

***Do you ever stop to wonder how YOU would feel if you (or a loved one) were caught up in a "sweep", imprisoned without trial for years in shitty conditions, and tortured?

There have been plenty of people falsely imprisoned for 5,10, 20+ years, some even on death row. When they are finally released, I'm sure they're are relieved and cherish time with their family. They may be angry at the system and even file lawsuits like normal people.


How many were systematically tortured and beaten? Is waterboarding common in US prisons?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Phil1111 1,186]

Like the old saying goes. You can pay me now or you can pay me later.

Gitmo Inmates Settlement: Why Britain Decided to Pay
By Nick Assinder / London Thursday, Nov. 18, 2010

There is always a price to be paid for keeping secret intelligence secret. On Tuesday, the British government paid it by agreeing on a compensation settlement with 16 Guantánamo Bay detainees — all but one who are now free — who claim they were tortured during their time in captivity. And according to speculation by the British media, that price — which is confidential — is anywhere between £5 million ($8 million) and £10 million ($15 million), with at least one of the alleged victims set to be made a millionaire as a result. But that hefty sum also buys the U.K. the guarantee of confidentiality in its controversial dealings with Guantánamo prisoners — and may even have avoided a rift with U.S. Intelligence agencies.

Few were surprised by the news of the payment. After the previous Labour government's failed attempts to stop sensitive intelligence from U.K. and U.S. agencies being disclosed in court during cases brought by the detainees, it was likely that the current coalition would go for a settlement instead — Prime Minister David Cameron announced in July that there would be a full inquiry into the allegations, probably to start by the end of the year, once all legal proceedings had ended. In February, an appeals court ordered the release of CIA information held by MI5 and MI6 relating to one detainee, Binyam Mohamed, who claims he was tortured before being flown to Guantánamo Bay.
(See pictures of Guantanamo's last days.)

Mohamed, a British resident held at the prison from 2004 until last year, was first arrested in Pakistan in 2002 and handed over to the U.S. before being moved to Morocco and then Afghanistan on his way to Guantánamo. He claims he was abused in Pakistan under the supervision of U.S. agents and tortured after being "rendered" to Morocco, where he also alleges Britain's MI5 fed questions to his Moroccan interrogators via the CIA.

Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke told parliament on Tuesday: "The alternative to any payments made would have been protracted and extremely expensive litigation in an uncertain legal environment in which the government could not be certain that it would be able to defend security and intelligence agencies without compromising national security." He added that no admission of culpability had been made. Whitehall sources have estimated the cost to the government of continuing to fight the court cases — which were launched in 2008 — could have amounted to some £30 million ($50 million).

In the short term, the alleged potential damage to the security services' operational secrecy and reputation posed by the release of thousands of secret documents has been averted. Labour's former Foreign Secretary David Miliband stressed at the time of the original court appeal in February that U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had warned that security cooperation between the two countries would be harmed if the information provided to Britain in secret were made public by the court.

In the longer term, ministers now plan to introduce a law ensuring such information will in future only be seen in secret hearings and not shown to interested parties and their lawyers. And the settlement has cleared one of the last obstacles to a full judicial inquiry into the torture allegations and Britain's role in the extraordinary rendition of suspects — with some alleging that the U.K. sometimes acted as a refueling stopover for U.S. security services moving suspects to other countries for torture.

But Britain's move has also strengthened demands for the U.S. to allow judicial scrutiny of torture allegations against its own intelligence services. So far, the U.S. courts have rejected all attempts on the grounds that government agencies and officials have immunity from such civil lawsuits, as well as on national security grounds.

"The Obama Administration continues to shield Bush-era torturers from accountability in civil proceedings by blocking judicial review of their illegal behavior," said Steven Watt, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, in a statement on Tuesday. "To date, not a single victim of the Bush Administration's torture program has had his day in a U.S. court. The U.S. can no longer stand silently by as other nations reckon with their own agents' complicity in the torture program."

In the U.K. there was some consternation over the payouts, with Labour MP Ian Austin complaining in parliament that the detainees are getting "more money than victims of terrorism here in London." Compensation for victims of the July 7, 2005 bombings — which so far has reached £11 million ($18 million) — is capped at a maximum of £500,000 ($800,000) per person.

But others, including many in the opposition Labour party, seemed resigned to the fact that the decision had followed a hard-headed and realistic assessment of the relative damage that would be caused by the two available courses of action: fight through open court or execute a tactical retreat. "No one likes this outcome but it was probably the lesser of two evils and the government did what it had to," says one senior Labour backbencher, who asked not to be named.

Having paid a heavy price, ministers will now be hoping that the majority will agree and a line can finally be drawn over this most damaging of affairs. "
http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2032004,00.html