Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GPS Info who wrote (190948)	7/5/2006 9:21:21 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

It would seem that it’d be a little difficult to arrange these meetings out to Gitmo, but I’m glad that they’re happening at least. The Red Cross has a permanent office at Guatanamo. Didn't know that did you? Bill O'Reilly devoted the first 30 minutes of his show last night to his visit to Gitmo and he brought up the point that not only does the Red Cross have REGULAR access to the detainees, it was the Red Cross that demanded that detainees be permitted to put a privacy curtain on the window of their cell. And because guards couldn't look into their cells to observe their welfare, 3 detainees committed suicide. But the Red Cross doesn't catch any blame for permitting these suicides to occur by denying US prison managers the ability to prevent them. Why hasn't the Media reported it before? These guys are not being mistreated. Their cells are clean, they get plenty of food. And neither are they "innocents" who just "just in the wrong place at the wrong time". And a number of detainees who have been released later were involved in Jihadist activities: Maulvi Abdul Ghaffar, captured in Afghanistan in December 2001, was one of the twenty-three prisoners released from Camp Delta in late January 2004. After his release, he joined the remnants of the Taliban and was killed in a gunfight on September 26, 2004.[54] Abdullah Mehsud, also captured in Afghanistan in December 2001 after surrendering to Abdul Rashid Dostum, masterminded the kidnapping of two Chinese engineers in Pakistan's South Waziristan region as well as returning to his position as an Al-Qaeda field commander.[55] Mehsud has also claimed responsibility for the bombing at Islamabad's Marriott Hotel in October 2004. The blast injured seven people, including a U.S. diplomat, two Italians and the Pakistani prime minister's chief security officer. Airat Vakhitov and Rustam Akhmyarov, two Russian nationals captured in Afghanistan in December 2001 and released from Guantánamo in late 2002, were arrested by Russian authorities on August 30, 2005. The two former detainees were arrested in Moscow for allegedly preparing a series of attacks in Russia. According to authorities, Vakhitov was using a local human rights group as cover for his activities.[56] en.wikipedia.org My main point was couldn’t we have put these guys in a super max prison in the first place? No... because we are war with their organization, Al Qai'da, which declared war and attacked the United States. These detainees are in legal limbo because they CHOSE not to align with a soveriegn state in conducting their activities, but a non-state organization which offers them only the most basic of protections under the Geneva convention (and then only because we choose to obligate OURSELVES to observe those rules). And because Al Qai'da has not withdrawn their declaration of war against the US, they can not be released under a peace treaty. But because Al Qai'da does not represent a soveriegn state, they are not LEGAL Prisoners of War, as traditionally represented by the Geneva Accords. Is committing an attack upon US forces a crime? Is being a member of Al Qai'da a legitimate charge that they could be convicted for under US law? These are murky legal questions that risk their being exonerated and released, and then free to recommence their activities. They haven't been tried because various legal factions are suing to prevent the military commission from deciding their fates. For some reason these people wish to extend the full protections of US law to complete foreigners sworn to destroy us. And I'm not sure if this the kind of precedent that we should be establishing. Given how much you know of foreign affairs, is there another country’s administration (e.g. an Attorney General) that agrees that Gitmo is the best place for these guys? I don't know.. you could research the comments of Afghanistan's Karzai, or Pakistan's Musharraf. But personally speaking, these guys were involved/affiliated with an organization that declared war upon the US. And international law may not be clear about how illegal combatants/terrorists should be treated, but I'm not particularly keen to see them released anytime soon.. At least not until I'm relatively sure they have been "deprogrammed" of their religious intolerances. Wath the O'Reilly factor tonight.. Last night's show was quite revealing. He actually talked to several interrogators and they were fairly open about their methods. (which jibe with my knowledge of how insurgents were handled in Iraq). Hawk