GITMO

[Liberty]

Purple,

Thanks for your service but the following is a)false and b)a calumny against all of us: "This is just as bad as what the NVA were doing to the likes of John McCain in the Hanoi Hilton."

We are not treating the prisoners at Gitmo anything like the NVA treated John McCain. We are not beating them, breaking bones, tying them into positions that cause permanent damager, not giving medical treatment or starving them. At worst, we waterboarded 3, repeat 3, prisoners. And that was the worst thing we have done. It is the only thing we have done that arguably relates to torture as historically understood.

So please let's at least get the facts right before we start making accusations.

Glad too see someone sees what is happening in a proper perspective. When they start calling having Christians handle a Koran torture you know they are being handled a lot better and with more sensitiy, than the guy we recently discussed who spent 8 months in Galveston Jail because he dared to defend himself. The guy was found to have commited no crime.

Who do you think ate better? the guys at Gitmo or the innocent guy in Galveston Jail?
Who was more likely raped?
Who was more realistically scared of of his fellow prisoners or guards.
Who eats better?

We allow the Marxist to frame the discussions and it gets ridiculous. I agree that that they need to be treated humanly.. I see very little to convince me that they aren't treated a whole lot better than our own unconvicted prisoners held for trials.

I do believe that if some are deemed to dangerous to ever be let loose that they could disappear while being transported to their homeland. What we don't know won't hurt us.

[anygunanywhere]

Those posters who insist that they do not believe in anyone losing their rights must be careful and not be convicted of a minor felony because you lose your God given rights to vote and the RKBA. Gee, I wonder when those laws were enacted. We really need to watch out for our rights.

Poor terrorists.

Anygunanywhere

[NuBer92]

is this what we should expect when Habeus Corpus is suspended for all US Citizens for the "protection" of the public in the "war on terror"

Lets just go ahead and lock up every one for no apparent reason and torture them for a few years to determine that they are nothing more than peasants defending from an invading force. what would you do.

I am not saying free all of them but we all know there are some in there that are there for the sake of being brown or speaking dirka dirka.

[Daltex1]

I think it was a mistake to close GITMO, we have now taken away one of the things our enemy fears, besides the Spectre Gunship. I just hope that when we send these guys off to their welcoming country that they lock them up and do not set them free. We all know that most prisoners from Gitmo when released return to the battlefield. Big mistake in my opinion. I think we should have had the tribunals and sentenced most of them to Death. I wonder id Obama will lock them up over on American soil if the prisoners homeland does not take them.

[Frost]

Those posters who insist that they do not believe in anyone losing their rights must be careful and not be convicted of a minor felony because you lose your God given rights to vote and the RKBA.

If we strip felons of the right to vote or carry it does not effect law abiding citizens one bit.

If habeas corpus is denied to any group then all rights can be denied to anyone by simply asserting their membership in that group.

[anygunanywhere]

Those posters who insist that they do not believe in anyone losing their rights must be careful and not be convicted of a minor felony because you lose your God given rights to vote and the RKBA.

If we strip felons of the right to vote or carry it does not effect law abiding citizens one bit.

It does affect US Citizens who are protected by the constitution and BOR.

If we deny murdering terrorists rights they never had in the first place under our constitution and BOR it doesn't effect law abiding citizens either.

Anygunanywhere

[Frost]

If we deny murdering terrorists rights they never had in the first place under our constitution and BOR it doesn't effect law abiding citizens either.

This is the only way i can think of to make my point more clear:

If habeas corpus is denied to any group(murdering terrorists)then all rights can be denied to anyone(you) by simply asserting their membership in that group(you are a murdering terrorist).

I hope that helps.

[anygunanywhere]

If we deny murdering terrorists rights they never had in the first place under our constitution and BOR it doesn't effect law abiding citizens either.

This is the only way i can think of to make my point more clear:

If habeas corpus is denied to any group(murdering terrorists)then all rights can be denied to anyone(you) by simply asserting their membership in that group(you are a murdering terrorist).

I hope that helps.

Frost, I have said the exact same thing before so I believe we are on the same page here. Way back when the three branches of the gubmint first started wiping their dirty boots on the Constitution and BOR was when we should have corrected the situation. If it had been done then we would not be worrying ourselves about being labeled terorist for our beliefs.

Should we roll over on our backs and expose our bellies beause we fear being labeled? Which is worse? Why don't we deal with the wrongs?

Anygunanywhere

[Frost]

Frost, I have said the exact same thing before so I believe we are on the same page here. Way back when the three branches of the gubmint first started wiping their dirty boots on the Constitution and BOR was when we should have corrected the situation.

OK, i agree 100% with that.

If it had been doen then we would not be worrying ourselves about being labeled terorist for our beliefs.

I am not exactly sure what you mean here.

Should we roll over on our backs and expose our bellies beause we fear being labeled? Which is worse? Why don't we deal with the wrongs?

Anygunanywhere

Do you mean we would lose the "war on terror" if we allowed people to challenge their detention?

[Rockrz]

I hate to say it, but the only way most Americans are going to understand that these terrorists are a real threat is if we get hit again, harder than we were on 9/11

Even then, most liberals believe these people are mad at us because of our policies, and if we would just be nice they would quit trying to destroy us.

Anyone who has studied islam know that the war isn't over for these people until everyone converts to islam and their sheria law (how ever you spell that) is implemented worldwide.

Even then, these folks will keep killing...only then it will be killing those muzlims that aren't serious enough about following islam (moderates)

What I'm referring to here can be easily found in their writings and in the koran, so I'm not trying to bash these folks...I'm simply taking them at their own word.

[anygunanywhere]

If it had been doen then we would not be worrying ourselves about being labeled terorist for our beliefs.

I am not exactly sure what you mean here.

If we had stopped the three branches of government from trampling on the Constitution and BOR the very first time they tried we would not be concerned with being labeled as terrorists by tyrannical government thugs.

Should we roll over on our backs and expose our bellies beause we fear being labeled? Which is worse? Why don't we deal with the wrongs?

Anygunanywhere

Do you mean we would lose the "war on terror" if we allowed people to challenge their detention?

Allow who to challenge their detention and under what basis? The terrorists? Here is where we will disagree. They were caught in the act and should be eliminated, erased, vaporized.

Anygunanywhere

[Rockrz]

They were caught in the act and should be eliminated, erased, vaporized.

Exactly...and our failure to do so is about to come back and bite us in the back side!

Especially now that our government is about to go limp on terrorism.
I wouldn't be very supprised at all if we get hit again during obama's tenure.

It would be fitting to his legacy, although very bad for the country

[Liberty]

I think we have allowed the leftist to control the discussion and the language. We allowed a little sleep deprivation, soldiers handling the Koran and a little waterboarding to be called torture. Obama is making a big deal of emptying out the Guantanomo Bay holding facilities several months from now. Guantanamo Bay naval base will still remain open BTW. The place has out lived its usefulness. President Bush would be faced with the same decision if he were to remain in office.

The question remains. "Do these people have any value to us?" Some may still have valued information. We should use what ever means we have to get this information. out of them. They may have some value to their families We could trade them them for something like Osama's head. If we determine they have no value we can return them to the Iraqi or Afghani tribesman who might have some unresolved issues with them. Unless they are directly involved in terrorism. There is no reason to clog up our court systems the Afghani and Kurdish Tribesman will be glad to handle the trial and punishment details for us. It only gets complicated when when we try to take care of details ourselves.

I dare say that these people even the so called tortured ones were better taken care of than the unconvicted in our own Texas Jails. They are cleaner, better fed, and protected from other prisoners. I find it paradoxial that we fuss about how the terrorist are treated. When or own unconvicted are allowed to be raped and beaten in our system. I' just can't accept that being raped is OK while waterboarding to save American lives is unacceptable.

Just my thoughts.

[anygunanywhere]

Nicely played, Liberty.

Anygunanywhere

[Frost]

If we had stopped the three branches of government from trampling on the Constitution and BOR the very first time they tried we would not be concerned with being labeled as terrorists by tyrannical government thugs.

Allow who to challenge their detention and under what basis? The terrorists? Here is where we will disagree.

Anygunanywhere

I must confess it is hard to understand your position. It will likely take much more discussion for us to come to a meeting of the minds if we are both willing to endure it. My understanding is now that you believe the power to arbitrarily detain anyone is an appropriate power of the state, but we have simply allowed the wrong people to wield that power. If we had better bureaucrats we would not need to fear them labeling the wrong people.

They were caught in the act...

If they were caught in the act. That is a question of fact that we must have a just process to determine which respects the natural, god given, inalienable and self-evident rights of all people.