[Then why have they [Prisoners in Guantanamo Bay] not been charged, tried, convicted & executed?]
IMO the answer to your question is that conviction would require death and to kill them would create such an outcry globally and in our own nation that Gitmo would have already been history. Gitmo was the only logical solution... hold them indefinitely, from effecting holocaustic Jehad, thereby denying them eventual American citizenship and rights.
22 comments
"IMO the answer to your question is that conviction would require death and to kill them would create such an outcry globally and in our own nation that Gitmo would have already been history."
"Gitmo was the only logical solution... hold them indefinitely"
"from effecting holocaustic Jehad"
"thereby denying them eventual American citizenship and rights."
Later on, Buzsaw spouts this jewel...
"Imo, the military knows better who's innocent and who's not. What would be the military's motivation for rounding up innocents?"
...but how do you know that they're genuinely conspiring to commit terrorist atrocities on American soil without having gathered evidence against them and put them on trial?
America does still have the presumption of innocence yano... well, in theory.
Great, so if the military decided you were guilty of conspiracy to terrorist activities, hauled you to a base, tortured you till you say something...anything, just to get them to stop, denied you due process, and held you years on end, denying you due process...you'd be cool with that?
Also, while the world might not like executing these people, the outcry would be far less if they were tried like anyone else would. If they were found guilty, then go from there...although I don't see what benefit would be gained from execution, as they just start telling their people that you're now SANCTIONING the killing of them, as opposed to the sanctioned torture...excuse me, "aggressive interrogation" you're using now.
1. Cheers to Old Viking
so, when the australian govenment asked them to either try or release on of their citizens, the reason they continued to hold him without charge was not because there was no evidence to charge him with anything, but because they didnt want to cause a global outcry by charging and trying an australian citizen after the australian govenment had given them permission to do so? i think i missed that step when learning about logic
So you are defending democracy and freedom by denying people right to a fair trial? Nice one there. The terrorist have allready won, since you decided to GIVE away the things that they don't want you to have, ie civil rights.
How come most of the countries in the world don't have the death penalty, and still have fewer murders thant the US?
The reason why they are kept there indefinitely is probably because there are little or no evidence to put them on trial with.
Please.
"hold them indefinitely, from effecting holocaustic Jehad,"
Sounds like you think they have them ALL locked up, mission accomplished and all.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
