/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Pres. Bush: Close Guantanamo Prison



Ar-RaYYan
04-22-2007, 03:57 PM
Assalamu Alaykum brothers and Sisters. Please could you visit the following link and sign the petition to close Guantanamo Bay prison forever. :) There is already 78,254 that have signed the petition, help them get to 100,000 inshallah .www.avaaz.org/en/close_guantanamo
Please could you also spread the word so inshallah more people can sign the petition.
jazzakallahu khair for your help:)
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
'Abd al-Baari
04-22-2007, 04:00 PM
:sl:

Just signed! :)
Jazakallah sharing the link
Reply

Chechen
04-23-2007, 10:54 AM
Just signed it! Thanks for sharing
Reply

Cognescenti
04-23-2007, 01:54 PM
Where are the "guests" going to go?

Take for eg., the Saudi nationals. What do you think would happen to them if they were "repatriated"?

How about Ramzi bin Al Shib? Do you think Pakistan wants him back?

This is the real world people.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Khan-Ghalgha
04-23-2007, 11:26 PM
Yeah guys, where all the terrorists would go? Don't tell me they would actually be charged or given a lawyer. Come on people, it's a real world with real laws.
Reply

Keltoi
04-24-2007, 01:02 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Khan-Ghalgha
Yeah guys, where all the terrorists would go? Don't tell me they would actually be charged or given a lawyer. Come on people, it's a real world with real laws.
Do you think the U.S. will put these guys in a general population prison? Human rights groups would throw a fit. These people, if found guilty, will be in a military prison, whether Gitmo or another.
Reply

Cognescenti
04-24-2007, 01:13 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Khan-Ghalgha
Yeah guys, where all the terrorists would go? Don't tell me they would actually be charged or given a lawyer. Come on people, it's a real world with real laws.
Kinda like this, oh sagacious one?


From Mike Mount
CNN
Adjust font size:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Three suspected terrorists connected with the September 11, 2001, attacks have gone before judicial panels charged with determining whether they can be detained indefinitely, the Pentagon said Monday.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the suspected 9/11 mastermind; Ramzi bin al-Shibh, another key 9/11 planner; and Abu Faraz al-Libby, a top al Qaeda planner, separately appeared before three-judge panels last week, Pentagon official said.

Called combatant status review tribunals, the hearings determine whether detainees should be classified as enemy combatants, who can be held indefinitely and are eligible for military trials.

The men are part of a group of 14 detainees who were once held in secret CIA prisons before President Bush ordered their transfers to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in September.

Al-Libby and al-Shibh attended hearings Friday, while Mohammed faced judges Saturday at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, officials said.

Pentagon officials said another high-value detainee will go through a hearing Monday. The Pentagon did not identify the detainee.

Though similar hearings have been open to the media, last week's hearings were closed to reporters and the detainees' lawyers because of fears that detainees might divulge classified information, the officials said.

The hearings lasted between two and three hours, officials said. It could be weeks before the outcomes are known because the findings must be sent to higher authorities for approval.

All 14 men transferred to Guantanamo in September were given access to military advisers who assist them during hearings but offer no legal assistance. The men are given only an unclassified summary of the evidence against them. They are allowed to call witnesses to testify on their behalf.

The Pentagon has said it would release an edited transcript of each hearing and the unclassified summary of evidence against each detainee after the hearings.

The reports will be edited to prevent the release of information that could jeopardize national security, Pentagon officials said.

The hearings for the 14 terror suspects are expected to last through April, according to Pentagon officials.


http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/03/12/git...ngs/index.html

The Congress passed a specific law authorizing the Tribunals, the SCOTUS turned down the appeal of those facing justice, and Bin al Shibh and Khaled Muhammed are having their days in court. When they are likely convicted, they will be moving to the Supermax Federal Prison in Colorado (most likely), where they will grow old or to some other garden spot for execution.

What's his face, the Australian chap, already confessed. I think he is going to Australian custody. But further down the list, there will be some real hotheads without the same paper trail who will be harder to prosecute. I ask again, what do you think would happen to a Saudi national with plausible ties to Al Quaeda who is deported from Gitmo to Saudi?
Reply

Khan-Ghalgha
04-24-2007, 01:20 AM
You talk about top 14 dudes being prosecuted, I was kinda referring to like 300-400 or more "unlawful combatants".
Actually americans choose what to do with people they capture, and there is nothing I can do to change that, yet at least
I like that - "the sagaciuos one", my english is weak, what does that mean? derived from 'saga' I assume.

What's his face, the Australian chap, already confessed. I think he is going to Australian custody. But further down the list, there will be some real hotheads without the same paper trail who will be harder to prosecute. I ask again, what do you think would happen to a Saudi national with plausible ties to Al Quaeda who is deported from Gitmo to Saudi?
How should I know, and why this question suppose to bother me?
Reply

King Solomon
04-24-2007, 06:03 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Khan-Ghalgha
You talk about top 14 dudes being prosecuted, I was kinda referring to like 300-400 or more "unlawful combatants".
Actually americans choose what to do with people they capture, and there is nothing I can do to change that, yet at least
I like that - "the sagaciuos one", my english is weak, what does that mean? derived from 'saga' I assume.



How should I know, and why this question suppose to bother me?
You do realize that those 300 would have been on trial already but THEIR LAWYERS filed petitions with the US Supreme Court to stop the trials? They have just gotten done with the petitions and the US government are ready to proceed with their case. Besides how many trials have their been on the other side? I bet Daniel Pearl wish he would have been put in a cell instead of being you know headless.
Reply

Idris
04-25-2007, 11:36 AM
Guantánamo: Symbol of US Hypocrisy.....
Reply

Keltoi
04-25-2007, 01:55 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Idris
Guantánamo: Symbol of US Hypocrisy.....
What hypocrisy is that? Would you rather they were just shot? Or better yet..beheaded? The only reason these people are still waiting for trial is because their lawyers, many of them military appointed, asked the Supreme Court to intervene. That's right, the same evil U.S. military supplies these people with legal representation who attempted to get them released through the Supreme Court. If that hadn't happened, these people would have been charged and put on trial a year ago or earlier.
Reply

MTAFFI
04-25-2007, 02:23 PM
I love how Guantanamo is such a hated thing, many would say why do you think that? I tell them this, we are apparently at war with a group or groups of people who wish to threaten the security of our country. Since we are at war, we are allowed to keep prisoners of war, is this not correct? Since this war will not be over until all of these people either stop or are killed, the people can be held until the war is over, someone correct me if I am wrong, but I dont believe that is in violation of any international laws or otherwise. The enemy chooses to behead our men whether they be military or otherwise, we choose to capture our enemies and give them trials to find if they are guilty or innocent. Since we caught them fair and square it is our right to do that, my advice, you dont wanna be in Gitmo dont put yourself in a position to be put there. DUH, LONG LIVE GITMO! :D
Reply

Khan-Ghalgha
04-26-2007, 12:49 AM
You are correct, you choose what to do with people you capture, you're in control, we can only bla bla bla about it, and do nothing as of now.

International laws proved to be a joke anyway, those vague geneva conventions, they serve no purpose, waste of paper.
Reply

Keltoi
04-26-2007, 12:51 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Khan-Ghalgha
You are correct, you choose what to do with people you capture, you're in control, we can only bla bla bla about it, and do nothing as of now.
For all intents and purposes, yes that is the case.
Reply

Khan-Ghalgha
04-26-2007, 01:06 AM
Guantánamo: Symbol of US Hypocrisy.....
Guantanomo is the symbol of US domination... in many ways
Reply

Keltoi
04-26-2007, 01:18 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Khan-Ghalgha
Guantanomo is the symbol of US domination... in many ways
More like a symbol of U.S. law. If the U.S. was as bad as foreign pop culture assumes, these people would be dead. After they were fully interrogated of course.
Reply

Khan-Ghalgha
04-26-2007, 01:33 AM
foreign pop culture assumes
It's simply precious, I get one of those "Zen moments" when I read this.
Reply

Keltoi
04-26-2007, 01:49 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Khan-Ghalgha
It's simply precious, I get one of those "Zen moments" when I read this.
I call it "foreign pop culture" because that is what it has become. I liken it to the Roswell "UFO" landing back in the 50's. Every conspiracy and mad scheme for world domination is attributed to the U.S., and there are plenty of people that soak that stuff up like a sponge.
Reply

thirdwatch512
04-26-2007, 01:52 AM
signed :)
Reply

Keltoi
04-26-2007, 01:53 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by thirdwatch512
signed :)
Why? If I might ask.
Reply

snakelegs
04-26-2007, 02:00 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Khan-Ghalgha
Guantanomo is the symbol of US domination... in many ways
to me it is the symbol of our shame
Reply

Abdul Fattah
04-26-2007, 02:00 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi
More like a symbol of U.S. law. If the U.S. was as bad as foreign pop culture assumes, these people would be dead. After they were fully interrogated of course.
So basically your defence the whole time has been "it could be worse", so It mustn't be that bad.

That's like saying, "9/11 wasn't that bad, there could have been a plane that hit the white house to, but that didn't happen, so you have no right to complain".
Obviously everyone would say I am mad if I actually meant that. But I think it illustrates my point clearly: "Just because it could be worse, doesn't mean it's ok.".

You're even amazed when your fellow Christians have signed it???
I can tell you why => human rights, morality, decency, empathy, ethics, ...
Reply

Keltoi
04-26-2007, 02:07 AM
I would be interested to know what human rights have been violated. These people were captured on the battlefield in many cases, and in others they were captured in anti-terrorism operations. Now, these people need to be charged and given a fair trial. That is underway. Guess what, when you are in a war you usually take prisoners. Do you realize how many German prisoners there were in the U.S. by the end of WWII? No, these aren't recognized POW's because they don't represent a nation-state. So what are we to do with them? I hear alot of complaints, but no alternatives. Should we just let them go?
Reply

Abdul Fattah
04-26-2007, 02:40 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi
I would be interested to know what human rights have been violated. These people were captured on the battlefield in many cases, and in others they were captured in anti-terrorism operations. Now, these people need to be charged and given a fair trial. That is underway. Guess what, when you are in a war you usually take prisoners. Do you realize how many German prisoners there were in the U.S. by the end of WWII? No, these aren't recognized POW's because they don't represent a nation-state. So what are we to do with them? I hear alot of complaints, but no alternatives. Should we just let them go?
Their trail is on the way? Yeah these guys have been hearing that for 5 years... Thruth is, hundreds of people have been taken under arrest for nothing more then speaking English in Afghanistan! Well you know, they were only interested in the Afghans that were easy to interrogate. and at the same time there's military blunders, where they have the HQ of Al-Qaida completely surrounded, except for the part that borders to Pakistan, but decided to wait one day and set up their troops in clear vision at the gates of the city. Next day to their surprise all the high up members seemed to have vanished, well better luck next time. Should you let them go? Defenitly! don't tell me it takes 5 years to press charges against someone. Either press charges or let them go. You can't just detain people for 5 years on the ground of suspicion, that is just wrong on so many levels.


I'm happy to hear that you are "interested to know what human rights have been violated". Because given that interest you probably won't have any problems reading my extensively long post explaining the different human rights that the US ignores.

United Nations Convention Against Torture
Article 1
1. Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
2. This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application.

Article 2
1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.
2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.

Article 3
1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

Article 16
1. Each State Party shall undertake to prevent in any territory under its jurisdiction other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture as defined in article I, when such acts are committed by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. In particular, the obligations contained in articles 10, 11, 12 and 13 shall apply with the substitution for references to torture of references to other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

* Section 1: torture is defined as severe pain or suffering, which means there must be levels of pain and suffering which are not severe enough to be called torture (often termed "cruel, degrading or inhumane treatment"). However, "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" is independently proscribed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 5. Discussions on this area of international law are influenced by a ruling of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on sensory deprivation.

* Section 2: If a state has signed the treaty without reservations,[1] then there are no exceptional circumstances whatsoever where a state can use torture and not break its treaty obligations. However the worst sanction which can be applied to a powerful country is the publishing of the information that they have broken their treaty obligations. In certain exceptional cases the authorities in those countries may consider that with plausible deniability that this is an acceptable risk to take as the definition of severe is open to flexible interpretation.
* Section 16: contains the phrase territory under its jurisdiction other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, so if the government of a state authorises its personnel to use sensory deprivation on a detainee in territory not under its jurisdiction then it is suggested that that government has not broken its treaty obligations.

The Convention has received new attention in the world press because of the Stress and duress interrogation techniques used on the detainees by United States military personnel, most notably at the Abu Ghraib prison and Bagram prison. The United States ratified the Convention, but declared that "... nothing in this Convention requires or authorizes legislation, or other action, by the United States of America prohibited by the Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the United States."[2]

The Convention also requires states to take effective measures to prevent torture within their borders, and forbids states to return people to their home country if there is reason to believe they will be tortured.

copy-paste from wikipedia:
Hague and Geneva Conventions

Specifically, Chapter II of the Annex to the 1907 Hague Convention covered the treatment of prisoners of war in detail. These were further expanded in the Third Geneva Convention of 1929, and its revision of 1949.

Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention protects captured military personnel, some guerrilla fighters and certain civilians. It applies from the moment a prisoner is captured until he or she is released or repatriated. One of the main provisions of the convention makes it illegal to torture prisoners and states that a prisoner can only be required to give his or her name, date of birth, rank and service number (if applicable).

Reply

snakelegs
04-26-2007, 02:51 AM
the policy of "extraordinary rendition" may very well be even more shameful than guantanamo.
if anyone is unaware of it, do a google search.
Reply

Abdul Fattah
04-26-2007, 02:55 AM
Yeah, lot's of European countrys are guilty of
Article 3
1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

The patriot act alone should be sufficient grounds for UN-countries to longer give any detainy into US custody.
Reply

MTAFFI
04-26-2007, 02:05 PM
Perhaps other people, nations and religious groups should take a look at their own gross violation human rights before they comment on the US's. I would say the US could be a model of human rights compared to those who complain about Gitmo. Take a look at yourself before you bash others
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-24-2013, 10:16 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-02-2013, 09:14 PM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-12-2008, 08:35 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-27-2006, 06:08 PM
  5. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-18-2006, 07:27 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!