Prove it and by the evidence then sentence them.

Could you please explain the implication of the term "probably" here.

It is even better, you even do not give **** for law and order, it seems. What you promote is pure anarchy, tyranny, arbitrary use of force and arbitrary justice.

To make this clear: I ASSUME that a majority of the inmates at Guantanamo were caught for some valid reason, and that a share of these are danergous men indeed. But that is an assumption only that I need to prove within a reasonable timeframe. To delay the evidence until the end of time and by doing so claiming that the lack of evidence proving their innocence serves as evidence for their guilt - that is just cheating, an illegal shortcut, an abuse - the easy path towards the dark side of the force. ;)

GUILT MUST BE PROVEN.

P.S. Most likely, the needed laws to lock terrorists are already there, it is just that our courts in Europe and probably also America are quite shy to use these to their full meaning, and that there are too many escape holes in laws by which suspects can legally escape or delay proceedings, and pledge for reduced penalties. These holes must be shut, no matter how liud the human rights bridgade is yelling over that. We have a perverted culture of seeing the perpetrator's interests not only as equal to the interests of the victims, but often even rate his interests higher, and spend more media publicity for him then for the victims. As perverse as I see this, I think the solution cannot be to throw all law and order over board and just act arbitraily ion behalf of rumours and hear-say. That would be AT LEAST as bad as the situation we have right now.

Maybe Europeans know this better by bad experience, than Americans. IKn America you some lame MacCarthism, and that was it regarding your experiences with police states and dictatorships. European people since centuries have been plagued by these things so very much more than you.

Even less understanmdable it then is how carelessly we trade our freedoms and rights away then, and welcome back totalitarianism and tolerate the intolerant. So when obviously we have not learned anything from our longer and darker histories over here, maybe then you Americans have not missed any needed lessons at all when having skipped them. So - scratch what I just wrote. :)

Prove it your self otherwise.
Do you have access to all investigation files?

People get locked away with trials as well.
If one of those terrorists turned out to be innocent or not after a trial everybody would be wining that US government frames inocent peaple.
Just like dictators do.
Especially when lot of data about methods of investigations and way of obtaining intelligence could not be released to public.
There is always something to rant about.

Guantanamo probably will be moved away to more "constitutional" partner country at the end.
Those things always been done and will be done but kept away from all too sensitive public.
That is until next time something happened and everyone will be wining about how come that this or that person wasn't locked away as a
known jihadist.

Once again MH fails to even grasp the issue, this isn't about locking up terrorists or alledged terrorists, the issue is purely one of a specific facility which was contraversialy created for a claimed specific purpose and for specific reasons.
It is being shown to not be achieving that purpose and is delivering results which are counter to the reason for its existance. And to make matters worse it turns out that in the main it has not ever really being used for the purpose it was created for.
All the justifications for this facility are crumbled which is why people like you and Tater are trying to justify it with irrelevant nonsense which has nothing to do with the actual issue at all.
You still attempt to justify it purely because you blindly think that you must.

Which might be....?

Nonsense, we've alreadly let many go that were deemed innocent. Our entire system is based on innocent until proven guilty. It's common for people to get swept up on a battlefield. I understand our soldiers often can't determine who is fighting and who is not. Many men there carry and own guns...just like we do... That's why we have trials, to prove guilt or innocense.

Dictators just lock people up and throw away the key with due justice. It's hard to preach freedom and rule of law to those you invaded, then lock people up with no chance of due process.

Good

If US stays in Afghanistan simply to teach them western perception freedom then well...its waste of time lives and money.
Freedom teaching is a myth.
Your freedom is mostly blasphemy for average village Afgan.

So you are attempting to defend something without knowing what it is.
I did wonder how you could keep putting forward arguements that were so irrelevant.
Does that make your blind cheerleading for the facility really blind blind cheerleading?

lol


I like the "blind" world you use a lot.
You really must have seen the light.:up:

You have just abandoned the basic fundament of your country's legislation and legal codes of all Wetsdern civilisation: presumption of innocence. And that is what makes YOU the outlaw now.

And the files - well, do you have them all? Or have you just chosen to blindly believe in what you want to be true? Blind trust is a dangerous thing.

That is no excuse. Wikileaks claims that one quarter of the arrested people have been innocent, and one half have been guilty, but on a low level of guilt, by far not justifying to put them aside from the law. They were what in German is called "Mitläufer", I still have not learned a satisfying English equivalent for the term. Only one quarter of the arrested men were indeed that highly dangerous terrorists that was claimed ALL inmates were. Wikileaks also has publoished documents showing by what hilarious constructions the US tried and still tries to hide the innocence of people and keep the claim of their guilt alive, so that the overall system would not need to be put in doubt. If this material has been supressed in American media, check the German press. :smug:

Ah - otheres shall clean the mess you are responsible for? No deal, man. When inmates are harmless, take them yourself,l you then have nor argument not to do so. And when they are dangerpous, have the decency and moral grace to deal with them yourself. You threw the party and had all the drinks, now clean your kitchen - yourself.

That is no excuse to willingly accept them happening, and not to correct them where being revealed they go wrong.

Ah, now it is not about legal rules, and rule of law, and law and order - now it is abvout people not liking the abandoning of law and order just being too sensitive. What's next? Calling them slightly mentally deranged? Being near a nervous breakdown? Mimosas that cannot stand the good ol' cowboy way of having a nice lynching party?

I agree that our laws are being abused, and allow too many escape holes, and allow too many exceptions from the rules. That is becasue there is too many laws already, and too many lobbied special laws - and the whole thing being so chaotic already that nobody can overwatch it anymore.

Repair the laws then. What you advocate is: policestate's arbitrary justice, and anarchy, becasue it seems to be the easier way to chose. But that is just as bad.