Gitmo remains open

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Hardly, just stating to close it down without a plan was not to bright and from the looks of it...Congress agrees it was not to bright to state that.

It was not bright from the very beginning to create a legal vacuum.

I missed that one...can you provide a link?

Media and press throughout Europe. Germany. Britain. Italy. Spain. Don't tell me that US media ignored it that completely so that you never took note of it.

Some innocents still left? Perhaps. So instead of Baghram we should send them to say, the Bahamas? Much nicer there. Three hots and a cot near the beach? Sweet! Anything else?

Save your sarcasm for making yourself happy in lonely moments. It is a principle in any legal system worth the name that guilt must be proven instead of just being claimed, and that this must be acchieved within a reasonable timeframe and by procedural rules countercontrolled by independent and/or public institutions. If you will to skip that, you are not any better than the GeStapo, who acted the very same way like you, and even did so on basis of formally more valid laws than Bush did when chosing that mistaken path that now your country is rightfully attacked for. Not too mention that you open gate, door and window for a culture of diffamation replacing laws and justice, and a culture of mobs in the street lynching people arbitrarily. Evidence for guilt is no longer needed if the public accepts that just the claim for somebody being guilty is enough. that is totally unacceptable.

Bring the prisoners to court, and make them subject to your regular, publicly known laws. That alone is acceptable. anything else is in no way different than the legal system in the GDR, in Saddam's Iraq, or in any other tyranny on the planet - you are not any different to them.

Note that in earlier threads I did not oppose things like torture or imprisonment of terrorists in priciple. I just insist on this being done on basis of public consensus and according changes to existing laws being made, and this still being open to countercontrol by the system of checks and balance that are the very and totally indispensable basis of any national community worth to be desacribed as being just, and democratic.

And please nobody here now distracting again by telling me that America is not a democracy but a republic. It is a democratic republic - or is it a republic like North Korea? China? GDR? If america by design and intention was not meant to be a democratic state, then the term obviously has no more any meaning.

[AVGWarhawk]

You last 4 paragraphs make me chuckle Skybird....I'm sure you are aware of the pot calling he kettle black?

[Skybird]

Again, keep your sarcasm for yourself. Trying to make fun of others does not hide your lack of arguments. If you accept your nation to behave like any given tyranny in some banana republic, do not wonder that you get compared to that. Arbitrary justice is when the legal system is beyond control and observation, and not basing on known and commonly accepted law. That also is one of the most common characteristic of injust regimes and dictatorships.

And that is what is the case in Guantanamo. From the very beginning.

[AVGWarhawk]

What sarcasm? You of all people in the country you are in have the colossal gaul to bring up Gestopos? You can hardly compare the two friend. 250 would be terrorists do not compare friend. Also, what argument? I started no argument. That is your modus operandi. Furthermore, you have a nasty habit of typing things like this:

who acted the very same way like you,

Like who? Me? If so, how so? If you meant Americans in general, state as thus. I personally did not lock up 250 terrorists and sit for years waiting on something to do with them.

What is this?

than Bush did when chosing that mistaken path that now your country is rightfully attacked for.

We are rightfully attacked for? Please, what Skybird logic would state we were rightfully attacked?

Note that in earlier threads I did not oppose things like torture or imprisonment of terrorists in priciple

Note, I do not spend my days reading and living by every word typed by Skybird. To be honest Skybird, I ignore your diatribes for the most part. So, whatever you said in some thread in the GT forums was more than likely glanced over and forgotten. Not to be smug Skybird but the book writting posts get to be a bit much.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

What sarcasm? You of all people in the country you are in have the colossal gaul to bring up Gestopos? You can hardly compare the two friend.

If you accept arbitrary justice beyond our civilisational standards of checks and balances, what makes you different from the GeStapo then, hm? You defend to use the methods they used, but do not want to be compared to them, eh? At least that can be understood. Who would like to be compared to them... Set your justice system back on track regarding the issue discussed here, like it is America'S claim to be a shining example for the rule of law and justice and democratic checks and balances indeed, and the comparsion to tyrannies, banana-republics and GeStapo will end. Behave like these, and get rightfully compared to them.

Simple.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Skybird

If you accept arbitrary justice beyond our civilisational standards of checks and balances, what makes you different from the GeStapo then, hm? You defend to use the methods they used, but do not want to be compared to them, eh? At least that can be understood. Who would like to be compared to them... Set your justice system back on track regarding the issue discussed here, like it is America'S claim to be a shining example for the rule of law and justice and democratic checks and balances indeed, and the comparsion to tyrannies, banana-republics and GeStapo will end. Behave like these, and get rightfully compared to them.

Simple.

You missed the entire idea of the post Skybird. First, Obama just got handed his 'NO' we do not agree on just closing this down without a plan and the 11 million is not coming until a plan is created and approved. Second, Congress is looking and listening after all. They are just not making rash decisions(as this one was by Obama). Obama needs a plan first before going in head-long saying the base will close.

Jim summed it up very well here:

Seriously though......If there is no contingency plan in place around deportation or whatever, you may well find they go underground, regroup and start committing atrocities in your backyard.

Steamwake was correct here:

Well it sounded good at the time and thats what counted

You went off on some dissertation that we are nothing more than the Gestopo. You chalked it up as a no win situation because of Bush era laws. Well, here you are incorrect, Obama can win....think of a plan first! That is all the Congress asked. Laws, Constitution, they all have been taking a piss on both for years now. What is the difference today? Furthermore, I did not read one article were European countries were afraid Obama would send these detainees to their countries. I would think that would be darn smug of Obama and to say the least, ballsy? If such articles do exist, it was nothing more than a ploy to sell a few papers. Non-the-less, Gitmo will be addressed but it needs to be address carefully.

[Skybird]

AVG,

This snappy comment of yours was what got me started, until then I had no problem here:

Some innocents still left? Perhaps. So instead of Baghram we should send them to say, the Bahamas? Much nicer there. Three hots and a cot near the beach? Sweet! Anything else?

I even agree on the lack of plan. Hell, I even said weeks ago that Obama will soon find out that the legal intricacies of this are much bigger than he seemed to have realised back then. The way guantanamo camp was created, simply bypassing a valid legal basis since there was none available, necessarily must cause nothing but troubles and complicated consequences. And now that becomes obvious.

Washington demanded Germany to take in 10 Chinese prisoners recently, and although Germany in principle agreed to that (I do not know why, since if the people are no threat, as Washington claimed, I see no reason why they should not be allowed into the US), after being handed over the case documentation the inteiror ministre rejected to let them in, saying that Washington withholds vital key information about the men'S past. You see, even now Washington plays hide and seek and tries to avoid to put the cards on the table.

And Europe should solve home-made american problems by accepting people that america claims to be too dangerous to let them into the US?

Ignoring the difference between claim and evidence here.

Italy, Britain and Spain have been asked to accept certain prisoners, too. Other european countries signalled acceptance to do so, but now have fallen silent over that. It is felt that Washington does not negotiate the issue honestly and openly. - Which probably already is "plan B".