Hey, I just wanted to let you guys know that I am severely excited about the executive order to close Guantanamo Bay and to review the status of all current detainees. This has been a very notable human rights issue that is hopefully on its way to what I would call an honorable resolution. I'm firmly in the "camp" of wanting to see an end to indefinite detentions in any form, in any country. If anybody else has any opinions on this I'd be happy to respectfully discuss this complex issue since I am somewhat familiar with the general history of the whole thing in the thing.
I don't know much about that place but I can tell you one thing. If someone has killed someone or a crime that is comparable to that the person should be locked up forever without a chance to get out. They killed someone so they don't deserve another chance. That's just how I feel about things like these.
It's a place where people go because they're "suspicious". Maybe you said the wrong thing in an email or over the phone when big brother was watching you. They do shitty things to people who don't necessarily deserve it, suffice to say.
After some of the decisions Obama has made thus far (cf /.) I'm willing to write this off as a meaningless gesture that looks good to the populace, but which will be quietly un-done when nobody is looking.
I'll gladly eat my hat if proven wrong.
Guantanamo Bay is no worse than the other two hundred prisons in the small Cuba, but unlike those, it's controlled by the united states instead of the cuban regime. That's why it has so bad press.
Of course, Guantanamo Bay is really bad but, frankly, when the main reason given to close it is "so that the Cuban regime cannot say that the americans also treat badly their prisoners", and they remain silent to the conditions of ALL the other prisons in Cuba (and the many suspicious detentions), it shows how selectively blind has become half of the world population. I guess it's because the news sources that make people worry about Guantanamo never say anything about the life on that country.
Oh, and I think Obama will indeed close it, but probably his party will open another in another place, except that now their news sources will not rant about it so that no one cares.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Not to excuse Guantanamo, but all evidence suggests that Guantanamo bay is paradise next to prisons in the near east. If you want to read up on human rights violations, take a look at the prisons in Turkey, or Lebanon. It kinda annoys me when there are people spending great effort to end the abuses in Guantanamo, when their efforts could help with even greater atrocities elsewhere.
Get your own house in order before going after someone else. Americans are responsible for Gitmo; they aren't responsible for Turkey or Lebanon.
I think that the point was that people who loudly complain about Guantanamo have the wrong priorities. They prioritize by "visibility" rather than by the gravity of the situation: The problems with Guantanamo Bay are more "visible" and get more media attention, and thus are an easier target to protest against. However, Guantanamo Bay doesn't get even close to being the worst prison on Earth, and there are tons of places which would require worldwide attention and protest much more urgently.
In other words, people protest against Guantanamo Bay because it's more fashionable, rather than being the most urgent problem in the world.
If you're an American, then it makes sense to complain about Guantanamo first, since you have better odds of getting something done about it than you do about prisons under the control of other nations. Get the greatest improvement for your invested time, kinda thing.
For people from other countries, yeah, complaining about Guantanamo is probably not the most efficient strategy.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
In other words, people protest against Guantanamo Bay because it's more fashionable, rather than being the most urgent problem in the world.
No Warp. No.
People protest against Guantanamo Bay because we have this document in the United States of America called the Bill of Rights. Maybe you've heard of it. Let me inform you of a few things, Because from your comment, you obviously haven't the slightest clue what it says.
Bill of Rights wrote:
Fifth Amendment - No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Sixth Amendment - In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
Seventh Amendment - In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Eight Amendment - Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
You see, in the United States, we have these rules that guide our purpose and our hand. The evils committed others do not forgo our duty to abide by the principals set by our forefathers; They do not allow for us to ignore our own violations.
There is NOTHING fashionable about the Constitution, and the protections it provides. Claiming such just shows willful ignorance towards all that the Bill of Rights was created for.
Seriously, know something before you start flapping your gums. Fashionable? Please.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
Warp is from Finland, so it's reasonable for him to not know anything about the Bill of Rights. I couldn't quote anything about the Finnish government; hell, I can barely keep a handle on the British and they speak more or less the same language!
So I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming that when he was speaking in generalities, he was talking about people who aren't from the United States. Now, if you did mean to imply that Americans only complain about Guantanamo because it's fashionable, then please see Dark Kobold's post above.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
To those saying it's weird to complain about Bay before complaining about worse human rights violations going on in the middle east or wherever, don't you think it's reasonable to hold the US to a higher standard than these other nations? I know I do.
To those saying it's weird to complain about Bay before complaining about worse human rights violations going on in the middle east or wherever, don't you think it's reasonable to hold the US to a higher standard than these other nations? I know I do.
Yes, and that in itself is a tragedy much greater than any prison in the world (not specifically the US part, but the world in general).
Prisoner - Hey, why are everyone fussing up about a prison not nearly as unjust as this one? Seriously, I'm up for a execution for thought crime!
Guard - Well you see, in this country you don't really have any human rights, so no one bothers to care about you since this prison/state doesn't break any actual laws.
Prisoner - Ok boss, sounds fair to me!
For Americans it naturally makes more sense to care about injustice in America first hand, but for the rest of the world maybe not.
Would it really make sense to offer aid to a passing ship when your own ship is sinking? No. You take care of your own problems first.
America has a lot of fucked up shit going on, but once (/if) it is sorted out, we can actually help again by being a practitioner of what we're actually preaching.
All of this "Americans complain about Gitmo because it's fashional" bullshit is exactly that: bullshit.
But then again it's Warp so
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
First of all, keep in mind that the bill of rights does not apply to the people detained there, as they are not U.S. citizens. Our bill of rights does not extend to foreign nationals.
Their status is listed as enemy combatants (prisoners of war), so their rights legally speaking are only that granted through the Geneva Convention. As such, over the last few years, some have been freed, others have seen trial, and others have been convicted.
It is wrong to keep people there indefinitely without trial, (which seems to be the plan for some of them) so its a good thing that this practice is being ended, but "fixing" your ship before helping others is a really, really bad prescient.
Think about issues like education, inside the US, there are minor problems and there are defiantly the occasional few for whom the current system works badly. But overall, things are good. Does this mean we can't offer educational support to other countries just because our system isn't perfect?
We don't need to be 100% flawless in our own practices to care about the inhumane treatment that takes place in other countries.
The Bill of Rights and the entire Constitution apply to everyone on US soil. They enumerate inalienable rights that are inherent to all people as human beings. There are privileges (and responsibilities) that you get by being an American citizen, including e.g. not getting deported if you outstay your welcome, but rights are for everyone.
In any event, yes, you can do a multi-pronged approach. But you'll get a lot more support from the people you're trying to help if you aren't being hypocritical. Imagine if China were trying to convince India to pollute less, for example. Would they have much luck?
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
Think about issues like education, inside the US, there are minor problems and there are defiantly the occasional few for whom the current system works badly.
Occasional few?
"Nearly one-third of all public high school students—and nearly one half of all African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans—fail to graduate from public high school with their class" http://www.silentepidemic.org/epidemic/statistics-facts.htm
I'd take the source with a grain of salt, but there's nothing "minor" about the failures of our educational system. That said, it's much worse elsewhere and I agree that the US should try to help everyone, not just itself.
"Their status is listed as enemy combatants (prisoners of war), so their rights legally speaking are only that granted through the Geneva Convention."
As I was in the army (german) we had several reads through
the Geneva Convention and 'Haager Landkriegsordnung' etc.-nowhere 'enemy combatants' as a phrase occured (I believe the bush-admnistration invented the term, to keep the suspects out of the scope of these international laws, meaning they aren't/weren't POW...).
You'll find combatant/non-combatant though-but even a non-combatant can't be kept 'forever' whithout anything remotely connected to a 'fair' trial/verdict.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Derakon wrote:
The Bill of Rights and the entire Constitution apply to everyone on US soil.
And they aren't on US soil. Gitmo is in Cuba.
Derakon wrote:
They enumerate inalienable rights that are inherent to all people as human beings. There are privileges (and responsibilities) that you get by being an American citizen, including e.g. not getting deported if you outstay your welcome, but rights are for everyone.
The bill of rights is not for everyone. The rights it secures are for the people of the united states of america, if you want to find a list of rights that apply to all people on earth, you might have to defer to international acts, such as the geniva convention.
The united states can not, and should not try to enforce the Bill of rights for every person on earth. Canada and UK probably don't want our version of the right to bear arms. The middle east doesn't want our version of freedom of speech.
That said, we owe it to our follow man to try to prevent egregious abuses of other people, but we should not think for a minute that the bill of rights extends past our boarders.
Alden-- I actually agree with you, but my point is, even if our own system is flawed, we can still help others. We don't need to be 100% perfect before helping others is the kind thing to do. I just wanted to illustrate that even if there are bad things being done in American operated prisons, we can still care about the torture and inhumane conditions of prisons abroad.
Ah, nothing like the good old argumentum ad hominem when you are out of better arguments. A bit sad that you have to resort to such childishness, though.
Joined: 11/22/2004
Posts: 1468
Location: Rotterdam, The Netherlands
The closing of Guantánamo is an excellent decision. It's revolting to me that there are actually people against this. This prison exists solely to act as legal limbo at which the U.S. can practice torturing people, which by the way has been proven to not work if you want information.
Sure, there are even worse prisons in the world (none of which are operated by the U.S., I hope), but it's disgusting that a wealthy Western nation can have the guts to say that the Geneva Convention does not apply to some people, even though it was made specifically to apply to all people.
It doesn't matter who you are or what you think. It doesn't even matter if you have or want to kill people. Every human being should have human rights. If we step away from that principle, a second holocaust comes one step closer.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
The Geneva convention does apply to all people, and has been applied in Guantanamo. The critical difference is weather or not the prisoners count as enemy soldiers (meaning they could be held without trial until the conflict has concluded) or if they are "non-combatants" and are therefore covered by article 3, granting them greater legal rights, including the right to a trial.
The issue of torture is the only place where the Geneva convention was violated, and it is quite frankly inexcusable. That said, putting known terrorists in a military prison seems like a worthwhile endeavor. [/soapbox]
Joined: 11/22/2004
Posts: 1468
Location: Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Twelvepack wrote:
That said, putting known terrorists in a military prison seems like a worthwhile endeavor.
Actually, they were mostly suspected terrorists who were put in there so they could rat themselves out after being tortured. Most of them never became known terrorists because of the lack of fair trials.
Guantánamo is an abomination that should never have been tolerated by the U.N. or any nation against inhuman practices. Its use has sent the U.S. back into the middle ages, where this practice was completely normal to extract the necessary confession from a suspect.
It's revolting to me that there are actually people against this.
There's a difference between being against something and thinking that people have the wrong priorities. Saying "this is not such an urgent matter as some people make it sound" is not saying that you are opposed to the idea.
