Thread: Guantanamo disgrace... show your stories here.

hang on.....

there you are.

JURIST - Forum: Injustice at Guantanamo: Torture Evidence and the Military Commissions Act

Originally Posted by ChiangMai noon

The federal government is working overtime to try and clean up the legal mess made by the use of illegal interrogation methods. In a thinly-veiled attempt to sanitize the Guantánamo trials, the Department of Justice and the Pentagon instituted an extensive program to re-interview the prisoners who have undergone abusive interrogations, this time with "clean teams." For example, if a prisoner implicated one of the defendants during an interrogation using waterboarding, the government will now re-interrogate that prisoner without waterboarding and get the same information. Then they will say the information was secured humanely. This attempt to wipe the slate clean is a farce and a sham.

[/quote]

I wonder if the prisoners know this, or will they just be asked to confirm their previous confessions under the real or imagined threat or more torture?

Originally Posted by panama hat

Can we agree on the simple premise that a trial to convict or release would suit everyone?

Afraid not there Panama hat.
A major travesty of justice has been committed by illegally abducting, imprisoning and torturing "suspected" terrorists. This dreadful and shameful wrong wont be made right by a show trial orchestrated by the captors and outside the terms of the justice system in any civilized country (including USA.)

The EU incarcerates illegal immigrants for eight years.

Not much whining about that. Gitmo has only been open for six.

Originally Posted by Texpat

The EU incarcerates illegal immigrants for eight years.

Eh? When and where has this occured?

I believe the thread started when you were out on your Stroller.

Since I'm such a nice guy and a good sport, I've fetched it for you. See, who says it's all blood and brimstone in issues?

By Caroline Brothrs
International Heradl Tribune
June 18, 2008

STRASBOURG -- European Union lawmakers voted Wednesday to allow countries in the bloc to hold undocumented migrants in detention centers for up to 18 months and ban them from EU territory for five years.

Approved in this medieval French border city, which is home to a significant population of North Africans and Turks, the legislation establishes common rules for expelling foreigners who are detained on EU territory without permission to be there.

Described by critics like Amnesty International as "severely flawed" and an erosion of human rights standards, but by supporters as a balanced approach, the so-called return directive passed in the European Parliament by a vote of 369 to 197, with 106 deputies abstaining.

"The member states must decide whether they need them - if so, then please legalize them," Manfred Weber, the German center-right legislator from Bavaria who shepherded the measures through the European Parliament, said of undocumented migrants in Europe. "If you don't need them for your labor markets, then send them home."

Europe, which has freedom of movement within its 25 Schengen states but no overarching policy on immigration, sees the law as a means to unify a patchwork of systems governing treatment of migrants who overstay their visas or who, in far lesser numbers, slip clandestinely across its borders.

EU countries currently deal with these migrants by placing them in 224 detention centers, with capacity for 30,871 people, across the bloc. The length of their confinement varies from 32 days in France to 18 months in Germany. In eight EU countries there is no upper limit on detention. European legislators visiting Denmark in April said they were concerned about some detainees who had been held for eight years. (oh goodness!)

Weber said the decision Wednesday provided a limit on detention in those eight countries - though two of them, Denmark and Britain, have opt-outs from the legislation.

But opponents of the law, like Cimade, the only French nongovernmental organization authorized to work in the 23 detention centers in France, fear that it will encourage countries with shorter detention lengths to extend them.

Cimade released a statement Wednesday saying that it deplored the passage of what civil liberties groups have called "the directive of shame," and said it was studying the possibility of contesting it before the European Court of Justice or the European Court of Human Rights.

Ten amendments proposed by European Socialists were rejected Wednesday.

They included the necessity for a judge's approval for detention within 72 hours of an arrest, the obligation to provide detainees with legal counsel and the possibility of making the five-year re-entry ban optional. Other amendments would have reduced the maximum detention period to six months rather than 18 and insisted on greater assurances for the protection of unaccompanied children.

Weber denied that the European Parliament had caved in to the council made up of EU interior ministers during three-way negotiations between the Parliament, the council and the EU's executive branch, the European Commission.

Dragutin Mate, the interior minister of Slovenia who is the council's president, warned lawmakers Tuesday that the failure to approve the directive meant there would be no EU agreement on immigration for at least three years, which would jeopardize pending legislation on workers' rights.

The vote came a day after António Guterres, the United Nations high commissioner for refugees, said that the world was dealing with "a complex mix of global challenges" that could threaten even more forced displacements than the 37.4 million people last year.

The UN refugee agency is concerned about those fleeing conflict or persecution who have the right under international law to seek asylum in safe countries but opt for undocumented entry to Europe because of a lack of legal channels.

It says that large numbers of people will be subject to the directive's five-year re-entry ban, which does not take account of changes in their home countries that could force them to leave again.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/18/europe/migrant.php

Poor, oppressed folks just looking for a scrap of schnitzel or a bite of baguette. Banged up for eight years. Shameful.

Makes Guantanamo look like a walk in the park -- with better weather.

^Right. So no interest in substantiating that rather blanket claim then? Best to just leave it hanging, perhaps have it repeated a few times, then claim it as 'fact'?

Your predictable diatribe about how eight is actually less than six begins in three, two, one ...

Originally Posted by Texpat

Your predictable diatribe about how eight is actually less than six begins in three, two, one ...

Tex,

You made the claim, I'm merely asking you to back it up. This is 'Issues' after all.

You want to talk about 'predictable' then how about your proving to be the antithesis of reasonable discussion and debate with all your name-calling and pointless sarcastic comments.

What exactly is your problem; that I dared ask or merely that somehow my presence and contrary opinions make you feel uncomfortable? Perhaps you should think about taking a break from the Issues section, it's obviously not doing much for you.

Originally Posted by Texpat

The EU incarcerates illegal immigrants for eight years.

even if true, so what??

this isn't an anti American thing, it's anti gross injustice thing.

not sure why it should be such a partisan issue other than the defensive paranoia of the stars and stripes brigade.

It is a sort of defense reflex
"We aren't the only bad boys! Look at you lot"

So you want me to run out and find the counsel of these poor bastards banged up for eight years and get some quotes about how their Mickey Mouse comic books have been withheld for hours on end and how their right to conceal knives in their Korans is impinging on their fundamental right to bear arms (wait, sorry, these guys are in the EU) OK they're not allotted their god-given six hours of daily whining...

I suspect all those lawyers are too busy reading about Gitmo to bother with their clients -- into their ninth year ... (assuming the poor bastards have been given counsel)


Whaaaaaaa!

Originally Posted by Texpat

Since I'm such a nice guy and a good sport, I've fetched it for you. See, who says it's all blood and brimstone in issues?

Gee thanks, not like pulling teeth at all ...

By Caroline Brothrs
International Heradl Tribune
June 18, 2008

STRASBOURG -- European Union lawmakers voted Wednesday to allow countries in the bloc to hold undocumented migrants in detention centers for up to 18 months and ban them from EU territory for five years...

Wait, so detained for "up to 18 months" and banned from the EU for 5yrs. So your only point of reference is the following:

European legislators visiting Denmark in April said they were concerned about some detainees who had been held for eight years. (oh goodness!)

A one line reference to "some detainees" who have been held for 8yrs, no further details. Do you know why they have been held for that period? How many of them there are? Quite a brittle peg to be hanging your hat on really.

Poor, oppressed folks just looking for a scrap of schnitzel or a bite of baguette. Banged up for eight years. Shameful.

Makes Guantanamo look like a walk in the park -- with better weather.

The two are not analagous. Clearly 8yrs is not a matter of course.

for sure those illegal immigrants are being tortured and waterboarded like in Gitmo

try again tex, let's face it, the old USA is becoming more and more like the old Europe, not something to be proud of

Actually the EU has the old USA bested by two years in the detention stakes.

The only difference is, we bang up battlefield para militaristic terrorists and the EU locks up illegal migrants.

The only difference is, we bang up battlefield para militaristic terrorists and the EU locks up illegal migrants

along with english pakistanis that are attending wedding celebrations.

Originally Posted by Texpat

I believe the thread started when you were out on your Stroller.

Since I'm such a nice guy and a good sport, I've fetched it for you. See, who says it's all blood and brimstone in issues?

By Caroline Brothrs
International Heradl Tribune
June 18, 2008

STRASBOURG -- European Union lawmakers voted Wednesday to allow countries in the bloc to hold undocumented migrants in detention centers for up to 18 months and ban them from EU territory for five years.

Approved in this medieval French border city, which is home to a significant population of North Africans and Turks, the legislation establishes common rules for expelling foreigners who are detained on EU territory without permission to be there.

Described by critics like Amnesty International as "severely flawed" and an erosion of human rights standards, but by supporters as a balanced approach, the so-called return directive passed in the European Parliament by a vote of 369 to 197, with 106 deputies abstaining.

"The member states must decide whether they need them - if so, then please legalize them," Manfred Weber, the German center-right legislator from Bavaria who shepherded the measures through the European Parliament, said of undocumented migrants in Europe. "If you don't need them for your labor markets, then send them home."

Europe, which has freedom of movement within its 25 Schengen states but no overarching policy on immigration, sees the law as a means to unify a patchwork of systems governing treatment of migrants who overstay their visas or who, in far lesser numbers, slip clandestinely across its borders.

EU countries currently deal with these migrants by placing them in 224 detention centers, with capacity for 30,871 people, across the bloc. The length of their confinement varies from 32 days in France to 18 months in Germany. In eight EU countries there is no upper limit on detention. European legislators visiting Denmark in April said they were concerned about some detainees who had been held for eight years. (oh goodness!)

Weber said the decision Wednesday provided a limit on detention in those eight countries - though two of them, Denmark and Britain, have opt-outs from the legislation.

But opponents of the law, like Cimade, the only French nongovernmental organization authorized to work in the 23 detention centers in France, fear that it will encourage countries with shorter detention lengths to extend them.

Cimade released a statement Wednesday saying that it deplored the passage of what civil liberties groups have called "the directive of shame," and said it was studying the possibility of contesting it before the European Court of Justice or the European Court of Human Rights.

Ten amendments proposed by European Socialists were rejected Wednesday.

They included the necessity for a judge's approval for detention within 72 hours of an arrest, the obligation to provide detainees with legal counsel and the possibility of making the five-year re-entry ban optional. Other amendments would have reduced the maximum detention period to six months rather than 18 and insisted on greater assurances for the protection of unaccompanied children.

Weber denied that the European Parliament had caved in to the council made up of EU interior ministers during three-way negotiations between the Parliament, the council and the EU's executive branch, the European Commission.

Dragutin Mate, the interior minister of Slovenia who is the council's president, warned lawmakers Tuesday that the failure to approve the directive meant there would be no EU agreement on immigration for at least three years, which would jeopardize pending legislation on workers' rights.

The vote came a day after António Guterres, the United Nations high commissioner for refugees, said that the world was dealing with "a complex mix of global challenges" that could threaten even more forced displacements than the 37.4 million people last year.

The UN refugee agency is concerned about those fleeing conflict or persecution who have the right under international law to seek asylum in safe countries but opt for undocumented entry to Europe because of a lack of legal channels.

It says that large numbers of people will be subject to the directive's five-year re-entry ban, which does not take account of changes in their home countries that could force them to leave again.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/18/europe/migrant.php

Poor, oppressed folks just looking for a scrap of schnitzel or a bite of baguette. Banged up for eight years. Shameful.

Makes Guantanamo look like a walk in the park -- with better weather.

Hardly a realistic comparison with Guantanamo bay.
People queuing up to get into the place and the door wide open for them to go home. The only reason they remained locked up is to stop them getting into the general EU community as illegal aliens. Most developed countries have a problem with illegal aliens posing as refugees. Some are, and some arnt. Sorting out the difference is a nightmare for all concerned. Its a whole different subject you are attempting to divert attention to here Tex. Totally unrelated to the illegal incarceration and torture of suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay.

Nice try at deflecting the attention away from the issue at hand.

Is it? I'll bet those poor migrants who just wanted a better life for their hardworking selves and their poor, poor families are wondering why they've been locked up longer than the hardest meanest baddest terrorists on the planet ...

I wonder if EU Central has all-you-can-eat halal buffet?

Originally Posted by Texpat

Actually the EU has the old USA bested by two years in the detention stakes.

The only difference is, we bang up battlefield para militaristic terrorists and the EU locks up illegal migrants.

Not quite there Tex. The US "abducts" foreign citizens and holds them for years in a foreign country to avoid US law, while torturing them. Hardly the the same as detaining illegal aliens. You are really clutching at straws to draw a comparison there mate.

why would stop another country from kidnapping US soldiers and put them in detention for ever ? nobody according to Tex.

I guess Vietnam did that already, and it was all "legal" and "justified"

Originally Posted by Butterfly

why would stop another country from kidnapping US soldiers and put them in detention for ever ? nobody according to Tex.

I guess Vietnam did that already, and it was all "legal" and "justified"

That's the final irony of it all as far as I can see too. If Tex and others, as American citizens, are prepared to deny the rights of others then they, also as American citizens, cannot expect to be accorded any rights in return. But they do.

Originally Posted by Texpat

Is it? I'll bet those poor migrants who just wanted a better life for their hardworking selves and their poor, poor families are wondering why they've been locked up longer than the hardest meanest baddest terrorists on the planet ...

I wonder if EU Central has all-you-can-eat halal buffet?

Still trying to change the subject there hey Tex. Whats wrong, don't like hearing the truth about Bushes crimes.

Originally Posted by Panda

Still trying to change the subject there hey Tex.

Gets quite tedious, doesn't it. You can throw a blanket over some of the American posters in Issues at times. All the name-calling, disingenuous and constant shifting of the posts, lack of intellectual-honesty and integrity kinda blurs together after a point. Doesn't matter who it's coming from it sounds the same.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by Butterfly

why would stop another country from kidnapping US soldiers and put them in detention for ever ? nobody according to Tex.

I guess Vietnam did that already, and it was all "legal" and "justified"

That's the final irony of it all as far as I can see too. If Tex and others, as American citizens, are prepared to deny the rights of others then they, also as American citizens, cannot expect to be accorded any rights in return. But they do.

To extrapolate the situation a bit further, according to Texs logic every captured US soldier should be charged with murder or at the very least, conspiriosy to comit murder.