• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Guantanamo hunger strike growing

apdst said:
These clowns live better than our service members and the world still hates us. Looks like a waste of time to treat them like kings.
Click to expand...

Don't be silly, our service members have freedoms, pay, rights, etc. Don't be a clown.
 
I could care less if the do not want to eat, they are there for good reasons and if they want to refuse to eat so be it. It is their problem, not the world's or the USA's problem.
 
MarineTpartier said:
I've never really understood the concept of a hunger strike. I mean, who are they kidding? Does anyone care that they are hungry? I don't. Do they think the guards care? LOL, no. What they should do is go on a hygiene strike. That affects others. Hunger strikes seem so self defeating.
Click to expand...

These slimy murdering bastards at Gitmo think they're like Ghandi.
 
Guantanamo hunger strike - a problem that solves itself.
 
American said:
Uhhhhh, is Gitmo still open? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Bush's legacy and Obama's art of playing dodgeball.

Last week, the Obama administration imposed new arbitrary rules for Guantanamo detainees who have lost their first habeas corpus challenge. Those new rules eliminate the right of lawyers to visit their clients at the detention facility; the old rules establishing that right were in place since 2004, and were bolstered by the Supreme Court’s 2008 Boumediene ruling that detainees were entitled to a “meaningful” opportunity to contest the legality of their detention. The DOJ recently informed a lawyer for a Yemeni detainee, Yasein Khasem Mohammad Esmail, that he would be barred from visiting his client unless he agreed to a new regime of restrictive rules, including acknowledging that such visits are within the sole discretion of the camp’s military commander. Moreover, as SCOTUSblog’s Lyle Denniston explains:

Besides putting control over legal contacts entirely under a military commander’s control, the “memorandum of understanding” does not allow attorneys to share with other detainee lawyers what they learn, and does not appear to allow them to use any such information to help prepare their own client for a system of periodic review at Guantanamo of whether continued detention is justified, and may even forbid the use of such information to help prepare a defense to formal terrorism criminal charges against their client.

The New York Times Editorial Page today denounced these new rules as “spiteful,” cited it as “the Obama administration’s latest overuse of executive authority,”

The Obama GITMO myth - Salon.com
Click to expand...
And, people thought Salon was a pro-Obama liberal rag.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Well saying they are human beings, i care..
Click to expand...

Jerry Sandusky is a human being. I personally don't give two ****s about him.

Being a human being isn't some cop out for an emotional appeal to pity, regardless of the circumstance.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
More and more detainees in Guantanamo are on a hunger strike because they thought it was going to close but as we all know they have not. Im not surprised that no media outlet in the US is really reporting on this. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Then let them all starve to death and solve the problem that way. I have zero sympathy.
 
Deuce said:
Yeah! I mean what the hell kind of country does a silly thing like keep its prisoners alive?
Click to expand...

We give them food. If they refuse it, screw 'em.
 
Cephus said:
They're a bunch of murderous sleazeballs, they no longer count as human beings.
Click to expand...

Yea yumm saying only 1 Guantanamo prisoner has been convicted by US federal courts (Ahmed Ghalilani)
only 6 of the 779 prisoners have been put before a military commission
87 prisoners of the 166 (one-half) have been "cleared for transfer" by senior officials six US government agencies, but have not been released
The majority are released with no charges against them... .

I think we might be the "sleezeballs"
 
Cephus said:
Then let them all starve to death and solve the problem that way. I have zero sympathy.
Click to expand...

Of course you do. You dont care about the rule of law.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Of course you do. You dont care about the rule of law.
Click to expand...

I care about stupidity and suffering the consequences of one's actions. If they refuse to eat, let them starve. It was their choice.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Yea yumm saying only 1 Guantanamo prisoner has been convicted by US federal courts (Ahmed Ghalilani)
only 6 of the 779 prisoners have been put before a military commission
87 prisoners of the 166 (one-half) have been "cleared for transfer" by senior officials six US government agencies, but have not been released
The majority are released with no charges against them... .

I think we might be the "sleezeballs"
Click to expand...

11 years is too long to be held in a prison without a trial, even assuming that military rules apply. However, over 4 of those years have been under a CIC who promised to do something about it. After all, he is the head sleazeball.
 
Deuce said:
I don't know, maybe human beings who don't want other human beings to die?

When someone is willing to kill themselves in a slow and horrible fashion, it is generally worth asking about why they might be doing that.

In this case, indefinite detention by the US military without trial. As a so-called tea partier, surely you're not happy about the idea that the US government can just throw a person in jail forever and never have to justify it.
Click to expand...
My post has nothing to do with your latter statement. I simply don't get the point of hurting yourself to gain attention. You want to get some attention? Go on a butt wiping strike. That'll get you noticed.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Guantanamo hunger strike growing - Americas - Al Jazeera English

More and more detainees in Guantanamo are on a hunger strike because they thought it was going to close but as we all know they have not. Im not surprised that no media outlet in the US is really reporting on this. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

A couple of questions.

How did Al Jazeera get this story? It seems intended for those who support, or are sympathetic to, terrorists.

And why are these people even in Gitmo? Is the drone program not working as well as we were told?

These fanatics should have been eating dust by now.
 
I think many are missing the point of the story, when they were taken to Gitmo, they knew they had limited rights, and they like it or not accepted their fate, then along comes Obama …. One of his first actions was to Sign the Executive Order closing Gitmo. Fast forward to 50 months later, not only are they still there ….. More of their rights are being taken away .. It’s just broken promise after broken promise … same ole story, just a different story line .
 
Deuce said:
Good, indefinite detention without trial is unconstitutional.


Medically inducing consumption is far more expensive.
Click to expand...

The Sixth Amendment only applies/extends to US citizens.
 
Wow some pretty disgraceful comments on here from so called "Americans". Here was me thinking that the US was built on law, order and justice not mob rule thank god no one here has any political influence.
 
Higgins86 said:
Wow some pretty disgraceful comments on here from so called "Americans". Here was me thinking that the US was built on law, order and justice not mob rule thank god no one here has any political influence.
Click to expand...

I doubt you ever thought that in your life.
 
StringBean said:
Unless you're Japanese.

Or deemed a "terrorist" by the president.
Click to expand...

You're right... Many of the Japanese locked away via FDR were American citizens - which was explicitly tyrannical. As far as Obamy - that clown would label me a terrorist for being a staunch libertarian...

Of course it is democrats who do and have done that nonsense....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom