• 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!

Justice task force recommends about 50 Guantanamo detainees be held indefinitely

RightinNYC

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Justice task force recommends about 50 Guantanamo detainees be held indefinitely - washingtonpost.com

A Justice Department-led task force has concluded that nearly 50 of the 196 detainees at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should be held indefinitely without trial under the laws of war, according to Obama administration officials.

...

The task force has recommended that Guantanamo Bay detainees be divided into three main groups: about 35 who should be prosecuted in federal or military courts; at least 110 who can be released, either immediately or eventually; and the nearly 50 who must be detained without trial.

Administration officials argue that detaining terrorism suspects under Congress's authorization of the use of force against al-Qaeda and the Taliban is legal and that each detainee has the right to challenge his incarceration in habeas corpus proceedings in federal court.
Click to expand...

I'm glad to see Obama's not caving on this, though it raises one pretty obvious question: If we're holding 50 of them indefinitely without giving them a trial, then why are we closing Gitmo?
 
This is another one of those realities that came out of nowhere and smacked PBO in the mouth.
 
A Justice Department-led task force has concluded that nearly 50 of the 196 detainees at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should be held indefinitely without trial under the laws of war, according to Obama administration officials.
Click to expand...

Oh......Boo Radley.......where is your outrage.:roll:
 
Harshaw said:
Simply because it was a slogan, not an actual policy, made without any serious consideration on the matter.
Click to expand...

If the slogan was good, that means the reputation of the place was bad. So if shutting down the place is good for public relations, and we can still keep the prisoners, why not do it?
 
Tsunami said:
If the slogan was good, that means the reputation of the place was bad. So if shutting down the place is good for public relations, and we can still keep the prisoners, why not do it?
Click to expand...

Where are we gonna keep these prisoners?
 
Charles Martel said:
Where are we gonna keep these prisoners?
Click to expand...

Who cares? We have 1.5 million people in federal prison, 50 more isn't going to change anything. 27% of our prisoners are already non-citizens. We have Supermax facilities that have never been escaped from. As far as I know, none of them have a bad international reputation. Pick one.
 
Honestly they should be interogated on the battlefield, either shot afterwards or used for some purpose. Holding them is not a solution. It isnt different then shooting them from a Predator drone, their faight is already sealed.
 
Tsunami said:
If the slogan was good, that means the reputation of the place was bad. So if shutting down the place is good for public relations, and we can still keep the prisoners, why not do it?
Click to expand...

And why do you think the reputation of Guantanamo was so bad?

One of the most intense controversies of the Bush years was the administration's indefinite imprisoning of "War on Terror" detainees without charges of any kind. So absolute was the consensus among progressives and Democrats against this policy that a well-worn slogan was invented to object: a "legal black hole." Liberal editorial pages routinely cited the refusal to charge the detainees -- not the interrogation practices there -- in order to brand the camp a "dungeon," a "gulag," a "tropical purgatory," and a "black-hole embarrassment." As late as 2007, Democratic Senators like Pat Leahy, on the floor of the Senate, cited the due-process-free imprisonments to rail against Guantanamo as "a national disgrace, an international embarrassment to us and to our ideals, and a festering threat to our security," as well as "a legal black hole that dishonors our principles."
Click to expand...

Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com
 
Charles Martel said:
Where are we gonna keep these prisoners?
Click to expand...
It seems likely they will be incarcerated at the Thompson Correctional Center. The TCC is an under-utilized Illinois Department of Corrections adult male Level 1 maximum security prison located just north of rural Thomson, Illinois. It was recently purchased by the Federal government.

Thomson Correctional Center in Illinois set to be new Gitmo, White House says

thomson-correctional-center-2009-12-14-23-40-43.jpg
 
Tsunami said:
Who cares?
Click to expand...

This tax paying American citizen.:cool:

We have 1.5 million people in federal prison, 50 more isn't going to change anything.
Click to expand...

None of them is an enemy combatant captured abroad by our US military, you...do see the difference? Otherwise, the 100,000 troops surging in Afghanistan right now and capturing prisoners will have to be processed and then your "50 more" is alot more and then that's going to change everything.

27% of our prisoners are already non-citizens. We have Supermax facilities that have never been escaped from. As far as I know, none of them have a bad international reputation. Pick one.
Click to expand...

Cause....international reputation a serious consideration when imprisoning enemy combatants. The 27% aren't enemy combatants....or prisoners of war.
 
Tashah said:
It seems likely they will be incarcerated at the Thompson Correctional Center. The TCC is an under-utilized Illinois Department of Corrections adult male Level 1 maximum security prison located just north of rural Thomson, Illinois. It was recently purchased by the Federal government.
Click to expand...

Yes, spending millions and millions more to answer all of the questions Gitmo solved years ago. And your picture reveals lots of space for massive demonstrations....should this prison become a beacon of injustice or in Tsunami's words....get a "bad reputation."

Cause...despite it's "bad reputation"....Gitmo is an absolute stroke of genius. Impossible to escape. Demonstrations cannot occur, Oprah cannot set up a TV feed from Gitmo. Keith and Rachael can't camp in Cuba. It's under military jurisdiction. We can hold military tribunals, house and feed the expanding prisoners expected for this necessary war on evil. We can carry out water therapy classes and nasal cleaning benefits for those incarcerated. Interrogate, imprison, bring to trial, and if necessary, execute sentences.

And every day that goes by more and more people realize the genius of Gitmo. The "let's just leave them where they are" just makes so much sense. We don't have the money to build and maintain a new prison. We don't want a beacon where political or other interests can legally demonstrate and turn the place into an actual bad reputation endeavor. We don't want these men on US soil, there is absolutely no reason for it.
 
Tsunami said:
If the slogan was good, that means the reputation of the place was bad. So if shutting down the place is good for public relations, and we can still keep the prisoners, why not do it?
Click to expand...

Who says the slogan was "good"? It obviously doesn't jibe with reality.
 
All of the denuded land in the picture belongs to the prison facility. Not even a blade of grass to hide behind. No one can either approach nor leave unobserved. This is a supermax facility comprised of 1,600 cells and eight housing units. The facility also has a 200-bed minimum-security unit. The facility is 146 acres and consists of 15 buildings, totaling 625,000 square feet. Construction in the cell houses is pre-cast reinforced cement walls. The facility is enclosed by a 12-foot exterior fence and 15-foot interior fence which includes a dual sided electric stun fence. The guard towers on each side are situated to provide an unobstructed view of the no-mans-land between perimeter fences. Each wing (the X structures) is self-contained and insulated from the other wings. Inmates are monitored under constant armed and electronic surveillance. I don't believe a prisoner has ever escaped from any Level 1 supermax facility.

From what I understand, the prison will be staffed by corrections officers rather than military personnel. Interrogations will not occur at the TCC. The prison facility will be utilized strictly for incarceration purposes.
 
Charles Martel said:
This tax paying American citizen.:cool:

None of them is an enemy combatant captured abroad by our US military, you...do see the difference? Otherwise, the 100,000 troops surging in Afghanistan right now and capturing prisoners will have to be processed and then your "50 more" is alot more and then that's going to change everything.

Cause....international reputation a serious consideration when imprisoning enemy combatants. The 27% aren't enemy combatants....or prisoners of war.
Click to expand...

We aren't fighting an army. That makes them not enemy combatants, and this not a war.
 
Apparently Gitmo is good enough for Haitians and Marines, but not terrorists.
 
Tsunami said:
If the slogan was good, that means the reputation of the place was bad. So if shutting down the place is good for public relations, and we can still keep the prisoners, why not do it?
Click to expand...
because bringing to the mainland and to Illinois, will now make the prison in that state a target or the surrounding area. It also cost the taxpayers many more millions for security not only in housing but also transportation and security fee's in relations to all the processing that will be involved.
 
Tsunami said:
We aren't fighting an army. That makes them not enemy combatants, and this not a war.
Click to expand...

Actually, no; we're fighting textbook war criminals.
 
Tsunami said:
We aren't fighting an army. That makes them not enemy combatants, and this not a war.
Click to expand...
Your right, anyone who fights and doesn't represent a nation state is a saboteur, terrorist, spy etc., the rules of war are clear on how the military should treat these individuals, whether being the aggressor or defender.

captured, interrogated, tried and executed, and on the field if necessary.
 
deltabtry said:
Your right, anyone who fights and doesn't represent a nation state is a saboteur, terrorist, spy etc., the rules of war are clear on how the military should treat these individuals, whether being the aggressor or defender.

captured, interrogated, tried and executed, and on the field if necessary.[/QUOTE]

I agree........;)
Click to expand...
 
Tsunami said:
If the slogan was good, that means the reputation of the place was bad. So if shutting down the place is good for public relations, and we can still keep the prisoners, why not do it?
Click to expand...

Because candidate obama and the entire democratic party promised us "the rule of law." If enacted into policy this will be just another campaign promise left in the dust.
 
Tsunami said:
If the slogan was good, that means the reputation of the place was bad. So if shutting down the place is good for public relations, and we can still keep the prisoners, why not do it?
Click to expand...

Because terror sympathizers that write newspaper articles and their colleagues on the airwaves shouldn't set our national security agenda, nor should ignorant Europeans and their propagandists.

Why bend to the Europeans and Amerikan leftists?
They've been wrong on virtually every major issue during the past 40-years.

When you think they screw up enough courage to... say... vote for the use of force in Iraq... we find it wasn't a vote of conscience, but of political expediency.

Following the public relations wind is dangerous and the realm of the weak, those without a moral compass, those lacking judgment: Bill Clinton and the modern Democrat party are the perfect examples.

.
 
Last edited:
Tsunami said:
We aren't fighting an army. That makes them not enemy combatants, and this not a war.
Click to expand...

You've actually got that one backwards there. If they were a regularly organized army under the flag of a recognized state, they wouldn't be enemy combatants.

Harshaw said:
Yes. It wasn't because it was at Gitmo. Holding them anywhere else is just as much of an injustice if holding them at Gitmo ever was.
Click to expand...

I'm looking forward to hearing the explanations for why they're different:

Holding detainees indefinitely with no trial in Cuba = Inhuman
Holding detainees indefinitely with no trial in rural Illinois = Totally cool

Must be something to do with air conditioning. Maybe Gitmo was too humid for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom