Obama to shut down Gitmo

Obama-Biden or McCain-Palin? Or Paul-Hulka?
Queen Bee
User avatar
Posts: 46875
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 8:48 am
Location: Just south of the North Pole

Postby northern_goddess » Mon Nov 10, 2008 10:12 pm

mutha is fixing
I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it.

http://www.fat-pie.com/salad.htm

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 12382
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:28 am

Postby Argonheart_Po » Mon Nov 10, 2008 10:54 pm

Where will he send the poeple who cannot return to their homelend?

arrogant Yankee cokehead
User avatar
Posts: 5342
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:30 pm

Postby Felix » Mon Nov 10, 2008 10:56 pm

Argonheart_Po wrote:Where will he send the poeple who cannot return to their homelend?


They should probably be killed, eh?
Cherman humor: ha! because your father hates you, you have no one to fuck, you can't afford health care, you have nothing but this board, you pretend to have cancer, you are a racist pig, you are stupid, you are a bloody fuckface...

stewed
User avatar
Posts: 5563
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:54 pm
Location: Outer Banks, North Carolina, USA

Postby AnnieOakley » Mon Nov 10, 2008 10:57 pm

Excellent idea. Lunch?
You meet the same folks on the way up as you do on the way down.

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 12382
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:28 am

Postby Argonheart_Po » Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:01 pm

It's a serious question - The y can't return - they haven't been convicted - where should they go?

arrogant Yankee cokehead
User avatar
Posts: 5342
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:30 pm

Postby Felix » Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:07 pm

Return where? They are from quite a few countries - I don't imagine an Afghan dirt farmer who was sold by bounty hunters or rival tribesman would have anything to fear from Kabul. If we can't convict them, and they can't return home because of our kidnapping them, we have a responsibility to them.

At any rate, inconvenience is no excuse for further deprivation of their liberty and right to due process.
Cherman humor: ha! because your father hates you, you have no one to fuck, you can't afford health care, you have nothing but this board, you pretend to have cancer, you are a racist pig, you are stupid, you are a bloody fuckface...

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 12382
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:28 am

Postby Argonheart_Po » Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:32 pm

we have a responsibility to them.

At any rate, inconvenience is no excuse for further deprivation of their liberty and right to due process


I agree - but do you think Obama's first act will be to release a bunch of foriegn terror suspects into the US?

Not smart.

arrogant Yankee cokehead
User avatar
Posts: 5342
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:30 pm

Postby Felix » Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:36 pm

Argonheart_Po wrote:I agree - but do you think Obama's first act will be to release a bunch of foriegn terror suspects into the US?


No.
Cherman humor: ha! because your father hates you, you have no one to fuck, you can't afford health care, you have nothing but this board, you pretend to have cancer, you are a racist pig, you are stupid, you are a bloody fuckface...

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 12382
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:28 am

Postby Argonheart_Po » Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:44 pm

Welcome to the real world where principles have consequences.

He can't release them without scaring the shit out of anyone, and yet he should becuase it is the right thing to do.

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 17000
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 12:38 am
Location: Bloody Fuckface

Postby Wellpisser » Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:07 am

Felix wrote:Return where? They are from quite a few countries - I don't imagine an Afghan dirt farmer who was sold by bounty hunters or rival tribesman would have anything to fear from Kabul. If we can't convict them, and they can't return home because of our kidnapping them, we have a responsibility to them.

At any rate, inconvenience is no excuse for further deprivation of their liberty and right to due process.


Yes, that is all of the Gitmo detainess nicely summed up.

Seriously, do you think that Jordanian or Syrian Islamo nutcases should be returned to Jordan or Syria? Argon has a good point. Personally I think they should be and I wish that the UK would send known terrorists that cannot be convicted under UK law back home to their countryt of origin whether or not that country tortures people.

What do you think BO should do?

Incorrigible Testiclast
User avatar
Posts: 2614
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 1:10 pm
Location: New Jersey USA

Postby crzypt » Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:27 am

Argonheart_Po wrote:It's a serious question - They can't return - they haven't been convicted - where should they go?

If they are found Not Guilty in an open court of law?

Straight outta the Courthouse and down to the nearest ICE office to pick up their Green Card

If the United States can grant political asylum to proven terrorists like Luis Posada Carriles and Emmanuel "Toto" Constant, then IMHO it has an indisputable obligation to provide equal treatment to Gitmo detainees who have been found innocent of "terrorism" in the US courts
I yam what I yam....except when I'm a sweet potato

Stew Ingredient
Posts: 6332
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 5:38 am
Location: LES, NYC, USA

Postby flojin » Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:39 am

How nice it must be to unhindered by principles. It is a quandary: What do you do when you've rounded up a bunch of people, stashed them on foreign soil, and denied them access to your established system for trying them? What to do indeed.

This demonstrates the need for foresight in leadership. It also shows why we MUST respect the institutions that wise people in the past have created. Our system is imperfect, but to circumvent things like the Geneva Convention or the US Constitution in an ad-hoc fashion as a panicked reaction to unfolding events has consequences.

The best way out of it is to go back to the idea of principle. We must do what is right, because it is right, and then heed the lesson and avoid this mess in the future.

Those people deserve a fair trail. We must learn whether or not they are criminals, and if it can't be proven that they are, then they must be released. The Russians tried gulags. It is not how we want to govern.
Maxwell wrote:Tell me why I should care about ethics when the democrats don't.

Mayor McCheese
User avatar
Posts: 17375
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 5:44 am
Location: God damn America

Postby Citizen Baba » Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:41 am

The Uighurs in Gitmo should be resettled in the US.

The only thing they are guilty of is hating the Chinese, for which they should be given medals.

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 5040
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Oblivia

Postby Piel! » Tue Nov 11, 2008 1:05 am

Gud nooz four Tigmore!!!1!
The Blowkiest Bloek in the whole of Bleakdom

bark brak! bark barack karp! bark!

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 1786
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:02 pm
Location: Fredonia

Postby Polardude » Tue Nov 11, 2008 2:48 am

They can be released to Loughborough. Tina will welcomed them
Mali
"Aint that sweet. 3 kosher klown on one thread. Pity its not in a coffee bar in tel aviv. It would make an interesting target."

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 5040
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Oblivia

Postby Piel! » Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:32 am

Polardude wrote:They can be released to Loughborough. Tina will welcomed them


Iz Laughbra kneer Buca?
The Blowkiest Bloek in the whole of Bleakdom

bark brak! bark barack karp! bark!

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 12382
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:28 am

Postby Argonheart_Po » Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:19 am

Seriously, do you think that Jordanian or Syrian Islamo nutcases should be returned to Jordan or Syria?


I agree.

But it's not only that - if some of them are returned - then they are likely to be tortured or killed.

Obama has a problem - release them on US soil and look like a weak liberal.

Return them to their nation of origin - and be criticised by the governments there for returning fascist nutcases - and look like a weak liberal.

Return them to their nation of origin - and have them killed - and look weak to the Arabs or Iranians - and an executioner to the west.

It's all very well to close Gitmo - but if you do - then you need at act, and to act, as we have seen with Bush, invites criticism. Long gone is the luxury of sitting on the sidelines carping at those who act with no responsability yourself.

Stew Ingredient
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:51 pm
Location: RTW

Postby candy is dandy but... » Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:50 am

Detain innocent people indefinitely or look like a weak liberal.
What to do?
I want my fucking money back

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 15029
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:33 am
Location: Phnom Penh

Postby foolsprogress » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:12 am

Argonheart_Po wrote:...then you need at act, and to act, as we have seen with Bush, invites criticism. Long gone is the luxury of sitting on the sidelines carping at those who act with no responsability yourself.

Nothing has changed in this regard. As Armericans, carping or not, we have no more or less resposibility than we did before the election.
Let me live in a house by the side of the road...

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 12382
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:28 am

Postby Argonheart_Po » Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:17 pm

So what should Obama do with these men?

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 9241
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 9:14 am
Location: Just south of the South Pole

Postby simon_in_exile » Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:44 pm

Argonheart_Po wrote:So what should Obama do with these men?


Flojin makes a great post, and your question should be "what should the USA do with these men?". The Bush administration has everything to answer for due to their creation of this totally avoidable mess.

If I was in charge it would be quite simple:
Try them all in a court of law.
- if innocent, give them the option to become US citizens. But keep tabs on them, as once you've wrongly held someone for 7 years, they're likely to be pretty pissed off. If they want to return to their own countries, that's up to them.
- if guilty, place them in a normal civilian jail in the USA. Do not send them back to their own country where they will likely be tortured (further).

Mayor McCheese
User avatar
Posts: 17375
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 5:44 am
Location: God damn America

Postby Citizen Baba » Tue Nov 11, 2008 1:56 pm

simon_in_exile wrote:
Argonheart_Po wrote:So what should Obama do with these men?


Flojin makes a great post, and your question should be "what should the USA do with these men?". The Bush administration has everything to answer for due to their creation of this totally avoidable mess.

If I was in charge it would be quite simple:
Try them all in a court of law.
- if innocent, give them the option to become US citizens. But keep tabs on them, as once you've wrongly held someone for 7 years, they're likely to be pretty pissed off. If they want to return to their own countries, that's up to them.
- if guilty, place them in a normal civilian jail in the USA. Do not send them back to their own country where they will likely be tortured (further).


I largely agree, simon. A minor quibble is it would be unprecedented for the US government simply to award any foreign-born person citizenship. Instead, they should be given positive assistance -- temporary housing and welfare benefits, help finding a job, English classes -- by being routed through the traditional refugee resettlement framework. After a year they could apply for a green card, and after four more for citizenship.

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 5040
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:06 pm
Location: Oblivia

Postby Piel! » Tue Nov 11, 2008 2:21 pm

Argonheart_Po wrote:So what should Obama do with these men?


FRIE TEH REVOLOOSHUNARIES FORM TOEGIT!!1111!
The Blowkiest Bloek in the whole of Bleakdom

bark brak! bark barack karp! bark!

Queen Bee
User avatar
Posts: 46875
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 8:48 am
Location: Just south of the North Pole

Postby northern_goddess » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:11 pm

Do you think many of them will not be able to be convicted of something? or most of them?
I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it.

http://www.fat-pie.com/salad.htm

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 348
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 8:11 pm
Location: Florida, USA

Postby Dan » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:13 pm

What are they going to do with them? From what I read a lot of the home countries don't want them back.

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Postby Dagny » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:16 pm

Dan wrote:What are they going to do with them? From what I read a lot of the home countries don't want them back.


The new civilian security force needs recruits. :twisted:
Free Leonard!

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 9241
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 9:14 am
Location: Just south of the South Pole

Postby simon_in_exile » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:18 pm

Dan wrote:What are they going to do with them? From what I read a lot of the home countries don't want them back.

There's a bit of chatter about that in this thread.

[edited to add that I agree with baba's comment about green cards instead of citizenship. Posting quotable comments whilst working on something else - that's just one reason I'm not a politician]

Queen Bee
User avatar
Posts: 46875
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 8:48 am
Location: Just south of the North Pole

Postby northern_goddess » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:19 pm

simon_in_exile wrote:
Dan wrote:What are they going to do with them? From what I read a lot of the home countries don't want them back.

There's a bit of chatter about that in this thread.


:)

I think we should come up with a plan and then send Obama a letter with our 'helpful' suggestions.
I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it.

http://www.fat-pie.com/salad.htm

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:09 pm
Location: Death Valley

Postby methuselah » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:36 pm

Felix wrote:
Argonheart_Po wrote:Where will he send the poeple who cannot return to their homelend?


They should probably be killed, eh?


Fine with me.
If you look out your window as the sun's going down, I'll be there by the side of the road, And I'll ride you away from the dirty down town, An ne'er again leave you alone
T-Bone Burnett

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:09 pm
Location: Death Valley

Postby methuselah » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:38 pm

Dagny wrote:
Dan wrote:What are they going to do with them? From what I read a lot of the home countries don't want them back.


The new civilian security force needs recruits. :twisted:


Excellent post.
If you look out your window as the sun's going down, I'll be there by the side of the road, And I'll ride you away from the dirty down town, An ne'er again leave you alone
T-Bone Burnett

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 18649
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:13 pm

Postby snowgirl » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:59 pm

Citizen Baba wrote:
simon_in_exile wrote:
Argonheart_Po wrote:So what should Obama do with these men?


Flojin makes a great post, and your question should be "what should the USA do with these men?". The Bush administration has everything to answer for due to their creation of this totally avoidable mess.

If I was in charge it would be quite simple:
Try them all in a court of law.
- if innocent, give them the option to become US citizens. But keep tabs on them, as once you've wrongly held someone for 7 years, they're likely to be pretty pissed off. If they want to return to their own countries, that's up to them.
- if guilty, place them in a normal civilian jail in the USA. Do not send them back to their own country where they will likely be tortured (further).


I largely agree, simon. A minor quibble is it would be unprecedented for the US government simply to award any foreign-born person citizenship. Instead, they should be given positive assistance -- temporary housing and welfare benefits, help finding a job, English classes -- by being routed through the traditional refugee resettlement framework. After a year they could apply for a green card, and after four more for citizenship.


What Baba and Simon said.

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 12382
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:28 am

Postby Argonheart_Po » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:14 am

Flojin makes a great post, and your question should be "what should the USA do with these men?".


Simon - you need to change your mindset. The Left are now in power - they have to make the decisions, no more whining from the sidelines.

if innocent, give them the option to become US citizens. But keep tabs on them, as once you've wrongly held someone for 7 years, they're likely to be pretty pissed off. If they want to return to their own countries, that's up to them.


Why should the US ask them to stay?

And what - here in the real world - do you think the chances of Obama doing that are, given that it will make him look like a terrorist sympathiser just when he will want to look stong?

I'd say less then zero.

So commenting on what might happen - in the real world - what will he do with these men?

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 28860
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:00 pm
Location: manhattan project brownfields

Postby q5q » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:17 am

there's a place in crawford, texas, they should be welcome to stay.
bodhisattva of sweetness, lite, and moist since 2001; dave_of_daves, whisperer_of_catsups

Vince wrote:
I'm never angry except with q5q who is a despicable abortion.

d&c
arbour zena: keith jarrett, charlie haden, jan gabarek, stuttgart rad orc

Mayor McCheese
User avatar
Posts: 17375
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 5:44 am
Location: God damn America

Postby Citizen Baba » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:19 am

what will he do with these men?


That's not the question you asked.

I actually think the Uighurs might get resettled here. We should arm them and send them back to China.

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 12420
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 7:49 pm
Location: Occupied Southern States

Postby Lavite » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:38 am

I'd be glad to see some changes. It should at a minimum cover the following:

1. Attach the POW status to those detainees to which it applies.

2. After that, formally charge and prosecute those suspected of committing a crime. It can be in a federal court or a military court as applicable.

3. Release the rest. If no country will take them then the U.S. must suck it up.
The majestic American Eagle soars high above the fangs of the bitter British Lion.

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 12382
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:28 am

Postby Argonheart_Po » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:42 am

That's not the question you asked.


I know - it's a further question follwoing the 'we-all-live-in-happy-bunnyland' replies.

1. Attach the POW status to those detainees to which it applies.


Agreed.

2. After that, formally charge and prosecute those suspected of committing a crime. It can be in a federal court or a military court as applicable.


Yes.

3. Release the rest. If no country will take them then the U.S. must suck it up.


That's the tricky one. How ill Obama deal with - say - 300 perhaps uncivilied and potentially ultra-violent fascists?

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 12420
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 7:49 pm
Location: Occupied Southern States

Postby Lavite » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:48 am

One would hope that the number of detainees who can't be rated POWs or charged with a crime is just a handful.

If the number is as high as 300, then the U.S. really screwed the pooch.
The majestic American Eagle soars high above the fangs of the bitter British Lion.

Mayor McCheese
User avatar
Posts: 17375
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 5:44 am
Location: God damn America

Postby Citizen Baba » Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:09 am

How many repatriated Gitmo detainees have been tortured?

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 12420
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 7:49 pm
Location: Occupied Southern States

Postby Lavite » Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:15 am

Torture is such an ugly word. We prefer to call it aggressive interrogation.
The majestic American Eagle soars high above the fangs of the bitter British Lion.

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 3403
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:57 am
Location: Il cielo in una stanza

Postby Collateral Knowledge » Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:56 am

Lavite wrote:I'd be glad to see some changes. It should at a minimum cover the following:

1. Attach the POW status to those detainees to which it applies.

2. After that, formally charge and prosecute those suspected of committing a crime. It can be in a federal court or a military court as applicable.

3. Release the rest. If no country will take them then the U.S. must suck it up.


These are good suggestions, but (1) means keeping POWs in camps somwhere until some sort of agreed end to hostilities. In practise that could be for ever. I think that's no less than they deserve but clearly the will to keep them as POWs is fading. That will mean the US is fighting a war in Afghanistan while eventually granting citizenship to enemy combatants, probably even while the war is continuing. It's utterly stupid.

Since the US supposedly illegally seized those people in the first place, if they can't be charged or held, then return them to the exact same place they were seized and let them go there. Those who objected to their intital seizing can have no complaint. It's suicidally stupid to compromise the safety of the US public because of what might or might not happen in another country. Ordinary people get tortured in all sorts of countries, including western ones. In practise this would mean many Taliban POWs being returned to Afghanistan where they will either live quietly, start killing again or be killed. A gamble of course, but not as stupid a one as letting them go free in the USA.

If they can be proven to be completely innocent then of course they deserve compensation. They don't deserve a new place of residence.

If people wish to adhere to the realpolitik idea that other countries can do as they like to people in their countries without western interference, then this is demographically probably the last group anyone should be concerned about. The extremely faint possibility of a Somalian Al Qaeda terrorist being tortured or killed on his return is far more fitting than of a woman being stoned to death for being raped there, for example. Since the west doesn't care about the latter, why care about the former? That's not principle, it's inverted morality.
21 minutes of adventure!

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 3403
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:57 am
Location: Il cielo in una stanza

Postby Collateral Knowledge » Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:03 am

Citizen Baba wrote:How many repatriated Gitmo detainees have been tortured?


Do you mean tortured when they return to their country of origin? I don't know that anyone's bothered to collate the information. The widespread claims that they will be tortured haven't been supported by much in the way of evidence (any evidence so far as I'm aware, though there may be some).
21 minutes of adventure!

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 3235
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Cologne / Chinese massage parlor

Postby ToyTone » Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:22 am

I would be rather careful when discussing things like torture with Collateral. He just confirmed me that he is in favor of gassing people he doesn't like.

that makes him a nazi. and we all know that they were into torture as well big time.
so keep in mind, with whom you are talking!
better a bizarre humor than always angry

Stew Ingredient
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:51 pm
Location: RTW

Postby candy is dandy but... » Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:37 am

Since the west doesn't care about the latter, why care about the former?


'The West' does care about the former, but doesn't have a way to prevent it. If expatriating somebody is likely to result in their being tortured then there is a way to stop that from happening.
I want my fucking money back

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 3403
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:57 am
Location: Il cielo in una stanza

Postby Collateral Knowledge » Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:58 am

ToyTone wrote:I would be rather careful when discussing things like torture with Collateral. He just confirmed me that he is in favor of gassing people he doesn't like.


You poor little victim. I said you should gas yourself. No coercion or action from me involved, just a little decency on your part.

candy wrote:If expatriating somebody is likely to result in their being tortured then there is a way to stop that from happening.


It's that 'likely' that hasn't be proven, though - so far as I am aware; I may be wrong - just widely claimed. Does anyone know how many cases there are of such terrorist suspects being repatriated and then tortured?
21 minutes of adventure!

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 1621
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:15 pm
Location: Well and truly inside Wellpisser's angry head.

Postby AussieBob » Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:14 pm

Collateral Knowledge wrote:You poor little victim. I said you should gas yourself. No coercion or action from me involved, just a little decency on your part.


Charming, you sound like such a well adjusted person.
Collateral Knowledge: I hope you lose your legs in a car bomb.

Mayor McCheese
User avatar
Posts: 17375
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 5:44 am
Location: God damn America

Postby Citizen Baba » Thu Nov 27, 2008 12:01 am

It seems as if releasing Gitmo detainees, who can't be proved guilty and face the prospect of torture if repatriated, in the US may not be far fetched at all, and the Obama administration may not have all that much choice on the matter. Because of convention(s) the US has signed, it can't return people to countries that may torture them and indeed has an affirmative obligation to provide protection to them.

Case in point, the Gitmo Uighurs:

http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-11-25-voa4.cfm

I know some folks in domestic refugee resettlement who are on an advisory board that will likely see them resettled in Northern Virginia where the largest Uighur community in the country resides.

Sorry, Po.

Stew Ingredient
User avatar
Posts: 13272
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 9:37 pm

Postby SeamusMcCool » Thu Nov 27, 2008 2:10 am

We can't return detainees who are innocent or acquitted because they might be tortured in their country of origin. So we'll leave them in Gitmo to be tortured and interrogated indefinitely. That's some beautiful logic.
"I'd stumbled into the middle of an evil, insidious cult of chainsaw worshipping maniacs. I had to wonder if we'd let our religious freedom go too far in this country, or maybe our immigration laws were just too lax."

Return to US Presidential Election 2008

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests