If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wired)   There isn't a single alternative to Guantanamo Bay in the US (there are 104)   (wired.com) divider line 80
    More: Interesting, Gitmo Detainees, Guantanamo Bay, Gitmo, United States, supermax, Khalid Shaikh, Fort Leavenworth, Federal Bureau of Prisons  
•       •       •

8157 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Nov 2012 at 10:48 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



80 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-29 09:56:12 AM
105. Western Aroostook County.
 
2012-11-29 10:48:54 AM
put them in Detroit?
 
2012-11-29 10:49:15 AM
"provided they make serious modifications"

And If my aunt had a schlong, she'd be my uncle.
 
2012-11-29 10:49:45 AM
If we put them in the US would we still be able to waterboard them?
 
2012-11-29 10:51:18 AM
What we really need is a big island somewhere, filled with venomous, predatory everything.
 
2012-11-29 10:51:53 AM
Think it's too dangerous to house the 166 suspected terrorists locked up in Guantanamo Bay within the continental United States?

Dangerous? What could be more dangerous than Cuba. Didn't anyone see Red Dawn?
 
2012-11-29 10:53:06 AM
But we cant have scurry terroists here it would make the tea partiers wet themselves in a pool of fear.
I thought we were supposed to keep POWs or whatever they are on the same latitude they were caught on or some dumb rule like that from the Geneva convention.
 
2012-11-29 10:53:19 AM

cgraves67: What we really need is a big island somewhere, filled with venomous, predatory everything.


The north half of Australia?

// was that the joke?
 
2012-11-29 10:53:42 AM
"But it's also worth noting that Feinstein released the GAO as the Senate debates next year's defense authorization bill, which in recent years has earned controversy for its provisions restricting Obama from closing Guantanamo. Her staff says it's just a coincidence."

I haz a skeptical
 
2012-11-29 10:54:52 AM
"Think it's too dangerous to house the 166 suspected terrorists locked up in Guantanamo Bay within the continental United States?"

No. I think the main argument (not sure how I feel about it) against it would be automatic constitutional rights granted under the 14th amendment.
 
2012-11-29 10:55:25 AM
Do they have mutant super powers or something? Just move some fellas out of one of the many fine Fed super max prisions and move them in there.
 
2012-11-29 10:55:28 AM
So here we are more than a decade after they were kidnapped. Have any of them been convicted yet? The ones that weren't released after several years for complete lack of evidence, obviously.
 
2012-11-29 10:57:02 AM
106> Your Mom's Vag
/that's cruel and inhuman
 
2012-11-29 10:57:06 AM
Got to keep them seperated.

Can't have them talking.
 
2012-11-29 10:57:11 AM

Devo: If we put them in the US would we still be able to waterboard them?


We can't waterboard them in Guantanamo either, not since 2009 anyway. And in fact I remember reading that even W quietly stopped using waterboarding after 2005 or 2006, when Cheney started falling out of favor.
 
2012-11-29 10:57:33 AM
ADX Florence.

We have put non-American terrorists caught in other countries in ADX Florence. We can do it again.

The problem is, and will always be, many of these detainees would never be convicted in a court of law due to torture or evidence or their actual capture. Combined with the fact that there isn't a country on earth that is going to welcome these people back, the American government (over the past 10 years) has created a non-zero group of individuals in an idiotic limbo where nobody has the guts to admit to the screw-up resulting from having to release them.

Thus, this group of people will be held until they die with no avenue of recourse and no reasonable action taken for a humane solution.

Yay America.
 
2012-11-29 10:58:29 AM

Spanky_McFarksalot: No. I think the main argument (not sure how I feel about it) against it would be automatic constitutional rights granted under the 14th amendment.


Yeah, they are already guaranteed constitutional rights. It's just that nobody wants to admit that.
 
2012-11-29 10:59:51 AM
Wasn't the whole point of gitmo was that it was off US soil and therefore not subject to constitutional due process?
 
2012-11-29 11:00:00 AM

Deep Contact: Got to keep them seperated.

Can't have them talking.


If you're under 18 you won't be doing any time
Hey come out and play
 
2012-11-29 11:00:34 AM
Obama won. We can stop pretending anyone gives a shiat.
 
2012-11-29 11:01:10 AM
Just release 'em to New York. They're all innocent, anyway, right?
 
2012-11-29 11:01:34 AM
media.comicvine.com

What Americans think of when they hear the words "Guantanamo detainees".
 
2012-11-29 11:01:35 AM
They are not common felons but war criminals and subject to the UCMJ.

Fark. These people would let them free if they could.
 
2012-11-29 11:01:55 AM
What is it that differentiates us from Nazi Germany or the old Soviet Union? I keep forgetting.
 
2012-11-29 11:01:56 AM
Just put them in a regular jail. They're not Magneto.
 
2012-11-29 11:02:17 AM
Jon Stewart on Guantanamo detainees: "They're not warlocks!"
 
2012-11-29 11:02:34 AM

Trashy: put them in Detroit?


I am not sure if it was on his list, but a prison further north in MI, sitting closed, tried to get that Gitmo gig. They also tried to sell prison space to Cali. just so the out of work guards could be rehired.
 
2012-11-29 11:04:12 AM

mexican bathtub cheese: Wasn't the whole point of gitmo was that it was off US soil and therefore not subject to constitutional due process?



Yeah, but fortunately we've fixed that problem...

By eliminating constitutional due process for everyone.
 
2012-11-29 11:05:51 AM

DrPainMD: What is it that differentiates us from Nazi Germany or the old Soviet Union? I keep forgetting.


We have reality shows.
 
2012-11-29 11:06:18 AM

DrPainMD: What is it that differentiates us from Nazi Germany or the old Soviet Union? I keep forgetting.



God is on our side, silly.
 
2012-11-29 11:06:58 AM

darth_badger: Do they have mutant super powers or something?


Compared to the average American, yes.

/the ability to recognize the difference between Hollywood and reality, for example
//the most dangerous power is their ability to tell people they mean no harm, even while murdering them in broad daylight... Americans seem to fall for that trick every single time
 
2012-11-29 11:07:04 AM
Clearly the housing requirements of 166 assholes needs to be addressed immediately. We'll just tax
some rich folks and all our fiscal problems will go away.
 
2012-11-29 11:09:29 AM
The GOP was just road blocking this move because Fartbongo wanted it and their #1 job was to be sure he was a one-term POTUS (so they failed) and now they can go about the business of campaigning for the prisoners and the federal dollars to housed in their state/district.
 
2012-11-29 11:12:08 AM

douchebag/hater: They are not common felons but war criminals and subject to the UCMJ.

Fark. These people would let them free if they could.


If you're talking about the Bush and Obama administrations I very much agree.

If you're talking about the detainees then all I can say is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials

Even "war criminals" have their day in court. If Goring and Keitel got trials why didn't UBL? Is AQ really so much more dangerous then freakin NAZI Germany, you know, the regime that ACTUALLY committed genocide and very nearly conquered the entire world. If so I'd like for some politician to come out and say it, that the reason we have to give up all these rights is because AQ poses more of an existential threat than the Soviets or NAZIs ever did. What a joke.
 
2012-11-29 11:14:57 AM
www.cratelabelsonline.com
 
2012-11-29 11:16:19 AM

Trashy: put them in Detroit?


www.wearysloth.com
 
2012-11-29 11:19:52 AM

bulldg4life: ADX Florence.

We have put non-American terrorists caught in other countries in ADX Florence. We can do it again.

The problem is, and will always be, many of these detainees would never be convicted in a court of law due to torture or evidence or their actual capture. Combined with the fact that there isn't a country on earth that is going to welcome these people back, the American government (over the past 10 years) has created a non-zero group of individuals in an idiotic limbo where nobody has the guts to admit to the screw-up resulting from having to release them.

Thus, this group of people will be held until they die with no avenue of recourse and no reasonable action taken for a humane solution.

Yay America.


Obama has the power to correct this problem all by himself. Unfortuantly, it would single handledly guarantee that the next President is a Republican.

That is, he should pardon everybody there and release them into the United States. He has the constitutional power to do so without Congressial permission.

Nobody there can be tried in a fair court of law, because they aren't actually guilty of anything, are only guilty of relatively minor things (for instance, defending their homeland (Afghanistan) from an invading army (the US), as opposed to actual terrorism), the only evidence against them is classified, and/or the only evidence against them was obtained illegally (IE, via waterboarding or the like).

Of course, at least some of the people there are actual terrorists, and the rest might be a little pissed off, you know, after being held for up to a decade without trial, and might become such. But morally and constitutionally, it's what he should do.
 
2012-11-29 11:25:00 AM

Mr. Carpenter: douchebag/hater: They are not common felons but war criminals and subject to the UCMJ.

Fark. These people would let them free if they could.

If you're talking about the Bush and Obama administrations I very much agree.

If you're talking about the detainees then all I can say is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials

Even "war criminals" have their day in court. If Goring and Keitel got trials why didn't UBL? Is AQ really so much more dangerous then freakin NAZI Germany, you know, the regime that ACTUALLY committed genocide and very nearly conquered the entire world. If so I'd like for some politician to come out and say it, that the reason we have to give up all these rights is because AQ poses more of an existential threat than the Soviets or NAZIs ever did. What a joke.


These men are all dirty terrorists! Giving them a fair trial might prove otherwise, and we can't have that. Truth and Justice is the American Way*

*The American Way does not apply to brown people
 
2012-11-29 11:26:22 AM

generallyso: So here we are more than a decade after they were kidnapped. Have any of them been convicted yet? The ones that weren't released after several years for complete lack of evidence, obviously.


This. Further, when they talk about closing Guano, they don't mean that they will give the land back to Cuba, simply that they will close their prison camp.
 
2012-11-29 11:29:41 AM
Put them in her district, problem solved and that many more voters for her.
 
2012-11-29 11:31:12 AM

Mega Steve: *The American Way does not apply to brown people


You might want to ask if any of them actually want the "American Way".
 
2012-11-29 11:32:32 AM

douchebag/hater: They are not common felons but war criminals and subject to the UCMJ. Geneva Convention.

Fark. These people would let them free if they could.


FTFY. UCMJ is exclusively for our fine men and women.
 
2012-11-29 11:32:37 AM

Mr. Carpenter: douchebag/hater: They are not common felons but war criminals and subject to the UCMJ.

Fark. These people would let them free if they could.

If you're talking about the Bush and Obama administrations I very much agree.

If you're talking about the detainees then all I can say is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials

Even "war criminals" have their day in court. If Goring and Keitel got trials why didn't UBL? Is AQ really so much more dangerous then freakin NAZI Germany, you know, the regime that ACTUALLY committed genocide and very nearly conquered the entire world. If so I'd like for some politician to come out and say it, that the reason we have to give up all these rights is because AQ poses more of an existential threat than the Soviets or NAZIs ever did. What a joke.


The CIA didn't think the aftermath of the attempt to give Khalid Sheik Mohammed a civil trial was very funny.

/at least Obama was willing to realize he screwed up, and cancel it before even more crap hit the fan
//and the media was willing to hush the whole thing up and not even question it... if a Republican had screwed up that badly we'd be in a civil war now
 
2012-11-29 11:37:16 AM

Joe Blowme: Put them in her district, problem solved and that many more voters for her.


Um, Feinstein is a Senator, not a Congresswoman, so she doesn't have a "district". And she just won re-election by over 22 points.
 
2012-11-29 11:37:39 AM

generallyso: So here we are more than a decade after they were kidnapped. Have any of them been convicted yet? The ones that weren't released after several years for complete lack of evidence, obviously.


cant be convicted if you're never put on trial
 
2012-11-29 11:39:41 AM

douchebag/hater: They are not common felons but war criminals and subject to the UCMJ.

Fark. These people would let them free if they could.


Well if they're not guilty of anything, sure. You seem to have an extremely poor misunderstanding of the justice system.
 
2012-11-29 11:40:44 AM
www.englishexercises.org 
Alcatraz on that list?
 
2012-11-29 11:45:46 AM

Gleeman: douchebag/hater: They are not common felons but war criminals and subject to the UCMJ. Geneva Convention.

Fark. These people would let them free if they could.

FTFY. UCMJ is exclusively for our fine men and women.


Um, actually no. While you are right about the UCMJ, the Geneva Convention is directed at State Backed actors. These guys are stateless. Because their country of origin has said "nope, don't want them back" they've become abadoned people. Non-state actors is something that was never really well understood, and not defined in international law. Essentially we're stuck with no good options. Can't really release them (even if they weren't our enemy, they probably are now), can't really bring closure (by turning them into normal prisoners via a conviction). So I suspect that they will rot forever until they die. Sucks but there it is. There won't be an international hue and cry (except from some world government types that the US general population rightly thinks are nutters) since their countries of origin don't want them back. So no aggitation at the internation stage.
 
2012-11-29 11:46:55 AM

moothemagiccow: generallyso: So here we are more than a decade after they were kidnapped. Have any of them been convicted yet? The ones that weren't released after several years for complete lack of evidence, obviously.

cant be convicted if you're never put on trial


It's a case by case basis as to whether they're being tried. A bunch of them are.
 
2012-11-29 11:47:35 AM
While I dont understand the fervor for wanting to bring them here, but someone seems to really want that to happend for some reason. I hope they get put someplace realy cold.
 
Displayed 50 of 80 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report