Pages: 1 2 3

 

2006-10-17 04:17:20
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15282528/

So it appears that everybody wants the US to close down Gitmo and release all of the innocent detainees but when we try and hand all of the detainees back to their respective countries they turn us down. Hmmm..... I dunno about you but that sounds like BULLSHIT to me. If you want us to close down Gitmo at least take back the innocent citizens of your country. I'm not blaiming any certain country for this because its at least 40 countries saying no. Britain said no to 10 of them because they said they couldnt afford to keep an eye on them and that they were facing lawsuits from the families of the detainees. Germany finally took some of them after 4 years of bitching. The Chinese refuse to take any of theirs' because they are all muslims. For godsake Albania has taken on detainees from different countries without any problems. I just think that if everybody wants Gitmo closed down so damn bad the least that could do is accept them back into their country instead of saying its Americas problem. You think we want them? Hell we locked them away. I doubt that they would wanna stay in the US after that.
2006-10-17 04:27:50
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO
What would you suggest that we do with non threatining detainees?
2006-10-17 04:29:21
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6811

arabeater wrote:

What would you suggest that we do with non threatining detainees?
Slave labour in a Gulag in the Nevada desert.
2006-10-17 04:35:00
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO

CameronPoe wrote:

arabeater wrote:

What would you suggest that we do with non threatining detainees?
Slave labour in a Gulag in the Nevada desert.
As tempting as that sounds I dont think thats possible. Besides I really dont think they would be too safe in the US. You know them being accused of being Al Qaeda and all!
2006-10-17 04:40:42
RedTwizzler
I do it for the lulz.
+124|6793|Chicago

arabeater wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

arabeater wrote:

What would you suggest that we do with non threatining detainees?
Slave labour in a Gulag in the Nevada desert.
As tempting as that sounds I dont think thats possible. Besides I really dont think they would be too safe in the US. You know them being accused of being Al Qaeda and all!
Yeah, for fuck's sake cameron. You know the huge threat posed by an improperly held Iraqi civilian who's had no trial.
2006-10-17 04:46:37
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO

RedTwizzler wrote:

arabeater wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Slave labour in a Gulag in the Nevada desert.
As tempting as that sounds I dont think thats possible. Besides I really dont think they would be too safe in the US. You know them being accused of being Al Qaeda and all!
Yeah, for fuck's sake cameron. You know the huge threat posed by an improperly held Iraqi civilian who's had no trial.
Who said that they were Iraqi? There are detainees from 40 different countries. And they did all have trials which is how they were found to be innocent, hence the reason for releasing them.

Last edited by arabeater (2006-10-17 04:48:36)

2006-10-17 04:52:27
TeamZephyr
Maintaining My Rage Since 1975
+124|6785|Hillside, Melbourne, Australia
Well the Australian Citizens want David Hicks to come back to Australia.

However the government is just a series of yes men to America and we've "been assured" that he'll get a fair trial.

Hate Phillip Ruddock, worst person alive. He dares to say "sleep deprivation isn't torture" while wearing an Amnesty International badge.
2006-10-17 04:59:03
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+796|6941|United States of America
Dammit! I can't find that fairly old Colbert Report Formidable Opponent on this issue.

Oh wait, here it is. http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/m … emId=70789

Last edited by DesertFox423 (2006-10-17 05:00:01)

2006-10-17 05:00:08
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO

TeamZephyr wrote:

Well the Australian Citizens want David Hicks to come back to Australia.

However the government is just a series of yes men to America and we've "been assured" that he'll get a fair trial.

Hate Phillip Ruddock, worst person alive. He dares to say "sleep deprivation isn't torture" while wearing an Amnesty International badge.
Yea I'm saying all countries are being dumb but most are. About the sleep deprevation thing, I went through the Air Force Survival Training and experianced alot of torture situations. Such as beatings, being locked in a very small cage for days, sleep deprevation and being starved. I have to say the hardest was sleep deprevation because I became physically sick and started to go a little nuts.
2006-10-17 05:02:25
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6775|Πάϊ
Bad, bad governments won't let the US release those innocent prisoners! So I guess Gitmo stays huh? Oh well...
ƒ³
2006-10-17 05:05:55
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO

oug wrote:

Bad, bad governments won't let the US release those innocent prisoners! So I guess Gitmo stays huh? Oh well...
No they dont mind if we release them, they just dont them in there countries. I guess they feel that we should take them in. NOT! They are not US citizens. We have enough problems with illegals without having them running around. I dunno if Gitmo is stays or not. Hopefully not.
2006-10-17 05:07:38
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6817
Oh yes, evil, evil Europe.  How dare they not take in Chinese citizens.  And by what right does Germany refuse to accept a Turkish citizen?

Here's a thought: why doesn't the US talk to Turkey about the Turkish citizen, and take in the Chinese citizens themselves?
2006-10-17 05:12:04
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6775|Πάϊ

arabeater wrote:

oug wrote:

Bad, bad governments won't let the US release those innocent prisoners! So I guess Gitmo stays huh? Oh well...
No they dont mind if we release them, they just dont them in there countries. I guess they feel that we should take them in. NOT! They are not US citizens. We have enough problems with illegals without having them running around. I dunno if Gitmo is stays or not. Hopefully not.
So I guess Gitmo stays huh?
ƒ³
2006-10-17 05:13:02
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO

Bubbalo wrote:

Oh yes, evil, evil Europe.  How dare they not take in Chinese citizens.  And by what right does Germany refuse to accept a Turkish citizen?

Here's a thought: why doesn't the US talk to Turkey about the Turkish citizen, and take in the Chinese citizens themselves?
Europe doesnt wanna take in any of there own citizens. England has refused. It took 4 years for Germany to take 1 of their own citizens. Why should we take in the Chinese citizens? They are CHINESE CITIZENS!!! NOT US! If they were US then I would say fine, but they arent.
2006-10-17 05:23:30
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6817

arabeater wrote:

Europe doesnt wanna take in any of there own citizens.
Oh, I only see them talking about England and Germany.

Except for this:

Your source wrote:

The Pentagon has already freed all but a few European citizens from Guantanamo.
But, that couldn't be right.  Then where could the story possibly be?  Oh, that's right:

Your source wrote:

But U.S. officials have struggled to persuade Britain, Germany and other allies in Europe to accept prisoners who once had legal residency there, or who are effectively stateless.
How dare they not accept citizens who aren't theirs!  The monsters!

Also:

They're:  Short for "They are".  E.g. "They're stupid"
Their:  "They own".  E.g. "That's their car"
There:  Referring to a location.  E.g. "We'll meet there at noon"

arabeater wrote:

England has refused.
England are supporters, at least in theory, of Guantanamo Bay.

arabeater wrote:

It took 4 years for Germany to take 1 of their own citizens.
Oh rly?

Your source wrote:

A Turkish citizen..................was finally permitted to return from Guantanamo [to Germany] in August, four years after the German government turned down a U.S. proposal to release him.

arabeater wrote:

Why should we take in the Chinese citizens? They are CHINESE CITIZENS!!! NOT US! If they were US then I would say fine, but they arent.

Your source wrote:

In addition, virtually every country in Europe refused to grant asylum to several Guantanamo prisoners from China who were not being sent home.................slowing the process is a U.S. policy stipulating that prisoners cannot be transferred to nations with a record of human rights violations unless there are written assurances that they won't be mistreated............Several European countries with small Uighur immigrant populations declined to give the prisoners asylum after receiving pressure from the Chinese government, which wants to extradite the Uighurs and try them on terrorism charges, according to U.S. and European officials
So basically, the US can try people for terrorism but China can't.  Well that sounds perfectly reasonable.

NOT!

If the US objects, they can accept the cost, aswell as the upset of China.
2006-10-17 05:28:57
JahManRed
wank
+646|6884|IRELAND

I don't know about anyone else, but the UK only wants one detainee back. Because he is the only one of them who is a British citizen. The other 10 are all foreign nationals, mostly from Pakistan who were asylum seekers or in the UK illegally. America wants the ppl put under 24hour surveillance costing millions when these guys shouldn't be in the UK in the first place. Obviously though, if these guys go back to Pakistan, their is no way they will be under surveillance, they will be a drop in the huge ocean of extremism brewing their and won't increase the threat anymore anyway (its through the roof anyway). The UK says let their respective countries take them. Sounds fair enough to me.
2006-10-17 05:33:29
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO

Bubbalo wrote:

arabeater wrote:

Europe doesnt wanna take in any of there own citizens.
Oh, I only see them talking about England and Germany.

Except for this:

Your source wrote:

The Pentagon has already freed all but a few European citizens from Guantanamo.
But, that couldn't be right.  Then where could the story possibly be?  Oh, that's right:

Your source wrote:

But U.S. officials have struggled to persuade Britain, Germany and other allies in Europe to accept prisoners who once had legal residency there, or who are effectively stateless.
How dare they not accept citizens who aren't theirs!  The monsters!

Also:

They're:  Short for "They are".  E.g. "They're stupid"
Their:  "They own".  E.g. "That's their car"
There:  Referring to a location.  E.g. "We'll meet there at noon"

arabeater wrote:

England has refused.
England are supporters, at least in theory, of Guantanamo Bay.

arabeater wrote:

It took 4 years for Germany to take 1 of their own citizens.
Oh rly?

Your source wrote:

A Turkish citizen..................was finally permitted to return from Guantanamo [to Germany] in August, four years after the German government turned down a U.S. proposal to release him.

arabeater wrote:

Why should we take in the Chinese citizens? They are CHINESE CITIZENS!!! NOT US! If they were US then I would say fine, but they arent.

Your source wrote:

In addition, virtually every country in Europe refused to grant asylum to several Guantanamo prisoners from China who were not being sent home.................slowing the process is a U.S. policy stipulating that prisoners cannot be transferred to nations with a record of human rights violations unless there are written assurances that they won't be mistreated............Several European countries with small Uighur immigrant populations declined to give the prisoners asylum after receiving pressure from the Chinese government, which wants to extradite the Uighurs and try them on terrorism charges, according to U.S. and European officials
So basically, the US can try people for terrorism but China can't.  Well that sounds perfectly reasonable.

NOT!

If the US objects, they can accept the cost, aswell as the upset of China.
He was a Turkish citizen that while in Gitmo failed to renew his  German citizenship. I doubt England is a supporter of Gitmo.

Last edited by arabeater (2006-10-17 05:35:17)

2006-10-17 05:34:52
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO

JahManRed wrote:

I don't know about anyone else, but the UK only wants one detainee back. Because he is the only one of them who is a British citizen. The other 10 are all foreign nationals, mostly from Pakistan who were asylum seekers or in the UK illegally. America wants the ppl put under 24hour surveillance costing millions when these guys shouldn't be in the UK in the first place. Obviously though, if these guys go back to Pakistan, their is no way they will be under surveillance, they will be a drop in the huge ocean of extremism brewing their and won't increase the threat anymore anyway (its through the roof anyway). The UK says let their respective countries take them. Sounds fair enough to me.
I agree with you. However most countries dont want them back.
2006-10-17 05:45:16
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6817

arabeater wrote:

He was a Turkish citizen that while in Gitmo failed to renew his  German citizenship.
No, he had German residency.  That means he can stay there for a defined period of time.  Don't confuse your facts.

arabeater wrote:

I doubt England is a supporter of Gitmo.
Because they're only your strongest ally

Now how about the rest of my post?

Last edited by Bubbalo (2006-10-17 05:49:48)

2006-10-17 05:47:16
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO

Bubbalo wrote:

arabeater wrote:

He was a Turkish citizen that while in Gitmo failed to renew his  German citizenship.
No, he had German residency.  That means he can stay there for a defined period of time.  Don't confuse your facts.

arabeater wrote:

I doubt England is a supporter of Gitmo.
Because their only your strongest ally

Now how about the rest of my post?
He was raised there.  Ok then what would you recommend we do with all of the freed detainees that have nowhere to go?
2006-10-17 05:49:28
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6817

arabeater wrote:

He was raised there.
And he probably had every oppurtunity to go for citizenship, and chose not to............

arabeater wrote:

Ok then what would you recommend we do with all of the freed detainees that have nowhere to go?
Take care of them yourselves: you're the ones who got them into this mess.
2006-10-17 05:51:46
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO

Bubbalo wrote:

arabeater wrote:

He was raised there.
And he probably had every oppurtunity to go for citizenship, and chose not to............

arabeater wrote:

Ok then what would you recommend we do with all of the freed detainees that have nowhere to go?
Take care of them yourselves: you're the ones who got them into this mess.
Ok then I say send them back where we found them. Afgahnistan and Iraq. I dont want them here in my country either. We have enough illegals to worry about already.

Last edited by arabeater (2006-10-17 05:52:27)

2006-10-17 05:54:55
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6817
Oh, right, so just rip them out, hold them in prison for 4 years, then decide you really don't want them and dump them in a warzone.  Nice.
2006-10-17 05:56:08
arabeater
Do you have any idea how fooking busy I am?
+49|6937|Colorado Springs, CO

Bubbalo wrote:

Oh, right, so just rip them out, hold them in prison for 4 years, then decide you really don't want them and dump them in a warzone.  Nice.
Well thats where they were when we found them so they must have had some desire to be there in the first place.
2006-10-17 05:59:52
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6817
Kind of a different place when you found them.  Plus, funnily enough, people can't just jump right back to where they were after being away for 4 years.  Crazy, I know.

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard