Taliban Prisoners in Cuba

[fireproof]

Some of these people would just as soon bite your nose off as look at you.  Really.  They can't be taken to the mainland - what if they escaped?  No one would be safe.  

The fact is, we're suddenly dealing with a lot of very dangerous people without the time to properly prepare accomodations and a system for processing them.  This will take time - they will be ok until they can be dealt with on an individual basis.

Incidently, they are being fed a "culturally appropriate" diet.  No porkchops (and sufficient water and calories to stay healthy).  They are even given an extra towel to use as a prayer rug!  I think I would rather be a taliban prisoner of the US than an woman living in taliban controlled Afganistan.

[andream]

Look guys, I don't care if you hang them up by their heels somewhere, my point which is being lost in the emotionalism is that we're circumventing our own system and it puzzles me as to why these guys were handled any differently than any other criminals.

[chris68]

Andrea,

To answer your question the best of my knowledge is they are treating these people as prisoners of terrorism and not prisoners of war.  I'm not sure of the technicalities of those issues, but I am sure the government is probably setting that standard and until then are keeping them in Cuba instead of the US.  Granted a far cry from the conditions they had, wasn't it winter in Afganastan?  Now they are in summer conditions?

Okay I'll stop there but I think that is the main confusion here that they are trying to figure out.

Chris68
Deskdemon Forum Board Staff

[phoenix55]

Okay, maybe I'll be making an unpopular statement, but it's my understanding that if you're not a citizen of the United States, you are not automatically entitled to the rights of U.S. citizens, which would include due process.

I would bet Chris is right about the terrorism thing.  

Edited by phoenix55 on 22/01/02 05:43 PM.

[dedlered]

The Taliban may not be US citizens but they are to be treated by the terms of the Geneva Convention.  It is said that they are being treated well albeit not how they (the Taliban) would prefer to be treated.

I would expect that Chris's take on the terrorism aspect on this is correct as well.

Laura
Deskdemon Forum Board Staff

Edited by dedlered on 22/01/02 06:03 PM.

[chris68]

Also on the news on the way back from lunch they stated a very important issue here is that we are dealing with some of the MOST DANGEROUS individuals on the planet, and they were btw the most wanted by the FBI (some of them anyway), so I think until they can determine how they will be handled they are just holding them in Cuba til' they can figure all the treaties and the like they have to consider.  Besides I would rather they have the suspicious activities they have been reporting there instead of here, like someone said what would happen if one of them escaped here?  Not that I would wish that on anyone anywhere else, but at least they are being fairly treated (best of my knowledge) and fed, and even allowed to worship.  What more would they ask for under the current circumstances.  We will have to see what our government decides to go here and I am sure appropriate action will be taken.  Remember when they declared war on terrorism, well that took some time to prepare and I think that is what they (the government) is trying to do here in the best possible solution.  It may not make everyone happy, but they do have lots of legal issues to mull over before they do decide.

Chris68
Deskdemon Forum Board Staff

[andream]

okay that's it, Im paying the big bucks and ditching my digital TV for cable, cause I'm not getting my CNN fix.  Im missing nuances to the story. I can't believe it, terrorists are going to cost me £50. a month...grrrr!

Andrea, who needs her CNN

Edited by andream on 22/01/02 06:37 PM.

[chris68]

Andrea,

Might I recommend Fox news.  They claim to be fair and balanced news.  As for CNN, I'm not so sure.  The more I watch Fox news, it's better reporting, despite Rivera, and it actually does seem fair for the most part. Brit Hume and the like are wonderful to watch to get the NEWS IMHO.



Chris68
Deskdemon Forum Board Staff

[andream]

Well Chris, I'd like to try that but uhhh getting that In  the  Richmond (London)area  is no mean feat.  I've just been informed that the ONE cable company in my area has no Cable in my area and because my flat is located on the grounds of a Victorian Church, I have to do about a ream of paperwork anyway.  :sigh:

Edited by andream on 22/01/02 07:05 PM.

[donnap99]

How have you lived all this time without CNN?!?  I'd be shriveled up in a corner mumbling "need news, need news, need news,..."


DonnaP99

[chris68]

Ahhh bummer on that one Andrea.  DH is the one that got me tuned into Fox News instead of MSN and CNN.  Actually we still do watch MSN but not as often.  I keep forgetting sometimes that you are on the other side of the pond now.  You'll just have to come here for the latest and greatest updates, correct?

Chris68
Deskdemon Forum Board Staff

[blufire21]

Chris is right, they are being treated as prisoners of terrorism.  And they are being given the rights they need under the Geniva act.  Thanks to the USA Patriot Act (the terrorism law), normal constitutional rights have been forfited.  That American Taliban guy... he lost his rights thanks to this act.

Personally I'm torn when it comes to this law.  I'm glad that it protects us from such people, but it tramples over several of our rights.  What's more frustrating for me is the fact that the majority of our congressmen and senators did not read the bill before they signed it.  

"On October 12, the House voted 337 to 79, for a 175 -page bill that most of its members hadn't even had time to read." - The Village Voice, "Terrorizing the Bill of Rights" by Nat Hentoff.  Posted Novermber 9th on www.villagevoice.com.  I suggest you read the whole article because it's very interesting.  


Ellen in TX

[chris68]

Bluefire,

You bring up a very good point but do you really think they have time to read all the bills, even the President himself stated the one he signed last week he did not read nor did he intend to read it.  He sighned it however, why, because he has staff that brief him on the highlights of those things.  Do Congressmen and the like have the same staff, probably but to what extent I am not sure.  So assuming their staff are doing the jobs they were hired to do, I wouldn't worry too much about Congress, etc. etc. not reading what they sign.  Unfortunately it happens all the time.

Chris68
Deskdemon Forum Board Staff

[blufire21]

You're right again.  Do they have time to read everything?  Most cases no, but in the President's case, I have a problem.  Not touching on this bill (because I printed out all 200+ pages and it reads greek), but if you've every REALLY looked at a bill you would see why the Pres. must read all bills and not have his staff brief him on it.  

Congress writes special laws and allowances into a bill.  For example, hypathetically, if I was to introduce a bill into Congress that lowers the blood alcohol to .0001, representatives have the ability to also add things unrelated into the bill.  Senator A might write in a special allowance of 2 million dollars to set up special housing for families with of people undergoing chemo, while Senator B could write in an allowance for a 150 million dollar study on whether grass grows better in direct or indirect sunlight (I know very trivial, but it's for explanatory purposes only).  While I'm all for the housing add-in, who needs to spend $150 million on grass?  It's up to the President to see such things and veto the bill.  It's then up to Congress to rewrite the bill w/o the issue that the President said no to.  

Clinton got in to a big bind (think WAY before the other stuff) when he vetoed a welfare bill because the Representatives had writen in a huge perk for themselves that didn't add up.  He told the press that he had no problem with the actual bill, but with the little extra like that perk that were snuck in.  

As far as the Patriot Act, I would not have such a problem with it if the Republican leaders had not rewritten the bill after the House Judiciary Committe had written and submited the original bill to Congress.  The people who rewrote the bill did it the night before and then pressured the other congressman by making them feel that they would be considered unpatriotic by withholding their vote.  Senator Russ Fiengold gave an 11-page speache to President Bush that notes several amendment rights. Especially the 4th.  One of my biggest concerns is the fact that law enforcement has a right now to go through All business records including Your medical records.  All they have to say to the Judge to get a warrent to do this is that is has to do with a terrorism investigation.  At the moment, the gov. is enlisting the help of several consumer information companies to do this.  Check out his speach at http://feingold.senate.gov/releases/01/10/102501at.html.

Ok, now I'll shut up.  I didn't mean to get into this as deeply, but once I started typing it just kind spewed out.  I'm just a little PO'ed that the news didn't touch on this.  Any other time, it would be a BIG issue.


Ellen in TX

[whitesatin]

Here's what the terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay ARE
receiving:

* Three meals a day that meet Muslim laws with regard to diet;
* Water;
* Medical Care;
* Clothing and shoes;
* Shelter [albeit, not air conditioned shelter];
* Showers;
* Soap and toilet articles;
* Towels and washcloths;
* The opportunity to worship;
* Foam sleeping pads;
* Blankets [in contemplation, one supposes, of the air conditioners];
* Correspondence materials.

"Let's see a show of hands of those who believe these thugs
had better living conditions in Afghanistan than they do in
Cuba. No one?  Now, let's see a show of hands of those who
believe these thugs have better living conditions than most
Cubans. Oh! Look at that! Everyone."

- Rich Galen, "Mullings," 1/23/02


WhiteSatin