Guantanamo inmates and the EU

Google is your friend:



Whole article - interesting, it sheds some light on this.

Apparently, we're talking about 50+ prisoners who can't return to their home countries (most probably because they'd be shot on sight). So, the US asked some European countries if they can provide asylum to these people.

Still, I see no answer to my question - why are 50 prisoners such a problem to the US? You guys boast about how welcoming your tolerant society is to immigrants, so now's the time to prove it :)

There has to be a reason the home countries would shoot them on sight. We send them back to wherever they are citizens. Isn't that what Canada got all pissy about regarding that one guy awhile back??
 
There has to be a reason the home countries would shoot them on sight. We send them back to wherever they are citizens. Isn't that what Canada got all pissy about regarding that one guy awhile back??

Some of those troublesome cases, for example, are Uighurs to whom the chinese government wants to offer a bullet, in the head - the chinese approach being: "if there is any reason to suspect that they were islamic fanatics, kill them".
 
What a failure on the part of the US to have let them go. Incompetence

Talk about danged if you do, danged if you dont....

So the boys at Gitmo give in to the international whaaambulance and let most of the detainees go after closed door hearings and such....

And for their effort they get labeled by RRW as incompetents....:lol:
 
Forget incompetent. They had better hope they aren't 'labeled' and treated as war criminals.
 
Well if Obama wants to close Guantanamo he should have the decency to release the ones to be release in the US, preferably in Washington DC.
 
Well if Obama wants to close Guantanamo he should have the decency to release the ones to be release in the US, preferably in Washington DC.

God, could you imagine the weeping and gnashing of teeth that would occur if that were even a suggestion? :lol:
 
I'm thinking Midland, Texas would be the perfect location.
 
I still don't get it - why is it such a big deal in the US? Are the mighty Americans crapping their pants when they're supposed to release few dozen supposedly innocent and harmless prisoners into the American society?

:confused:
 
I haven't heard about any US pressure on this matter. What I have read about is that several swiss parliamentaries are checking whether Switzerland could take in some of them.
 
Talk about danged if you do, danged if you dont....

So the boys at Gitmo give in to the international whaaambulance and let most of the detainees go after closed door hearings and such....

And for their effort they get labeled by RRW as incompetents....:lol:

Danged if you do and danged if you dont when both options are wrong. Get the ones that are guilty, prove it by normal means, punish them. Release the innocent ones. Pretty simple.
 
Danged if you do and danged if you dont when both options are wrong. Get the ones that are guilty, prove it by normal means, punish them. Release the innocent ones. Pretty simple.

The problem is that if the ones found innocent are sent back to their countries, they will likely be tortured.

Additionally, the ones found innocent (or more accurately, the ones not proven guilty) are probably involved in terrorism as well. Now, I am all for due process and think that those whose guilt cannot be proven should indeed walk free. But that doesn't mean I'd want them in my country. One must wonder what a saudi or egyptian citizen was doing in the Afghani mountains, surrounded by talibans and armed. Sightseeing? Job scounting?
 
From a legal POV I agree entirely, and stated as much. But I still think it stinks, and don't want them as neighbours.


but you must acknowledge that some of them are genuinely innocent? would you have a problem with them?
 
but you must acknowledge that some of them are genuinely innocent? would you have a problem with them?

Of course not, but how to tell? I think most of them are somehow involved with terrorism (even the involvment is only ideological, which should be no reason for prison).

Human Rights Watch suggested that we should take some of them, I oppose. It's really not our problem and most of them seem problematic. Again, send them to Washington DC.
 
There has to be a reason the home countries would shoot them on sight. We send them back to wherever they are citizens. Isn't that what Canada got all pissy about regarding that one guy awhile back??

That's not related to Guantanamo, it has to with a Canadian citizen deported by teh US to Syria where he was tortured depsite a shred of evidence that he has terrorist links.

The Canadian government wasn't pissy with the US, in fact, our government colaborated on it. Canadians are pissy about it, but we're mostly pissy at our own government for allowing it to happen.

There is also the issue of a young Canadian citizen who is currently being held at Guantanamo. There has been pressure on our government to repatriate him and try him here, but until now the government has avoided it.
 
At least our government has labelled itself to be partially responsible for the torture the guy has undergone.
 
I still don't get it - why is it such a big deal in the US? Are the mighty Americans crapping their pants when they're supposed to release few dozen supposedly innocent and harmless prisoners into the American society?

:confused:

Thats the point. They are neither innocent nor harmless. I think people are realizing that now.

Danged if you do and danged if you dont when both options are wrong. Get the ones that are guilty, prove it by normal means, punish them. Release the innocent ones. Pretty simple.

Do you even know what 'normal' means in this circumstance? It not being a normal situation is what got us here in the first place...
 
Top Bottom