Moving Gitmo Prisoners

[RaptorJesus]

I'm confused. Why is it media (i use the term loosely) and a lot of people make a huge deal about this? I mean the whole "we don't want these guys in our back yard" tagline you may hear on Faux News or other channels, or maybe an old confused person you know.

Why is it that these people think it's better to keep them in some offshore prison? Do they have that little of confidence in our own prisons?

I thought butt-hurt conservatives believed everything is "the best" in the USA so why not the prisons?

Personally I have no problem with moving gitmo prisoners to our own prisons. In fact I think that's the way it should be, there shouldn't be some shady out-of-the-country prison just so we can violate the constitution by torturing them until they submit and cough up inaccurate information.

[Memorize]

It's funny because Gitmo is in a better condition than our own prisons.

When I get thrown in jail, I want to have a cable, flat screen TV.

[RaptorJesus]

At 9/24/09 03:18 AM, Memorize wrote: It's funny because Gitmo is in a better condition than our own prisons.

When I get thrown in jail, I want to have a cable, flat screen TV.

Yeah, then that's another thing I've heard. It's like they have both extremes. Unconstitutional torture if you're bad... Unheard of rewards if you're good. Makes no sense to me.

"Cable is being laid to provide satellite TV that already is available in the facility reserved for the best-behaved detainees. The five channels' programming offer sports and the Persian Gulf-based Al-Jazeera news station in English. The 17 Uighurs, who were ordered released by a federal U.S. judge last year, are held in a separate lockup with even more privileges."

[Drakim]

Hum. hum. Fast question, anybody here who is for torture but against rewards? (provided that both can provide information)

[Elfer]

Yeah, it's so bizarre that they'd have a nice facility for the people who were ordered to be released a year ago. They should keep laying the beats on them.

Besides Mez, prisons in the US have TV. Also, a funny constitutional trick might be to put these people in with the general prison population. How do you think those people are going to treat suspected terrorists?

[estrago1]

These NIMBY people really are misinformed. What makes them think that an offshore prision is safer? Lets say some prisoners escape from Gitmo. Then they will try to get back into the US. Then they will probably go back to their crimes. If you have a prison in your hometown, not only will crime rates drop, but if any prisoners DO escape, they certainly won't be sticking around. The object of escaping from prison is getting as far away from it as possible.

[LazyDrunk]

At 9/24/09 09:08 AM, Elfer wrote: How do you think those people are going to treat suspected terrorists?

I think that's a question NOT worth finding out, though the inescapability of the matter is probably at hand.

Where else can you find such ready agitators of society, enemies of the state, and generally pissed off Americans but in the US prison system? The mode middle eastern terrorists use to plant cells would likely find the dark, damp holes of prison an opportune habitat in prison. Suddenly acquiring potential agents could be both good and bad, depending on the actual inmate population surrounding the former Gitmo detainees. I'm sure the law could work it so the only contact that they'd recieve would be from law enforcement, but I'm also sure that Islamic prison cliques would find a way to carry out whatever wishes the suspected jihadist could dream up (or even simply trying to impress them by exhibiting unruly behavior).

I'm just speculating, but I'd rather leave the bodies of my enemies where they were first captured and deprive them the chance to ferment on US soil.

Once they are into the prison system, genpop could destroy them, but don't you think they'd be granted some legal precedent for having a lawyer and appealing to better their position? If isolation could be considered "better", I'd just as soon release them outright to Cuba or execute them based on whatever evidence they blundered on initial capture. Either they are an enemy or they aren't. If it takes this long to decide, then WTF, something is indeed wrong.

[Memorize]

At 9/24/09 09:08 AM, Elfer wrote: Yeah, it's so bizarre that they'd have a nice facility for the people who were ordered to be released a year ago. They should keep laying the beats on them.

Yeah, it's so bizarre that after all the talk of them being held "unconstitutionally" by Obama that he's still making the argument that he can hold at least "some of them" indefinitely.

[aviewaskewed]

At 9/24/09 03:10 PM, Memorize wrote: Yeah, it's so bizarre that after all the talk of them being held "unconstitutionally" by Obama that he's still making the argument that he can hold at least "some of them" indefinitely.

Oh the things people say to get elected....I mean, does anybody really see anything changing here? I see this being a conversation that went something like this "Ok, we're going to get everybody out of Gitmo by this date...because by then, our secret prison will have been built and ready o go".

I'm not saying it'd be all about the torture or the kind of stuff people have objected to with Gitmo, but the idea that they aren't going to try and sneak another secret prison out there after the closing of the old? Call me a cynic or a conspiracy theorist, but I just can't see it happening where these guys will get released into a general, or even good old fashioned maximum security facility. I would love to see the government make me eat my words though.

[Jon-86]

At 9/24/09 02:16 AM, mrgreg846 wrote: Why is it that these people think it's better to keep them in some offshore prison? Do they have that little of confidence in our own prisons?

I don't know if they know the real reason, but if they are outside of the US then the US government is not really accountable for some of the stuff that is said to go on their. Their basically using Guantanamo bay and other jails throughout Europe (so I've heard) to bypass international laws.

[Bacchanalian]

At 9/24/09 03:10 PM, Memorize wrote: Yeah, it's so bizarre that after all the talk of them being held "unconstitutionally" by Obama that he's still making the argument that he can hold at least "some of them" indefinitely.

God damnit Memorize your partisan pissing contests are fucking damaging to the mind.