It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

One in five Guantanamo Bay detainees is on hunger strike

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   

One in five Guantanamo Bay detainees is on hunger strike


www.timesonline.co.uk

Nearly a fifth of the detainees held at Guantanamo Bay are on hunger strike with the aim of attracting the attention of Barack Obama, military officials have told the Times, with most of them being force fed.

Of the 248 inmates inside the controversial US detention facility, 44 are refusing food, and 33 of those are receiving nutrition with tubes that are forced up their noses and into their stomachs
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Why are these people still locked up in this illegal prison. This prison should have never even opened in the first place. Locking people up without due process under trumped up charges and hastilly encated laws is guess againsat the law.

Time for the American Government to close the place and say they did it all wrong.

www.timesonline.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
I wonder if this is a calculated move to "attract the President's attention", or rather a base decision that is it better to wither and die, than continue to struggle in the endless legal twilight in which they find themselves.

Are the inmates allowed to organize and communicate amongst themselves?



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroomTime for the American Government to close the place and say they did it all wrong.


And who is going to take all these prisoners that will suddenly have no place to call home?

Apparently other countries want these people released....just not to them.



[edit on 14-1-2009 by nyk537]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 



This has been answered... but you decided to "leave" the thread after being shown up.

Also, i have posted in the other thread www.abovetopsecret.com...
Rumsfeld is being sued... and hopefully bush too.

legaltimes.typepad.com...

Excellent news






[edit on 14/1/09 by blupblup]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   
No, I decided to leave the thread after it got personal and the comments started to violate the T&C.

I won't get into this again with you here though….I wouldn't want to get "shown up" again.




posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


Well thank you.

I wouldn't want you to "appear" like you supported this abomination anyway.
Can't be a good thing huh?

If you see something against T+C's... report it



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   
I always do.


I never said I supported Gitmo, but my point is valid.


Since October 7, 2001, when the current war in Afghanistan began, 775 detainees have been brought to Guantánamo. Of these, approximately 420 have been released without charge. As of May 2008, approximately 270 detainees remain.[8] More than a fifth are cleared for release but must nevertheless remain indefinitely because countries are reluctant to accept them.


It is an issue.

I'm all for getting those who have committed no crime out of there, but I don't want them to stay here. Apparently other countries don't want them either.

So that's where we arrive at the problem.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


Also, You dodged every point i raised(on the original thread) and didn't "get into" anything with me


And making allusions that i was against T+C's or was being rude is not fair.

In your own info... more than half who were detained there were released without charge?
The percentage of "possible" terrorists is so small that it's pathetic?

You did support it


Originally posted by nyk537
In my opinion, they should stay right where they are…in GITMO.



That was my problem.
You supporting a facility/prison/whatever that the ENTIRE WORLD is against... i mean seriously...?

Do you honestly think it's ok to lock people up with no trial, no law on your side and without the right to a lawyer or a fair (and FAIR being the operative word) trial?

[edit on 14/1/09 by blupblup]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
You did support it.


I said they should stay in Gitmo, and I said that because they have nowhere else to go. We don't want them, and neither does any other country. So what then?


You supporting a facility/prison/whatever that the ENTIRE WORLD is against... i mean seriously...?


What the entire world is for or against is really none of my concern. I support or stand against things based on what I believe, not what the rest of the world believes.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
What the entire world is for or against is really none of my concern. I support or stand against things based on what I believe, not what the rest of the world believes.


Me neither.. but the fact the entire world is against it, including Americans, Lawyers and many, many others... for ME.. says something.

I linked to torture methods that were revealed by US agencies... C.I.A. etc.
You didn't want to know...




The ICRC reports of several activities which, it said, were "tantamount to torture": exposure to loud noise or music, prolonged extreme temperatures, or beatings. It also reported that a Behavioral Science Consultation Team (BSCT), also called 'Biscuit,' and military physicians communicated confidential medical information to the interrogation teams (weaknesses, phobias, etc.), resulting in the prisoners losing confidence in their medical care.


Source

Try and search and find a little bit of info about this ILLEGAL abomination...


In a foreword[165] to Amnesty International's International Report 2005,[166] the Secretary General, Irene Khan, made a passing reference to the Guantánamo Bay prison as "the gulag of our times," breaking an internal AI policy on not comparing different human rights abuses. The report reflected ongoing claims of prisoner abuse at Guantánamo and other military prisons.[167][168][169]


Source

[edit on 14/1/09 by blupblup]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
I proposed this in another thread the other day.


Just had a brilliant idea while reading an add for my local animal shelter.

"Adopt-A-Detainee" For all of those who pity these poor detainees. You can sign up to have one stay in your house. You can feed him, take him for walks, take him to church on Sunday, play in the parks with him. Just don't feed him after midnight or get him wet.

Save my tax dollars and take on the burden yourselves.

edit for spelling. The Scotch is kicking in. [edit on 13-1-2009 by jibeho]


No one wants these guys. It is a legal mess but what the hell do you do with them when you also have this problem when they are released.


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon said on Tuesday that 61 former detainees from its military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, appear to have returned to terrorism since their release from custody. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said 18 former detainees are confirmed and 43 suspected of "returning to the fight."


www.reuters.com...



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
Try and search and find a little bit of info about this ILLEGAL abomination...


This is the same problem we were having the other day, you aren't listening.

My gripe is not whether or not Gitmo should be closed, or whether or not it's an illegal abomination.

It's what to do with the people inside. Where are they going to go?

I don't argue your points.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by magicmushroom


Why are these people still locked up in this illegal prison. This prison should have never even opened in the first place. Locking people up without due process under trumped up charges and hastilly encated laws is guess againsat the law.

Time for the American Government to close the place and say they did it all wrong.

www.timesonline.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



Hmmm,

perhaps this story might explain-

www.reuters.com...

"The Pentagon said on Tuesday that 61 former detainees from its military prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, appear to have returned to terrorism since their release from custody."

"Pentagon officials say that about 110 detainees should never be released because of the potential danger they pose to U.S. interests."

"Washington has cleared 50 of the detainees for release but cannot return them to their home countries because of the risk they would be tortured or persecuted there."



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


Fair enough, although your comments and language lead me to believe otherwise.

The point is that America locked these people up illegally... why should anyone else have to take them?
As i said, I'm happy to do it just so that this joke closes down... but really, you created the problem.. YOU deal with it.
I referenced other stories of detainees being released back to the UK and being released without charge... point being, they did nothing wrong.

I know you are talking about the ridiculously small amount of people that "might" be a threat, but then put them on TRIAL... in a proper COURT and deal with it.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Well, the thing is that WE did put them there because we found them to be threats.

The ones who are scheduled to be released can't be because their country of origin won't take them back because THEY see them as threats too.

Thus we reach a standstill.

Either the prisoners countries of origin will have to take them back, or they will have to stay put, because I can guarantee you that the American people won't stand for these people being released here.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
reply to post by nyk537
 


Fair enough, although your comments and language lead me to believe otherwise.

The point is that America locked these people up illegally... why should anyone else have to take them?
As i said, I'm happy to do it just so that this joke closes down... but really, you created the problem.. YOU deal with it.
I referenced other stories of detainees being released back to the UK and being released without charge... point being, they did nothing wrong.

I know you are talking about the ridiculously small amount of people that "might" be a threat, but then put them on TRIAL... in a proper COURT and deal with it.


What you have to understand is that there are different burdens of proof for criminal prosecution, and the detainees in Gitmo, detained for various reasons(captured in the act of hostilities, detained for purposes of intel analysis, etc...)



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
Well, the thing is that WE did put them there because we found them to be threats.


And if they were treated humanely/legally and you had any evidence to support the reasons for them being there, we would have no problem.



The ones who are scheduled to be released can't be because their country of origin won't take them back because THEY see them as threats too.
Thus we reach a standstill.


I agree on this point.
I do find it frustrating that most of the countries don't want these guys/gals back, but i don't think we should take no for an answer.


See, how we can have an amicable and nice conversation/debate?





Either the prisoners countries of origin will have to take them back, or they will have to stay put, because I can guarantee you that the American people won't stand for these people being released here.


Perhaps a third option... you put them in regular prisons, with other "criminals" and let them await trial in "normal" conditions.
it's not like there are thousands and thousands of them is it?



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
I do find it frustrating that most of the countries don't want these guys/gals back, but i don't think we should take no for an answer.



What are we to do, lock up the leaders of those countries that say no in Guantanimo?

If only we had a second Australia where we could deport our undesirables to ala England hundreds of years ago...



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Here is an interesting addition to the discussion of all these "innocent" prisoners at Gitmo...

Pentagon: 61 ex-Gitmo inmates return to terrorism




top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join