More than 60 children reportedly held at Guantanamo Bay

Club Gitmo...Why limit the fun to just adults?

www.rushlimbaugh.com...

Seriously, I see no problem. These terrorist have no problems loading these kids up as suicide bombers, so I have no problem detaining them.

OK then, whats the differance between an adult shooting your loved one and a 'child' shooting the same?

None. the end result is the same. The person needs to be detained. that is, if he is not shot before hand.

Please look at both ends of the scale, and not focus on one thing.
There has to be a reason for detaining 'children' . Think about it.

Originally posted by Xeros
You obviously don't know the meaning of compassion. It might help to study Bhuddism. Seriously.

No thanks, I’d rather study Schwarzkopf...er...ism, you know, the ancient and wise philosophy which states "I believe that forgiving them is God's function. Our job is simply to arrange the meeting."

[edit on 28-5-2006 by WestPoint23]

uh, if there are some juveniles there, they're likely there for a reason, and i bet it ain't for public displays of affection......hey, maybe the counselors are doing them a favor by keeping them with their familes at gitmo....

Originally posted by Brian Nowhere
To even consider the idea that these children would be valuable
assets to our efforts if we treated them with kindness, and realized that
these innocent children have been born into chaos, and really can not be
held accountable for doing what they were raised to do, would require an ounce of compassion on the noecons part.

Tell the people that are recruiting them to show compassion. Tell them not to arm them or teach them how to kill.

I don't see the US sending 12 year-olds into battle. Why does the enemey do it? Ask them that.

I'll tell you why - because they hope we will overlook the children, and then they could kill more of us. And because it saves the terrorist's yellow butts if they are not the ones getting shot at. Send a boy to do a man's job. It's their fault!

Originally posted by jsobecky
I'll tell you why - because they hope we will overlook the children, and then they could kill more of us. And because it saves the terrorist's yellow butts if they are not the ones getting shot at. Send a boy to do a man's job. It's their fault!

That echo's my sentiment exactly.

There has to be a reason for it........................

Originally posted by jsobecky
Tell the people that are recruiting them to show compassion. Tell them not to arm them or teach them how to kill.

I don't see the US sending 12 year-olds into battle. Why does the enemey do it? Ask them that.

I'll tell you why - because they hope we will overlook the children, and then they could kill more of us. And because it saves the terrorist's yellow butts if they are not the ones getting shot at. Send a boy to do a man's job. It's their fault!

Then we should be helping these kids. It is obvious to me that what they go through to become "terrorist fighters" is simply no better than brainwashing. Why can't we help them. Of course, when I accuse Gitmo of being a torture facility, I'm going to get backlash. I'm going to read, "this isn't proven." Wow, great retort considering that they're hiding something for a reason behind the veil of "national security."

Screw national security, I vote, I pay taxes, I want to know if there are kids there. That isn't abiding the terrorists. If anything, if we simply admitted it, it would put a damper on kids being recruited for reasons like "they will simply be overlooked."

I love this country, but what we are doing is going to make us look bad for generations to come, and provide more hate to the machine, when we should be throwing a wrench in it.

Originally posted by niteboy82
Then we should be helping these kids. It is obvious to me that what they go through to become "terrorist fighters" is simply no better than brainwashing. Why can't we help them.

Because by the age 14 they are too far gone. Did you ever hear the Jesuit saying,
"Give me a child until the age 7, and he is mine for life" or words to that effect?

All we can do at this point is to hope that the ones that can learn, will learn.

everybody wants links ok heres links. Guantanamo Bay is not just a prison camp, its a death camp abusing wrongly accused people just because they look like terrorists. thats pretty sad.

Female interrogators tried to break Muslim detainees at the U.S. prison camp in Guantanamo Bay by sexual touching, wearing a miniskirt and thong underwear and in one case, smearing a Saudi man’s face with fake menstrual blood, according to an insider’s written account.

A draft manuscript obtained by The Associated Press is classified as secret; pending a Pentagon review for a planned book that details ways the U.S. military used women as part of tougher physical and psychological interrogation tactics to get terror suspects to talk.

www.thetruthseeker.co.uk...
i bet you half of the people detained there dont even know about the war in iraq!!

Allegations that Australian detainees have been tortured must be investigated.

Have Australian Guantanamo Bay detainees David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib been abused by their American captors? On May 16, Prime Minister John Howard rejected the abuse allegations. He said Australia's consul-general in Washington, Derek Tucker, had visited the pair and was satisfied that they had not been treated unacceptably. Since then, however, the allegations of mistreatment have intensified.

Late last week the US State Department said its officials were working with the Pentagon to provide a "full and appropriate response" to reports that both men have been beaten since their capture. A witness says he saw Hicks being beaten after his seizure in Afghanistan.

The allegations regarding Habib are more grave. Former British detainee Tarek Degoul claims Habib was beaten, dragged by chains and photographed naked. Habib's lawyer, Steven Watt, said last week he feared for his client's mental state. "In the beginning he was sending numerous letters back to his wife and family and they haven't heard from him in a very, very long time and that in itself suggests something untoward has happened to him."

www.theage.com.au...
another case of senseless abuse.

i could find alot more cases for you but then i might as well start a thread on Guantanamo Bay abuse tactics. thats all it is a big torture house.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Because by the age 14 they are too far gone. Did you ever hear the Jesuit saying,
"Give me a child until the age 7, and he is mine for life" or words to that effect?

All we can do at this point is to hope that the ones that can learn, will learn.

I have a very dear friend who worked with juvenile court outside the city, trust me, a 14 year old is not too far gone. Though, you may have your own opinion and I respect that.

Where did our compassion goes as humans before nationalists if we condone the abuse of 14-year-old kids? What would you do, if your child was in this camp as an American, being held by China (just an example) for being a fighter?

I'm sorry, but this stinks. Like dgtempe said, one child, is one child too many!

Shots still hasen't provided that all important link showing that no one has gone to Guartanomo since 2004. I wonder if he is making the facts up.

Judging by the way some people are endorsing the detainment of children in an adult prison, one where there has been torture, and where consolidatory confinment is almost part of the badge i have one thing to say to you...
Any terrorist who could kill you would be doing gods work. Because even if there is no God they will be leaving the world a richer place. By endorsing evil you share in it and I despise you for it. Thankyou for speaking your minds, its just a shame that some of the evil you say has little way of getting back to you.

However there is some strong (hardcore) evidence for reincarnation and I believe that the U.S military has yet to find a way of destroying the after life like they destroy other parts of the world. Therefore one day maybe you will be born a Muslim? Or maybe you will be re-born a few decades on in the world you helping to create?
People who endorse the maltreatment of children belong in hell. You would of thought that being clearly imprisionable these kids who have been taught to kill could be re-educated in some way e.g like pointing out that terrorism against our civilians often ends up making our leaders more popular with the people. But no instead of that you just accept it.

I wonder: Are people being paid to distribute (or at least work towards) evil on this site? Talk of selling your sole to devil, why not just directly contact him-them yourself?

This subject is not new.

While there “may or may not” still be young minors imprisoned in Guantanamo the treatment of these possible few children will be far, far better than the million+ children imprisoned currently today around the world.

The children have been kept separate from the 700 adults being held at the camp, located on the southern Cuban coast.
They have been held with no access to a lawyer or understanding of what will happen to them, our correspondent adds.
But the children have been given access to games, even videos, as well as an extensive education programme.
This has led to the belief that they can be rehabilitated.
BBC 2003

If there are still young minors imprisoned in Guantanamo that made it all the way to Guantanamo after transfer and screening, I doubt seriously if it was for a minor infraction or without due cause and consideration given for their respective ages.

In countries such as Cambodia, Indonesia, Kenya or N. Korea (as examples) incarcerated children can easily be under five years old for doing little more than living on the streets or become incarcerated because their parent(s) were criminals or just simply poor and trying to survive. Third world prisons…adults don’t even fare very well.

Very few countries make information available on the issue of kids behind bars. It isn’t that the information is hard to find but that most authorities are not forthcoming. The most widely accepted estimate, which was made four years ago now, is that the number of children in prison is around one million
---Geert Cappelaere, 2005
A Global Report into Children in Prison

Originally posted by Liberal1984
Any terrorist who could kill you would be doing gods work. Because even if there is no God they will be leaving the world a richer place.

In September 2002, Canadian officials reported that a 15-year-old Canadian had been captured on July 27 after being badly wounded in a firefight in eastern Afghanistan. Canada's prime minister, Jean Chrétien said he was seeking consular access to the boy.

Last week, Toronto's Globe and Mail newspaper reported that the youth, now 16, is being held in Guantanamo and that US officials have refused access to Canadian officials.

The newspaper quoted unidentified sources as saying that the youth allegedly threw a grenade that killed Sergeant 1st Class Christopher James Speer, 28, of Albuquerque, New Mexico.

The Globe and Mail said US officials would want to interrogate the Canadian because his father has been identified as a senior financial leader of al-Qaida.
[url= www.commondreams.org.../headlines03/0423-09.htm] Guardian 2003 [/url)

Perhaps current lines are not as clear as one may want...or need them to be.


mg

You are deflecting. The proper defense to this should not be "children elsewhere have it worse." That is such an easy out, I would have thought better. You obviously are not sticking to the thread. Kids are being held in Gitmo. Not Cambodia, not anywhere else. We are discussing kids being held as war criminals by a government that expressly believes in the Constitution. Therefore, as children especially, they should be given some credit for being children and given a little more attention, for perhaps, a fair trial?

I'm not going to bother the semantics of this anymore about whether or not the children "are there, or maybe not there," because half of these pro-imprisonment posts said at the beginning "that's blown out of preportion" to "so what if they are there?"

Give me a break, you can't flip flop. The arguement that something should be done has so far at least held their position. Your position has flip-flopped. So children elsewhere have it worse, that is not the issue here. This is an issue of American/Coalition forces holding children in captivity in the name of spreading democracy without a fair and (dare I say) speedy trial.

If they weren't destined to become terrorists when they were captured at 14 years of age, I'm pritty sure that once they get out of Gitmo and had this "wonderfull" experience at the hands of the US, these kids will most definatly turn to any and all means they can to get back at the US for what they did to them.

This is just giving people an even better reason to be pissed and go the extra mile against the US.

Originally posted by niteboy82
Where did our compassion goes as humans before nationalists if we condone the abuse of 14-year-old kids?

And from Liberal 1984

People who endorse the maltreatment of children belong in hell.

I don't remember anyone advocating the abuse or maltreatment of children. You may say that detainment itself is abuse; I disagree.

But please don't make an abuse case where there is not one being championed.

Originally posted by niteboy82
Give me a break, you can't flip flop.

I addressed the post directly, again this is nothing new…nor did I “deflect”…the possibility of minors in Guantanamo has been raised since 2003 and there were found to be young minors as fact soon after. Agreed.

I also provided a dated article that described such as well as a supporting article of the treatment of the child soldiers. Agreed.

it is concerned Taleban or al-Qaida sympathizers may threaten their safety That is why defense officials have not announced their names or issued any details on their release. VOA 2004

Is this not relevant?

Originally posted by niteboy82 The arguement that something should be done has so far at least held their position. Your position has flip-flopped. So children elsewhere have it worse, that is not the issue here.

There is no “argument”, what I stated is fact and it was concerning children.

The point was made after I stated, “If there are still young minors imprisoned in Guantanamo that made it all the way to Guantanamo after transfer and screening, I doubt seriously if it was for a minor infraction or without due cause and consideration given for their respective ages”

... followed by a supporting example (I briefly cited from many) of obvious states knowingly, intentionally and willfully practicing the act of child inprisonment daily and without indifference; showing that there is a difference, especially with children. No where did I make the claim you state.

The US does recognize that treatment should be different (as shown in my previous post), ergo if they do not treat minors appropriately they have already set precedence …and that the US did appear to act accordingly in the article concerning the three cases mentioned.

12 year old released after 17 months… what did he want to do?

"I want to go to America."

from above source

Of course the definition of a ‘minor’ is an issue as well…as is the determination of age.

How does one absolutely and positively tell a 15 year old from and 18 year old with out any proof whatsoever? Take an enemy combatants word for it? What if they told everyone they were 18? And for that matter, how does one absolutely and positively tell a 16 year old from a 14 year old? Travel to any university campus across the US and you will find 18+ year olds that ‘look’ 15-.

Many experts say that international laws, including the Geneva Conventions, require that child prisoners be separated from adults and receive education, Time said, adding that US federal law has similar requirements.

While US law defines those younger that 18 as juveniles, the Pentagon classifies as juveniles those under 16, the magazine said. AFP 2006

Which makes it even more difficult…
And..

Article 1
For the purposes of the present Convention, a child means every human being below the age of eighteen years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.

Convention on the Rights of the Child

When is adulthood reached in Afghanistan or under Taliban rule etc? Hmmm...

Hence:

Originally posted by missed_gear
Perhaps lines are not as clear as one may want or need them to be.

mg

I see your point. I really do! These kids could have been armed and dangerous, and something had to be done with them.

Kids in those countries are beyond their years anyway. I was wrong to say they were just kids. Now, can i ask you something? What are they doing with them?
Any rehab? Why not take these children and send them someplace where they can receive counseling or something? Why do they have to be in those chicken coops in Cuba?

That, is not good for our image- our image that is already very questionable by the world.

But, having slept on it, they can be just as dangerous as a 20 year old seasoned terrorist.

I was wrong.

Originally posted by Bikereddie
So a 30 year old male with a rifle and a 14 year old with a rifle, who are both aiming at you, to kill you makes a difference? The 30 year old male deserves punishment or shooting, but the 14 year old who is doing exactly the same , deserves compassion?

Firstly - I would like the EVIDENCE against these Children to be presented to me, so that I am convinced, that they are actually connected someway to the "Notorious Evildoers" - and I don't mean, that they are Muslim; that is maybe enough for some people, to hold them detaineed, but not for me.

And as we have Observed this Gitmo situation - I do not see any People ACCUSED or TRIAL for anything! They are just Detaineed indefinetly, interrogated, tortured - well basicly their Basic Rights have been removed. Sadly you do not at all critisize that, since everything is OKEY in the name of War against Terror.

Get real here. If he is old enough to shoot our troops, then he is old enough to be shot back at, or detained.

I agree - but you have to ask yourself, why he shot at troops? Did he just pick a rifle one day and said to himself; "Hell, I'm gonna start shooting those Yankees now!". I seriously doubt that. And as I said before - IF the US interrogators have ANY evidence on either of these people in Gitmo, including children, I suggest they quickly start presenting them and giving them a Fair Trial, if the Mighty USA wants to preserve what is left of their Image of a "FREE AND DEMOCRATIC" society, that they have in the eyes of the People of this World.

And remember - the WORLD is WATCHING...

Forget the child ideologies. They know what they are doing.

So you are basicly saying, that you allow Torture of Children?

And we have also reports, how children are being Raped in Guantnaamo in front of their Fathers, to extract confessions - shall we also forget the "Child Ideologies"?

The difference is?, there is no difference if you pick up a rifle and shoot.

I know you have a Son, and he is in the Army right? Well he was old enough to joing them, but imagine that your son is now 13-14 years old, and lets say CHINA invades UK. Your 14-year old son, ofcourse fights back, since he will not allow any foreign soldiers on his homeland. Well he gets captured and tortured in a CHINESE prison (and we all know how they do that). Would you "Forget the Child Ideologies" then also?

Originally posted by Shots
Also since when is there an age limit for POW camps? I have never heard of one.

Originally posted by Shots
For the rest of you I think you are all over reacting since there is nothing in the Geneva convention regarding the housing of minors as prisoners of war at least not that I can find]

Dear Shots.
You seem to think that Guantanamo is a POW camp. That is wrong.
POW are to be treated under the Third Geneva Convention. This is NOT happening.

If a child in Afghanistan shoots at an American soldier, he is not considered a soldier. Only uniformed soldiers fall under this convention. NOT people resisting the attack on their country. They are now terrorists. Remember?

Vaak

The wording i used in my posts were an example. If you (souljah) cannot see that, then fine.

I am not getting into a debate about what i wrote, when you turn the words around to suit your own ideals.

Others have understood that the posts were an example and not fact.

Eddie out...........................................