|

Pyar
 |
There is never a good reason to hold someone who is not being charged with a crime ... If it was you being held without charges and tortured by a sick government ,you might change your attitude.
No . We shouldn't release these people to countries like Iraq . I agree , when we leave there is a good chance of civil war . |
|

Alex's wifey =^.^=
 |
Last I heard, they aren't releasing them, they're just moving them. Some will be sent to Portugal and other countries, some might be put in other facilities in the states (I think there was on in Colorado or so that was under consideration).
Most of the prisoners WILL have their cases evaluated, since most of them haven't actually been charged yet.
It's going to take about a year before the place is actually closed...mainly because they AREN'T just throwing them out into the world. |
|

dankohner1
|
No |
|

korgrue
|
Not at all.
Paranoid much? |
|

bramandu
 |
No. I doubt most of them will be let free. They'll either be executed by other countries, sentenced to life in prison in the US, and those who are innocent hopefully will be freed with an apology at the very least. |
|

bash
 |
What?
We ARE doing that....which is why it will take up to a year to fully close GITMO. We aren't just releasing people at will. They will have their cases reviewed and either charged with a crime and sent to federal prison if found guilty, or not have any charges/found innocent, and released to a country willing to take them in. Iraq and the US will not take them. So far, the UK, Germany, Portugal, and Madrid have agreed to take in some. |
|

Bubuh
 |
Its not just closing down release people every which way. They want to bring charges to those we can prove guilty. We're not gona just let everyone go.
The problem before was Bush just held everyone with slightest suspision because he was just too scared if theres 0.1% chance if a dude had contact with Al Quida.
They now want to convict everyone we can prove guilty and make some decision with those tricky cases.
Its really more about doing what need to done instead of just procrastinating like Bush did for some 5, 6 years.
Its probably real possibility the US could create some other secret prison and not ******* advertise to the world like they did with GITMO. |
|

Bill B
 |
almost all of them were innocent people turned over to the usa by drug lords looking to get their opium business started back up in afganistan. after 8 yrs of torture the usa knows they are worthless for intelligence purposes. releasing a few psychologically damaged usa hatering sheperds into a world where there are already millions of anti-american people won't make a difference. |
|

SPJ P
 |
Honestly it scares the crap out of me... yes. There have already been many cases of people beiing released from the prison due to "insufficent evidence"... rulings deemed by our stupid court system. The same court system that lets people like OJ Simpson run free. You really want these dip-wads to re-visit each case? Chances are a lot of the detainees will be set free because of the technicalities in our law system. And chances are a lot of these released detainees will go back to doing what they were doing before, killing people. According to the penatagon, 61 of the prisoners that have ALREADY been released have re-joined terrorist groups. |
|

brownie
|
I agree with u T. Merula. U make a good pont!! |
|

nora22000
|
In US jurisprudence, the concept of innocence until guilt is proven would indicate that these are accused terrorists.
Yes, the devil-may-care, 'bring it on' days of W are gone. The weak excuse that US law didn't apply because Gitmo was not on US soil is either not true or if true, requires that the US close it down. Keep in mind that supposed terrorists or not, losing the Constitution and the rule of law is far more dangerous to a free society.
What? You want to keep the torture chambers open? What if your neighbor (you know, the paranoid one) decides that you're a terrorist and gets you set up to go to Guantanamo prison? Knives always, always cut both ways, my friend. |
|

Hardhat
|
Youse guys left out Sweden.
Most of these "concentration-camp prisoners" probably were not terrorist (as defined) when they were thrown into GITMO, but after endless years of psychological and physical torture they probably are NOW.
Way to go George -- making the world a safer place. It is the U.S.A. that should take in these people, not the rest of the world. It was the U.S.A. that made them what they are today. |
|

Someone's Secret
 |
Yes, I don't quite understand the reasoning behind that decision and wonder who is really pushing for it. I hope the administration will closely consider all the angles and consequences of the upcoming 'changes' in the interim. |
|

SnM Nurse
 |
PFFFF no. bring em on |
|

musicman812
|
They're not going to release them. They'll relocate them. That's first.
Secondly, I agree that it's extreme to shut it down. But if there's one thing America does best -- it's sensationalism. (On a side note, did you see that they pulled the bird out of the engine of the plane that dropped into the Hudson? They said "we pulled what looks to be a bird out of the engine but we're sending the carcass to the USDA for a full DNA markup to make sure". Again -- sensationalism)
Thirdly, nobody likes torture -- but there comes a point when you say if we apply a little pressure, we could get some information that could save some lives.
Lastly, if we do move them from Gitmo -- I say put them near the liberal lot that is screaming at the top of their lungs. Let them deal with them. I'm tired of the cheerleading/protesting except when the fruits of their labor somehow affect their own environment -- "not in my back yard". Section 8 housing is a perfect example. "Yes -- section 8 b/c it's the right thing to do...but put those houses on that side of town"! |
|

Joe
|
I say take them into international waters and off them one by one with a Kalashnikov. |
|

jammin7000
|
What would be extremely ironic is if these same terrorists found a way to blow up the white house with obama in it. |
|

|
|
|