I love that a Randian like **Rand Rover **gets all pissy and whiny and bitches about his rights being violated like an entitled little bitch when the gov’t wants to tax him to pay for public education (or whatever the Randian bugaboo is), but when someone else is being held for 7 years without habeas corpus and without anyone really making any effort to determine whether the person actually did anything wrong or was just turned over by some random tribesman to get a bounty, he doesn’t give a shit.
…you see here’s the thing. We’ve been talking about the Guantanamo Bay detentions on this board since pretty much the camp opened. We’ve discussed the Tipton Three, Chaplain James Yee, the Badr Brothers, Abassin Sayed, the Denbeaux Report, the assault on a US soldier disguised as a prisoner, detainees witnessed by the FBI chained to the floor stuck in their own piss. I have read most of the unclassified combantant status tribunal reviews: how many have you read?
Spin it any way you like but myself and many others over the last six years have presented a compelling tale of complete stupidity in the way that the Guantanamo Bay Detention Centre has been set up and run.
Are you wondering why the most high profile case bought by US authorities against Guantanamo Bay detainees was against Bin Laden’s “driver”? it was because prior to the arrival of the real terrorists in 2006 (the 30 odd people who had previously been held at “secret” camps around the world) he had the biggest “terrorist credentials” out of the lot of them. And he essentially got a sentence of “time served” and is now a free man.
The fact that there are no “case files” should not surprise you one bit. Simply read the unclassified combantant status tribunal reviews to see the appalling state of the evidence presented of guilt. Association with a charity not on any watch list? Driving a taxi down the wrong road? Wearing a common brand wristwatch? Sold out for a bounty payment?
Do us a favour: read the unclassified tribunal reviews, read the Denbeaux Report, then come back here and complain that we are relying on the spin of a couple of “liberal” reporters. The case against Guantanamo is compelling and overwhelming.
If you have read even a small sampling of the evidence out there you would see that the information presented in the OP is quite simply the tip of the iceberg.
Not for nothin, but every single time someone spent so much as the time it took to ride from the scene to the station in my squad car against their will, I had enough evidence to make a case (file, coherent OR comprehensive) outlining whatever I was ready to charge them with, y’know, stick. So even if it’s only the credible sworn statements of a couple witnesses (i.e. "I saw Abdul go into the black market area with a brown satchel of money, he came out with a martyr-izer 2000 with a gold buckle and custom faux Louis Vuitton print, then, he walked across the street to Adam’s Falafel stand and tried to blow himself up but the belt fell off and that’s when I called the police, so help me Allah) it would be SOMETHING. Then of course, y’know, you’d put the bad guy in the system with his particulars so that people would know who he was, why he was there and so forth. Really, it’s not that damned difficult, unless of course you’ve something to hide.
I’m no lawyer, but I think “This guy is terrist” scratched on a post-it constitutes a weak case file.
That link. I don’t think it leads where you think it leads.
But then he would have to take time away from his busy job as a file clerk with H&R Block. 
Oops. It was supposed to be this one.
Wait, Rand Rover, you’re a lawyer and a Randian? How does that work? Isn’t law the initiation of force?
I have determined that there are very few attractive women in NYC. If anyone else reads this thread and disagrees with me then I’m sure you people that have already posted to this thread will defend that statement as the absolute truth.
Dio, reading threads like this from you makes me sad. You can be smart and thorough in threads on other subjects, but given the opporÞunity to bash on the bush administration you let your prejudice cloud your judgment. Also, the first paragraph of the article is pure opinion and not fact–you can’t make a straight-faced argument to the contrary.
This. While we appreciate RR’s gracious attempt to offer Bush the benefit of the doubt … that ran out a long time ago for most people. If there was some evidence of his admin doing anything right, then we’d be a little more inclined to distrust all these hateful liberal reporter’s opinions. But as it is, this story plays right in line with who they proved themselves to be over eight years, and everything we know about that prison.
But thanks for keepin’ it real RR. I need somebody to chuckle at when I wake up. At least the Bush defense has progressed from “But these guys are freedom-killin’ trrrsts! Why do you hate America?”
I think the quote sums it up nicely. It seems to be more of the typical bureacratic crap you deal with in classified intelligence agencies than anything else. It seems Bush was more concerned with getting information to be used abroad than actually punishing the people detained. I’m OK with that. The detainees are/were in legal limbo, so why rush?
It’s not that the information didn’t exist, it’s just wasnt’t put together nicely in a 3-ring binder for Obama to peruse after dinner.
The “rush” is called Habeas Corpus.
And we don’t know that any information exists.
As of last July, yes
Yes we do. The article you posted even confirms it:
If you are complaining because Obama’s Admin simply has to print them out from the database first, then you are just a whining luddite.
There is no database, and we don’t know that the information exists. We only know that an anonymous Bush weasel says that the Pentagon told him it’s around, but not in one place. There are a multiplicity of sources claiming there are no collated cases or files.
You are missing the point Diogenes. Gitmo was a prison for terrorists, ergo the people in there are terrorists. What more proof or documentation do you need?
Post hoc de gusitbus pluribus emptor.
All that can exist on a database is verbiage. Actual evidence cannot be digitized.
Let me ask: if we have such rock-solid cases, how come we have no convictions, to speak of? What is the reluctance? Such convictions would go a long way to supporting the Bushivik case, would it not? That doesn’t strike you as being rather odd? Are they modest, reluctant to have the world know how totally right they are? I think not.
And what about the ones we have already released? Shirley, we didn’t cut them loose unless we were pretty sure they weren’t guilty of anything much. So why were they detained in the first place? Do you believe in the rule of law, or no?
And **Doggyknees **knows what a Luddite is. Do you?
You are compounding the error made by the article. The article opines that there are no “comprehensive case files,” and now you are saying that this means that no information exists at all.
If this is the level of reasoning with which you are satisfied, why not just say that bush is the devil himself and everyone that worked in his administration is a demon, and then you wouldb’t have to bother with quibbling about specific instances of his evilness.
Well, you’re certainly a low-ranking troglodyte. Or perhaps a kobold.
Make him a thrull. Those never got any love after Fallen Empires.
Seriously, Rand, are you even going to attempt to answer anyone in this thread? Many people made efforts at responding in this thread to you, so the least you can do is respond with the same thoughtfulness.
No, on second thought, I guess the least you can do is exactly what you’re doing.
Oh, sure, information exists. “Achmed Camelshtupper reports that his brother-in-law, Kemal Attaboy, is a terrist”. That is information. It is not evidence. Unless you’d like a bit more creative interpretation of that whole “hearsay” thingy, you know, make it a bit more flexible. Just for now, mind you, and we’re just going to bend it a *little *bit, just enough to protect ourselves from people who don’t respect the rule of law…