# Guantanamo: minority report? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 30, 2007, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145 "2007-03-30T18:21:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2007, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/1 "2007-03-30T18:21:23Z")
From an article on [CBS](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/30/terror/main2627764.shtml) : > [@](#): > > Gates said the challenge is figuring out what to do with hard-core detainees who have “made very clear they will come back and attack this country.” > > He [Secretary of Defense Robert Gates] said it may require a new law to “address the concerns about some of these people who really need to be incarcerated forever, but that doesn’t get them involved in a judicial system where there is the potential of them being released,” Gates told the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee. So… are they to be incarcerated for life because of a threat that they have yet to carry out? And why does it have to be addressed in a special law? Don’t you have good laws for prosecuting people who make deadly threats? And do these carry incarceration for life as penalty? I think that Gates think that the international community objects to Guantanamo on the basis of its location (and it couldn’t be better, location-wise). If abuses to international laws and human rights occur elsewhere the international community will still have the same opinion. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2007, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/2 "2007-03-30T19:16:47Z")
New law? What makes Gates think he’s going to get such a law out of this Congress? And doesn’t the Admin take the position that indefinite detention of “unlawful enemy combatants” is already legal? ---
**Author:** ![Terrifel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c68b51/32.png) [@Terrifel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terrifel)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2007, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/3 "2007-03-30T19:49:24Z")
> [@](#): > > He said it may require a new law to “address the concerns about some of these people who really need to be incarcerated forever, but that doesn’t get them involved in a judicial system where there is the potential of them being released,” Gates told the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee. This seems like the sort of remark that is destined to be quoted repeatedly by historians as a capsule summary of American principles during this era. ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2007, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/4 "2007-03-31T00:38:06Z")
That was the quote that I disliked the most: “we might lose in court, so let’s rig the dice”. In every fair justice of system people have “the potential of them being released”, why else have a court then? I am trying to be generous in my interpretations. Perhaps Gate is just a REALLY bad communicator. ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2007, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/5 "2007-03-31T01:04:45Z")
He’s a really bad something. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2007, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/6 "2007-03-31T04:34:58Z")
I’ve scraped better stuff than Gates off the bottom of my shoes. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2007, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/7 "2007-03-31T12:38:58Z")
Surely the idea of Gitmo, and its inhabitants, is that it is **outside** the laws of the USA. I’m not sure how I stand on States setting up areas outside the ‘law’, but I think that the archaic meaning of the word ‘outlaw’ is very interesting. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2007, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/8 "2007-03-31T15:45:56Z")
[QUOTE=FRDE] I’m not sure how I stand on States setting up areas outside the ‘law’, but I think that the archaic meaning of the word ‘outlaw’ is very interesting. [/QUOTE] Winston Churchill [wanted to classify the Nazi leaders as “outlaws” and hang them without trial.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlaw#A_feature_of_older_legal_systems) Fortunately, that archaic and **barbarous** idea was rejected by the Allies. ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2007, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/9 "2007-03-31T17:04:35Z")
Some people were acquitted in the Nuremberg trials. Had Churchill had his way they would have been hang even if innocent. It troubles me that this administration seem to ignore that lesson. And I am going to take a moment and derail my own thread to say that I am so disappointed of the US as of the last years. To me is like discovering somebody I had in good esteem was a thief, or a wife-beater. So much for looking up to you, I’d rather look up to Cuba now (slight exaggeration). I know that the average US citizen may or may not be a bad person, but darn, you are making it so hard to love your country. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2007, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/10 "2007-03-31T17:26:48Z")
[QUOTE=Mighty\_Girl] And I am going to take a moment and derail my own thread to say that I am so disappointed of the US as of the last years. To me is like discovering somebody I had in good esteem was a thief, or a wife-beater. So much for looking up to you, I’d rather look up to Cuba now (slight exaggeration). I know that the average US citizen may or may not be a bad person, but darn, you are making it so hard to love your country. [/QUOTE] We’ll get better after the Bush Admin ends, I promise! ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2007, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/11 "2007-04-01T13:19:01Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Winston Churchill [wanted to classify the Nazi leaders as “outlaws” and hang them without trial.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlaw#A_feature_of_older_legal_systems) Fortunately, that archaic and **barbarous** idea was rejected by the Allies. [/QUOTE] I think Churchill was correct, constructing the concept of ‘International Laws’ just breeds lawyers. I have no problem with ‘conventions’ - but ‘laws’ are venerable and need to be treated with care. You wait until the USA is invaded with ‘Human Rights’ nonsense, let alone monkey rights - and I jest not. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2007, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/12 "2007-04-01T17:55:03Z")
[QUOTE=FRDE] You wait until the USA is invaded with ‘Human Rights’ nonsense, let alone monkey rights - and I jest not. [/QUOTE] 😕 That sentence is meaningless. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/13 "2007-04-02T12:31:25Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] 😕 That sentence is meaningless. [/QUOTE] It seems that New Zealand has them and there is some nonsense about Austria doing the same It is highly possible that it is a sophisticated April Fool joke, but if so it whooshed me. Oops - my Googleflex is working: > **[The Observer archive | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/theobserverarchive)** > > \This is the archive of The Observer up until 21 April 2025. Find new articles of The Observer on \observer.co.uk\\ Now that could be April 1 - but the sheer insanity is so close to reality. ---
**Author:** ![LilShieste](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9f8e36/32.png) [@LilShieste](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LilShieste)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/14 "2007-04-02T21:00:24Z")
[QUOTE=FRDE] I think Churchill was correct, constructing the concept of ‘International Laws’ just breeds lawyers. [/quote] Well, it “breeds lawyers” only because it “breeds court cases”. Unless I’m misunderstanding what you’re saying, we’re talking about people who would not even have the benefit of a trial prior to their [possibly erroneous] conviction. Since these people would be given actual trials, most (if not all) of them would need lawyers. Why is it automatically a bad thing, if it “breeds lawyers”? > [@FRDE](#): > > I have no problem with ‘conventions’ - but ‘laws’ are venerable and need to be treated with care. IMO, conventions can be venerable and need to be treated with care, as well. I’m not saying that all conventions should be enforced as laws (that would be silly), but in cases where we’re talking about conviction, imprisonment, etc. it seems to make sense. > [@FRDE](#): > > You wait until the USA is invaded with ‘Human Rights’ nonsense, let alone monkey rights - and I jest not. And we can take them as they come. It’s not like we don’t have laws that can be construed as “weird” already, anyway. LilShieste ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2007, 10:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/15 "2007-04-03T10:41:52Z")
@ **LilShieste** Perhaps I had better explain where I am coming from. Laws apply to citizens of a State, also to people within that State (on the assumption that by being there they have given implicit consent). They should be enforced rigorously. UK Laws do not apply to citizens of Equador in Zambia. Conventions, the most memorable of which is the Geneva Convention, apply to citizens of States that have signed the Convention. A Mau Mau guerilla is not entitled to the same ‘protection’ as a WWII German soldier captured by the USA. Human Rights are a load of idealistic principles that have been drafted rather than evolved, slinging them on top of an established body of Law causes havoc, as it has done in the UK. ‘International Laws’ are a woolly concept, they entitle Serbian citizens to be tried for actions committed in Bosnia by a bunch of people sitting in the Hague - they are trans National - basically poking their noses into other people’s business. The USA appears to understand that it does not want third parties imposing their ‘laws’ on USA citizens within the USA, although it does appear to think that it can impose its own laws on other people. Human Rights are a menace to legal systems as they are an appeal to a higher authority than the Nation State. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2007, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/16 "2007-04-03T14:11:38Z")
[QUOTE=FRDE] It seems that New Zealand has them and there is some nonsense about Austria doing the same It is highly possible that it is a sophisticated April Fool joke, but if so it whooshed me. Oops - my Googleflex is working: > **[The Observer archive | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/theobserverarchive)** > > \This is the archive of The Observer up until 21 April 2025. Find new articles of The Observer on \observer.co.uk\\ Now that could be April 1 - but the sheer insanity is so close to reality. [/QUOTE] No, I meant, “You wait until the USA is invaded with ‘Human Rights’ nonsense” is meaningless. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2007, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/17 "2007-04-03T14:14:08Z")
[QUOTE=FRDE] Conventions, the most memorable of which is the Geneva Convention, apply to citizens of States that have signed the Convention. A Mau Mau guerilla is not entitled to the same ‘protection’ as a WWII German soldier captured by the USA. [/quote] I beg your pardon. Signatories are obliged to observe the Conventions even when at war with non-signatories. [QUOTE=FRDE] Human Rights are a menace to legal systems as they are an appeal to a higher authority than the Nation State. [/QUOTE] So what? The nation-state’s courts still get to decide when, where and how they apply. Or is your objection to “higher authority” such as the International Criminal Court? ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2007, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/18 "2007-04-03T14:24:19Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] > [@FRDE](#): > > You wait until the USA is invaded with ‘Human Rights’ nonsense, let alone monkey rights - and I jest not. 😕 That sentence is meaningless. [/QUOTE] Would you kindly inform the current Spanish government please? We have some… ah, interesting recent laws regarding chimpanzee rights which were taken for a collective joke, at first. Nope, them Socialists are serious. ---
**Author:** ![flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbce88/32.png) [@flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flight)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2007, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/19 "2007-04-03T14:28:32Z")
[quote=] Gates said the challenge is figuring out what to do with hard-core detainees who have “made very clear they will come back and attack this country.” He [Secretary of Defense Robert Gates] said it may require a new law to “address the concerns about some of these people who really need to be incarcerated forever, but that doesn’t get them involved in a judicial system where there is the potential of them being released,” Gates told the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee. [/quote] Possibly the scariest thing about this is that it doesn’t matter if they were guilty of the original crimes. I can see a reasonably peaceful person turned vehemently and violently anti-American simply by us locking him up for so long and treating him as we have. In that case we created the terrorist by the imprisonment, but need to keep him in prison in order to protect us from that terrorist we created. This is like the whole the Iraq war. The only good way out was not to have gotten in in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![Bertram](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e8c25b/32.png) [@Bertram](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bertram)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2007, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145/20 "2007-04-03T14:49:28Z")
[QUOTE=flight] In that case we created the terrorist by the imprisonment, but need to keep him in prison in order to protect us from that terrorist we created. [/QUOTE] I can almost imagine a Muslim Yossarian in Guantanamo: as long as he claims that he is not an enemy of the United States he cannot be trusted because, well, how could he not have become one after all he had to endure? But if he told anyone that, yes, now he is an enemy .. [QUOTE=FRDE] Human Rights are a load of idealistic principles that have been drafted rather than evolved, slinging them on top of an established body of Law causes havoc, as it has done in the UK. [/QUOTE] Could you explain the “havoc”-part? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guantanamo-minority-report/398145.md?page=2)