Comments for http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html en-gb 30 Mon 26 Jan 2015 06:23:10 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html Dave http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=99#comment292 The should not be tried in civilian courts which is likely to result in reduced charges and £m payouts funded by taxpayers. They should be tried in a military court for crimes against humanity and, if found guilty, should be taken outside and shot. Mon 22 Nov 2010 09:57:53 GMT+1 Kim55 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=99#comment291 Of course the trial of these detainees should be held in civilian courts. These detainees should be seen as normal civilians. There is a high chance that there is a large number of innocent people among these detainees. To do justice to these people and to our conscience we should hold the trial of all these people in civilian courts under normal circumstance. It has been established as a fact that US has caught a number of people basing this act on wrong grounds. Many people were caught because they had beard they happened to be in the neighborhood of the American forces Mon 22 Nov 2010 08:11:45 GMT+1 ssaaki http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=98#comment290 277/ How can you reply on behalf of BBC ? .I don't think BBC has given you any power/authority . Fact remains Irgun's legacy and illegal occupation since 1967 is the crux of the problem and to justify illegal occupation ,you people started misinterpretations . Mon 22 Nov 2010 05:32:20 GMT+1 Illogicbuster http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=98#comment289 kevthebrit wrote: "History is just repeating it's self! The christians attacked the muslims via the crusades and now it's just reversed it's self!"---------------------------------------------------------------Actually, you are deficient in your history EDU. Muslims attacked and took the Eastern Holy Roman Empire 1st. The U.S. was 1st attacked by Muslim terrorists in the late 18th century and we had to bring in the Navy and Marines to "set them straight" at the time... Mon 22 Nov 2010 00:00:18 GMT+1 Illogicbuster http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=98#comment288 Faheyclone wrote: "Precisely, but it isn't Churchill & FDR's military,"------------------------------------------------------------------Exactly. This is Obama's and the liberal Democrats military. Sun 21 Nov 2010 23:45:38 GMT+1 kevthebrit http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=97#comment287 First of all......Just WHO is right in this scenario?History is just repeating it's self! The christians attacked the muslims via the crusades and now it's just reversed it's self! Much the same as the british empire ruled half the world it is also going the other way!OH! And as for wars and conflicts! Some folk just love them because it's a fast track to a very quick buck! Again read history!What goes around ......... So just STOP with all this so called 'shock and outrage'! Sun 21 Nov 2010 23:31:27 GMT+1 Illogicbuster http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=97#comment286 Globalist80 wrote: "The attempt by Bush et asl to blurr the distinction between combatants and civilians threatened out very freedoms.The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."--------------------------------------------------------------------Actually, incorrect. Bush was following the precedent set by FDR and upheld by the SCotUS at the time. Next... Sun 21 Nov 2010 23:15:59 GMT+1 Illogicbuster http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=97#comment285 devilzadvacate1 wrote: "I believe that this only applies in times of war, that is officially declared war between one nation and another."---------------------------------------------------------------------Actually, the Geneva specifies who is protected. It doesn't specify what you can't do someone who doesn't fall under those protections. It has no provision for "officially" declared or undeclared actions. Hence, we can try and execute those who attack us who fall outside the Geneva protections. Like we did in WW2. Hope that clears it up for you. Sun 21 Nov 2010 23:13:36 GMT+1 Mel http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=96#comment284 Post #6 and #2 have the right idea - no trial, just a concentration camp and then perhaps gassing? Oh! somebody did that once before? Sorry! Sun 21 Nov 2010 22:25:04 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=96#comment283 This post has been Removed Sun 21 Nov 2010 20:07:44 GMT+1 Faheyclone http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=96#comment282 Illogicbuster wrote:[W]e need to do what Churchill & FDR did when saboteurs & spy's were caught out of uniform. Military trial then firing squad execution.Precisely, but it isn't Churchill & FDR's military, but a bunch of GOP Party hacks in uniform that dithered about for 8 years & couldn't get the job done. They're a bunch of tinhorn bullies. Churchill was a conservative, FDR a liberal, but they both had substance behind their style. The only leader of the bunch who has put his money where his mouth is is Obama. I posted an earlier comment to them, but I'm afraid that in using the only kind of language they understand, I may have overstepped the bounds of civility rightly insisted upon by BBC. To the rest of HYS, I apologize. Sun 21 Nov 2010 19:41:24 GMT+1 Illogicbuster http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=95#comment281 "Should the Guantanamo trials be held in civilian courts?"No, we need to do what Churchill & FDR did when saboteurs & spy's were caught out of uniform. Military trial then firing squad execution. Sun 21 Nov 2010 19:25:37 GMT+1 Bob Smyth http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=95#comment280 280. At 6:52pm on 21 Nov 2010, Tibor wrote:No one considers that those guys could be simply innocent victims?If our sons and daughters would be treated similarly for crimes against Islam would it make a difference? One has no right to be so ignorant and obliged to define the truth at the first place.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------What, exactly, is a "crime against Islam"?Islam is an ideology - not an individual or other legal entity.The oft-quoted "waging war on Islam and Muslims" usually means "any failure by infidels to concede to the latest demand resulting from Muslims' exaggerated sense of entitlement that their "Islamic norms" must always prevail. Sun 21 Nov 2010 19:09:54 GMT+1 Tibor http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=95#comment279 No one considers that those guys could be simply innocent victims?If our sons and daughters would be treated similarly for crimes against Islam would it make a difference? One has no right to be so ignorant and obliged to define the truth at the first place. Sun 21 Nov 2010 18:52:07 GMT+1 Faheyclone http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=94#comment278 This post has been Removed Sun 21 Nov 2010 18:48:40 GMT+1 lordBanners http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=94#comment277 Typically US went Over-Boards with Guantanamo-Bay, but 'Actions' by ex-Colonial Powers in Europe carry more than a suggestion of POLICY which forbid Non-Whites from Prosecuting Whites. Govt Sponsored White SUPREMIST Ideology.Poland took pains to 'Get it Right' in Extradicting an Israeli to Germany accused of Forging a German Passport and Impersonation to Commit Murder, only to have Merkel RELEASE the Accused and allow him to Leave the Country.Colombia recently Convicted another Israeli in absentia for Training FARC Rebels against the State plus other serious charges. He was located in Russia and Arrested, but though Europe couldn't find any flaw in his Conviction-process, they successfully argued en masse that this mercenary would face Hardship in a Colombian Jail, and European Court OVER-RULED Russian Judiciary and ORDERED he be set FREE and returned to Israel, and Russia OBEYED!US 'Contractors' (Mercenaries) who Unprovoked rolled Grenades into an Iraqi Crowd killing 17 and injuring more were flown back to US despite Official Iraqi requests for their arrest, gyrated through the FARCE of a Trial and were promptly Set-FREE on a Technicality.Supporting each other in these TWISTED PERVERSIONS of 'Rule of Law' which DEVALUE the Lives of all others, often including our supposed Friends. Is CERTAIN to eventually result in them assembling similar Kangaroo Courts to Pre-Empt JUSTICE and let their Guilty go FREE according to Rules we've introduced.Democracy is what we BOAST, but the REALITY is a Race-Based 'Preferred - Non-Preferred' version of International APARTHEID close to becoming an Art-Form. And our expectation that They will sit MEEKLY and lap-it-up is as STUPID as our belief that They haven't Noticed being Victimised. Sun 21 Nov 2010 18:00:31 GMT+1 Bob Smyth http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=94#comment276 274. At 4:24pm on 21 Nov 2010, ssaaki wrote:kind attention : BBC /When people are misinterpreting Koran,Islam, Sharia, Muslims, you are not deleting their posts . When people use term-Jews to highlights their atrocities through out history , you remove posts immediately -why ?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------The people to whom these trials will apply would certainly not consider themselves to be "misunderstanders of Islam". Indeed, they often claim to "understand" and practice Islam in its "purest" form via its verbatim texts and tenets.These "verbatim" forms are the ones that are replete with the "convert, subjugate or kill" exhortations. In addition, the so-called "misunderstanders of Islam" always appear to "misunderstand" in exactly the same way - by reverting to the verbatim texts.On the basis of your post would you, perhaps, consider that "misinterpreting the Koran, Sharia, Islam and Muslims" comprises any critical comment whatsoever regarding these topics?The Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has already sought to make any criticism whatsoever of Islam or the Prophet Muhammad a "hate crime" in any UN member state (but has not yet achieved it).So, on precisely what basis should the BBC delete such posts? Sun 21 Nov 2010 17:18:31 GMT+1 ONE-SICK-PUPPY http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=93#comment275 Terrorism trials are best conducted on the business end of an M-16 battle rifle. I mean if we are not going to interrogate them, and we cannot re-habilitate them, and it costs millions to try them. Just what is the point of bringing them back here anyway? Sun 21 Nov 2010 16:58:51 GMT+1 Faheyclone http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=93#comment274 Ideally, they would have been tried as war criminals and executed, but the military brass screwed it up, didn't get good intel, failed to prosecute and got their jollies from tormenting them past their point of usefulness. The US military is too busy worrying about Gays in the ranks, the generals' next revolving door job with contractors, and how to help their GOP buddies rob the treasury to be bothered with details like running their military justice system. If they were McChrystal would have been up on charges for leaking the Afghan strategy before he could do his masters' bidding and try to stab his CinC in the back.If the Military did its job, Gitmo would have been filled and emptied many times over-first with the terrorist war-criminals, then with traitorous officers. I'm not exaggerating; look up treason in UCMJ, Courts Martial. Sun 21 Nov 2010 16:30:42 GMT+1 ssaaki http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=93#comment273 kind attention : BBC / When people are misinterpreting Koran,Islam, Sharia, Muslims, you are not deleting their posts . When people use term-Jews to highlights their atrocities through out history , you remove posts immediately -why ? Sun 21 Nov 2010 16:24:45 GMT+1 Ed Martin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=92#comment272 These trials should be held in a British provincial magistrates court, wherein the bigotry, self-righteousness and ignorance of all parties would be well matched.regardsEd Martin Sun 21 Nov 2010 16:11:17 GMT+1 Faheyclone http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=92#comment271 The right wing Bush administration with it's lurking, torture-monger, undisclosed-location, Darth Vader, war profiteer, hunting-buddy-shooting VP, Chaney, did more harm to the US the the 911 bombers. These people and their punk supporters undermine our basic principles. The only good they did was to embolden the right-wing scum to come out from under their rocks where the rest of us can get a good look at them. They should be on trial as well. Sun 21 Nov 2010 16:02:05 GMT+1 Bob Smyth http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=92#comment270 The vast majority (if not all) of those indicted in such trials claim that their inspipration, motivation and the so-called "justifications" for their actions are Islam and the Qur'an. Unfortunately, in the politically-correct environment imposed by the US authorities, these aspects are always conveniently "overlooked" in any trials. It would, perhaps, be of benefit to those observing such proceedings if these aspects were made abundantly clear.In addition, those indicted (and subsequently convicted) often claim that they do not recognise the jurisdiction of any "infidel court" and only respect Sharia law. It is, perhaps, interesting to note that the actions for which they are being prosecuted would incur no penalty whatsoever under Sharia law because their actions seek to "advance Islam and Muslims" and hence any "jihad" actions are considered to be "justified". Sun 21 Nov 2010 14:40:04 GMT+1 Faheyclone http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=91#comment269 Despite the macho posturing of right-wingers, the liberal Obama administration is the one to have the intestinal fortitude to actually try these people as the criminals they are. The military under GOP administration and congress kept them past any intelligence usefulness, got little or nothing of value because they used illegal and ineffective techniques, and made it harder to convict. This is a victory for the constitution, the courts, and the victims of 911. Sun 21 Nov 2010 14:30:13 GMT+1 George http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=91#comment268 Obama and the communists ( democrats) want to confuse Americans by pursueing un-American things. Obama wants to please Muslims as he wants to dimantle the US and give it to foreigners he feels the US has harmed. That is why he wants the trials in civilian courts. He knows the prisoners will be freed.If Hitler were tried in a civilian court in the US, he would have been found innocent of any crimes.Keep the trials in the military in Gitmo. Sun 21 Nov 2010 14:22:27 GMT+1 Rick http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=91#comment267 Let me begin by saying I am a U.S. citizen who's ancestors came over on a boat from Holland in 1638. Historically, members of my family have fought in the French and Indian War, The American Revolution (against the British), The War of 1812 (against the British), The Civil War (3rd Ohio Vol.Cav. Co. E), The Spanish American War, WW1, WW2, and Korea. If the prison is retained, it should be for the temporary incarceration of prisoners until a speedy civilian trial can take place.I sincerely believe the former U.S. President and Vice President should be indicted for violating the 'oath of office' and for war crimes. They both failed to "support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic" by denying the prisoners their Constitutional rights under the 5th, 6th, and 7th Amendments especially, after verbally declaring "The war is over". They not only ignored the U.S. signing of the Geneva accord of 1924 by admitting to condoning the act of torture known as "waterboarding" but by this act, they violated the 8th Amendment against cruel or unusual punishment. In the U.S. I consider one criminal act more heinous than all others combined and that act is "Terrorism against the United States Constitution". Sun 21 Nov 2010 13:42:01 GMT+1 peter petros http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=90#comment266 Out of so many charges the US had against him he was found guilty in only one. (and that was strictly to save face) maybe Obama should consider extending an olive branch towards Al Qaeda and Taliban and try to come to an understanding and hear their grievances instead of killing each other?Peace never hurt anyone wars and terrorism do Sun 21 Nov 2010 10:09:19 GMT+1 ssaaki http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=90#comment265 251/ Please read international terrorism and role of Irgun Sun 21 Nov 2010 08:18:00 GMT+1 ssaaki http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=90#comment264 251/ site provided by you is nothing but a bundle of lies developed by liars . Sun 21 Nov 2010 07:56:22 GMT+1 roy smith http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=89#comment263 They should be tried in a military court with all relevant facts brought forward choose how it was obtained. The court decides whether these facts are considered. It must have all the information obtainable. Sun 21 Nov 2010 05:54:51 GMT+1 ssaaki http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=89#comment262 253/ well said dear. Sun 21 Nov 2010 05:49:55 GMT+1 ssaaki http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=89#comment261 This post has been Removed Sun 21 Nov 2010 05:46:10 GMT+1 Silent-Hunter http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=88#comment260 I think that there should be no military courts at all. There should be civilian courts like we have now, and they should cover everything. Right to a fair trial is more important than anything else, including national security. Sun 21 Nov 2010 03:26:00 GMT+1 Desmond http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=88#comment259 At 01:29am on 19 Nov 2010, Joe wrote:126. At 00:40am on 19 Nov 2010, Kruger wrote:At 11:23pm on 18 Nov 2010, Matt wrote:(Murder, Murder, Murder. Kill, Kill, Kill.) is the cry as they condemn innocents to death as terrorists.-------------------------------------------------------Allah Akbar [God is great] is the terrorists cry as the they detonate their suicide bombs, or crash planes into buildings, killing innocents by the thousands._______________________________________________________The Klu Klux Klan in the southern states, have been known to shout similar things whilst committing horrendous physical acts of racial hatred. Strange how they don't get pulled up for acts of terrorism too.And they are far easier to identify, hoods or no hoods.*****************************************************************Of course suicide bombers cannot get pulled up for terrorism, if their body parts are lying around in a million different pieces intermingled with those of their innocent victims......except for the few who get caught before they have time to immolate themselves. Sun 21 Nov 2010 01:55:15 GMT+1 nya http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=88#comment258 "We captured them, tortured them, and they confessed." Somehow that does not sound right. I am sure the jury did the right thing. Sat 20 Nov 2010 23:19:05 GMT+1 kevthebrit http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=87#comment257 Man-UN-kind just LOVES war and trouble. History has proved that 100%!So try them, shoot them, free them because it will make NOT a jot of difference! WARS will NOT STOP! EVER! PEACE is a myth and war IS a FACT for ALL living things inc. us knuckle heads! We will keep trying to 'fix' it untill it breaks! Sat 20 Nov 2010 23:08:32 GMT+1 nya http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=87#comment256 The American judicial system worked. People should not be convicted on evidence obtained through torture. If this man were an American, and had been captured by a foreign power, made to confess through torture, Americans would be incensed. Maybe this a lesson for us to obey the rule of law as we expect other s to do. Sat 20 Nov 2010 23:03:31 GMT+1 eeyore http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=87#comment255 58. At 4:37pm on 18 Nov 2010, GranolaBaa wrote:International law is quite clear, and has been since the mid 19th century. Any person taken "in arms" and not in uniform or wearing military insignia is automatically guilty of a capital offence. Their only right is to be shot not hanged. We need to apply the law and have summary executions of all terrorists and fellow travellers. -------------------------------------------------------------------------OOPs. Where did you study Internaional Law and or the various Military Codes that exist. As far as I am aware, it was Hilter who ordered the murder of the French Resistance members, the SAS, spies etc.As a fellow traveller, would it help you if I gave you my address Sat 20 Nov 2010 20:25:35 GMT+1 U14368420 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=86#comment254 This post has been Removed Sat 20 Nov 2010 19:15:31 GMT+1 worried canary http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=86#comment253 All of these trials should be held in civil courts.If there is the smallest hint of a government cover up, a trial is a farce. Our justice system is the exact reason why this country is worth defending. If we allow politicians and intelligence agencies to have the final say, we are no better than any corrupt regime. Sat 20 Nov 2010 18:57:52 GMT+1 mrireland http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=86#comment252 Go to the real cost of Israel to the US RENSE.COM .difficult to get the exact cost but it is quite a lot, if you factor in all the other connected costs.If you go to utube and check I AM ISRAEL it gives another picture.Its clear that no progress has been made in a two state solution and now none is possible .A map of the area will illustrate why , all the Palestine land is carved up into Bantustans .How this plays out on world stage with the growth of terrorism can certainly be attributed in part to Israels occupation and unequivical support by the US .The US no doubt wants a strong ally in the ME but this comes at a very heavy cost not just financial but in PR , esp in the Muslim countries.Unless there is a honest effort to address how a solution can be found our world is diproportinately affected by this small area not much bigger than New Jersey. So many arguments have been offered but winning arguments is of little importance , finding solutions is however. Sat 20 Nov 2010 18:30:27 GMT+1 Wrinklyoldgit http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=85#comment251 Anyone who commits an act of terrorism in the UK should be tried for treason - for which the death penalty still applies.Is it not strange that people who have no respect for the law are the first to scream for a lawyer when they are caught? Sat 20 Nov 2010 18:26:33 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=85#comment250 227. At 07:02am on 20 Nov 2010, ssaaki wrote:Romans used to spread hatred,now Israel is spreading hatred and trying to create gulf between Christians and Muslims . Americans should understand this .-world had to pay/ spend too much during cold war era created by Israel- world had to pay too much on Iraq only because of false info furnished by Israel- world is paying heavy price on war on terror . The main cause of terror is again Israel , its occupation ,its aggression . _____________________________http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGhdX1SI3KY&feature=relatedEnjoy! :) Sat 20 Nov 2010 18:06:48 GMT+1 Globalist80 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=84#comment249 Response to J. Dyson:I am asying just that.Military trials are appropriate for offenses by military .In civilian trials exclusionary rules have been developed to prevent illegally obtained and therefore doubtful evidence from being used by improperly by extra zealous prosecutors .The rules protect us all from Kafka type tials which deprive us of our right to a fair trial The attempt by Bush et asl to blurr the distinction between combatants and civilians threatened out very freedoms.The price of liberty is eternal vigilance. Sat 20 Nov 2010 17:24:42 GMT+1 Maureen Gobener http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=84#comment248 We seem to be in the hands of wimps nowadays. What is all this drivel about torture? What torture? Having water poured over your head with your face covered in a cloth is not torture - it's having a shower, but nonetheless it apparently warrents receiving a million, not compensation but a little nicety for having been kept incarcerated in Guantanamo. What a world we live in. Having had to live through WW2 in the heart of London, I wouldn't mind receiving a million for all that I had to put up with because of a maniac called Hitler. When are we going to wake up to what these revolting terrorists are doing and when are we going to really deal with them? We used to be called Great Britain, where's the great gone? Sat 20 Nov 2010 17:14:32 GMT+1 M Bergman http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=84#comment247 Wherever you have secrets, you have corruption. Justify the need for secrets all you like, it doesn't alter this fact. Studies and history have both shown that people are far more willing to commit heinous acts when they think no one is looking, than when they know they are being widely observed. Neither courts, lawmakers, law enforcement personnel, nor juries are exempt from this fact; ipso facto, if it's a secret court, it is or will become corrupt and justice will ultimately be perverted. If we want fair trials, they must also be public trials. If we want to protect secrets, then we accept corruption and injustice as facts of life. History teaches us that when state secrets are exposed, it is all of us they've been kept from in order to manipulate public opinion for the advantage and personal gain not of the many, but of the few. Personally, I would rather risk exposure and know the truth, than lose my freedom protecting secrets that may actually support agendas running counter to all I believe in. Sat 20 Nov 2010 17:12:06 GMT+1 D G Cullum http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=83#comment246 Yes and it should be on television as well so that all can chose to watch and listen to what our government allows the USA to do with people from this country for doing what? Then the war criminals should replace them and see if water boarding is a game. Sat 20 Nov 2010 16:02:56 GMT+1 devilzadvacate1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=83#comment245 233. At 11:57am on 20 Nov 2010, you wrote:I do not claim to be a legal expert, certainly not as far as the Geneva Convention is concerned but there are a number of posts here pointing out that some of these people are unarmed combattants in a war zone and as such offer themselves up for trial at a military tribunal followed by execution if found guilty as per the Geneva Convention. I believe that this only applies in times of war, that is officially declared war between one nation and another.One cannot legally go to war against a religion, nor can you go to war against an idealism; you can anly go to war against a country. As far as I know neither US or Britain nor any other coalition country has declared war on any other country so anyone seized from an Al Quaeda training camp in, for example, Pakistan is not in a war zone and cannot be tried at a military tribunal. The only reason we speak of war is due to Mr Bush declaring a 'war on terrorism'. This does not legally amount to a declaration of war..Oooops, just reread my own post where I made reference to 'unarmed combattants', this should have said non-uniformed rather than unarmed. Sorry Sat 20 Nov 2010 15:30:20 GMT+1 devilzadvacate1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=83#comment244 241. At 1:01pm on 20 Nov 2010, lostalex wrote:devilzadvacate1 wrote: I'm sure if the boot was on the other foot and westerners were being tried in Iran (for example) based on evidence obtained from them whilst being waterboarded in a secret Iranian torture chamber the BBC would have no problems telling us in these terms.------------Wrong. This does happen to American citizens on other countries. Look at Amanda Knox in Italy...........................................I'm sorry, I think you have misunderstood the point I was making. My point was that the BBC should not be saying that evidence was being obtained by 'enhanced interrogation' at a CIA 'black site', this is just euphemism for torture at a secret torture chamber. If it were either Americans or Brits subject to 'enhanced interrogation' at a Taliban 'black site' BBC would quite rightly tell us it was torture in a secret prison rather than sanitising their report. Sat 20 Nov 2010 15:26:43 GMT+1 mrireland http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=82#comment243 Maybe they could send him to Bermuda ?We have four Uigers here enjoying the good life and full employment while thousands of Bermudians have no work during this recession.Its pleasant after Guntanamo. Sat 20 Nov 2010 14:11:00 GMT+1 BluesBerry http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=82#comment242 I believe there is a very good chance of Ahmed Ghailani winning his appeal. Unless ground work was provided for the constant references to Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden, this referencing would be not relevant, at beat leading to a new trial.If and when the one single conviction is rescinded, what will the Americans do then? Start all over with a new trial?Will they still keep Ahmed Ghailani at Guantanamo, and on what grounds?"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. (Sir Walter Scott {Marmion, 1808}) Sat 20 Nov 2010 13:25:18 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=82#comment241 This post has been Removed Sat 20 Nov 2010 13:11:25 GMT+1 lostalex http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=81#comment240 devilzadvacate1 wrote: I'm sure if the boot was on the other foot and westerners were being tried in Iran (for example) based on evidence obtained from them whilst being waterboarded in a secret Iranian torture chamber the BBC would have no problems telling us in these terms.------------Wrong. This does happen to American citizens on other countries. Look at Amanda Knox in Italy. Sat 20 Nov 2010 13:01:07 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=81#comment239 This post has been Removed Sat 20 Nov 2010 13:00:40 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=81#comment238 This post has been Removed Sat 20 Nov 2010 12:57:40 GMT+1 Kolawole Ajao http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=80#comment237 When Barack Obama closed down Guantanamo I gave him a thumb-up. But when he said terrorism-based charges would be held in civilian courts I turned my thumb straight down. Sat 20 Nov 2010 12:56:08 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=80#comment236 This post has been Removed Sat 20 Nov 2010 12:50:11 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=80#comment235 This post has been Removed Sat 20 Nov 2010 12:46:12 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=79#comment234 224. At 02:44am on 20 Nov 2010, Nizam Yagoub wrote:1. At 11:45am on 18 Nov 2010, crash wrote:He was ONLY found guilty of one charge,taking part in the murder of 224 people.What about Bush and Blair, who were behind the killing of over 600,000 Iraqi civillians (the Lancet report by 2006); they seem to be reeping the benefits of their crimes by writing their meomoirs?What about Ariel Sharon who has been protected by the US from alleged war crimes in Sabra and Chatila?What about the Israelis who took part in alleged war crimes in Gaza and Jeannine (2002 and 2006) war crimes; which the US refused to give the UN permission to investigaet by vetoing the resolution calling for one?It seems that terrorism and war crimes are legal as long as they are purpotrated by Israel and its allies against Arabs and Moslems__________________________I'm guessing all your facts are drawn from the 'Jihadists Encyclopedia of Modern History?'. Sat 20 Nov 2010 12:45:39 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=79#comment233 This post has been Removed Sat 20 Nov 2010 12:30:31 GMT+1 devilzadvacate1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=79#comment232 I do not claim to be a legal expert, certainly not as far as the Geneva Convention is concerned but there are a number of posts here pointing out that some of these people are unarmed combattants in a war zone and as such offer themselves up for trial at a military tribunal followed by execution if found guilty as per the Geneva Convention. I believe that this only applies in times of war, that is officially declared war between one nation and another.One cannot legally go to war against a religion, nor can you go to war against an idealism; you can anly go to war against a country. As far as I know neither US or Britain nor any other coalition country has declared war on any other country so anyone seized from an Al Quaeda training camp in, for example, Pakistan is not in a war zone and cannot be tried at a military tribunal. The only reason we speak of war is due to Mr Bush declaring a 'war on terrorism'. This does not legally amount to a declaration of war. Sat 20 Nov 2010 11:57:26 GMT+1 seasand123 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=78#comment231 One must never forget that these terrorists are unofficial combatants who sworn to wage war against any targets that deemed to them opposes their convictions, ideology and theology and what not. In fact they armed bandits who do not represent and officially sanctioned by their country of origin. They are mercenaries nt for money but for a cause.It is utterly foolish to try them in a civilian judiciary system. In such a system they are given too much leeway to argue their cases with the help of expert legal advise one can get with the possibility of justifying their actions.As in an open court, all informations, details, classified or non-classified had to be made public and argued irrespective of the damage it may inflict on the security of the state. It may also time consuming at a great expense of the tax payers money the state's resources.These terrorists do not deserve any sympathy and they are not common criminals but are mass murderers.The right place to try them is the military tribunal. To try them in a civilian court, is the mother of all blunders. Sat 20 Nov 2010 11:12:00 GMT+1 squeezy http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=78#comment230 Just goes to show why most of the world does NOT trust the US for honesty and justice! Sat 20 Nov 2010 10:53:28 GMT+1 Pancha Chandra http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=78#comment229 There have been miscarriages of justice: it is vital that every suspect is given a fair trial. Once charged and given a fair trial,the accused, if found guilty, should be given a commensurate sentence. Guantanamo trials should be carried out the same way. The Guantanamo saga leaves a very sour taste in the mouth. Let us hope justice is served with real terrorists caught and tried and innocent ones not subjected to false allegations and duress. Sat 20 Nov 2010 09:41:48 GMT+1 chrislabiff http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=77#comment228 Best law money can buy. Sat 20 Nov 2010 09:29:23 GMT+1 Tibor http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=77#comment227 "225. At 02:58am on 20 Nov 2010, hypocracyrules wrote:Personally I don't believe they should ever see the inside of a court.Gain intelligence from them, then discard.War is war. It's not pretty and it's certainly not fair.Live by the sword, die by it."Are you a product of Western "democracy" or an alien, I can't judge.What I can however is that you know nothing about the real nature of the matter. Shameful popularism + manipulated mind = Prefect citizen Sat 20 Nov 2010 08:40:46 GMT+1 ssaaki http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=77#comment226 Romans used to spread hatred,now Israel is spreading hatred and trying to create gulf between Christians and Muslims . Americans should understand this .-world had to pay/ spend too much during cold war era created by Israel - world had to pay too much on Iraq only because of false info furnished by Israel - world is paying heavy price on war on terror . The main cause of terror is again Israel , its occupation ,its aggression . Sat 20 Nov 2010 07:02:26 GMT+1 ssaaki http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=76#comment225 The reason/ cause for unrest is Israeli occupation since 1967. Sat 20 Nov 2010 05:32:38 GMT+1 hypocracyrules http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=76#comment224 Personally I don't believe they should ever see the inside of a court.Gain intelligence from them, then discard.War is war. It's not pretty and it's certainly not fair.Live by the sword, die by it. Sat 20 Nov 2010 02:58:45 GMT+1 Nizam Yagoub http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=76#comment223 1. At 11:45am on 18 Nov 2010, crash wrote:He was ONLY found guilty of one charge,taking part in the murder of 224 people.What about Bush and Blair, who were behind the killing of over 600,000 Iraqi civillians (the Lancet report by 2006); they seem to be reeping the benefits of their crimes by writing their meomoirs?What about Ariel Sharon who has been protected by the US from alleged war crimes in Sabra and Chatila?What about the Israelis who took part in alleged war crimes in Gaza and Jeannine (2002 and 2006) war crimes; which the US refused to give the UN permission to investigaet by vetoing the resolution calling for one?It seems that terrorism and war crimes are legal as long as they are purpotrated by Israel and its allies against Arabs and Moslems Sat 20 Nov 2010 02:44:27 GMT+1 Icebloo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=75#comment222 99. At 7:44pm on 18 Nov 2010, effinuts wrote:47. At 4:01pm on 18 Nov 2010, Steve wrote:It was Liberals like Obama who wanted these trials to take place in civilian courts in the first place.------------Wrong! I'm no big fan of Obama, but I do like facts. Civilian trials for terror suspects were started in the Bush Admin. Too much FOX news!!TOTALLY agree with you. It's shameful the US has no balanced news coverage. US news is the most corrupt and biased of all the industrialized nations. It's a national embarrassment. US news is like children's TV. Sat 20 Nov 2010 00:28:20 GMT+1 Icebloo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=75#comment221 It doesn't matter what we think. Judges/lawyers/politicians rule our world even if we don't want them to so there is no point in arguing about it. They will bend the laws to make everything fit the way they want anyway. Sat 20 Nov 2010 00:26:16 GMT+1 Sid http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=75#comment220 Mmmm.............accused of 285 terror charges on acts of terror in 1998. Why so many charges and found quilty on one charge. And why did it take so long for the case.Doh...I was told by US and UK ministers they don’t do integration because its illegal, 2 wrongs don’t make a right, or does it. It then works both ways. Eye for an eye, and later we all become blind...If ministers and the military cannot be trusted to do their job correctly then I guess the civil courts will have to sort the mess out.We already spent million or billions on two wars, over 9years, that’s longer than WW2, and how many people died?, and how many were innocent? And how many died in terror attacks?How many suspected terrorists were held in Guantanamo? and other prisons around the world? And how many of these prisoners were found guilty of terrorism?Mmmm........... Fri 19 Nov 2010 23:40:54 GMT+1 DPStL http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=74#comment219 I cannot believe how some very dodgy characters are being rewarded with millions, whilst cut backs are causing real pain to innocent British citizens.It may be difficult to get a conviction these days but someone using a false passport & visiting a training camp in Afghanistan is more than a suspect & should not be awarded on penny. Have we gone MAD? Give the money to the innocent victims of terrorism or injured servicemen instead. On top of that the UK's unwillingness to send some of these people home just in case ...... leaves many of us speechless.Meanwhile poor handicapped people who are really being harrased/tortured in my book - to the point of commiting suicide - are being virtually ignored & their aggressors/tortures, causing real mental & physical harm, in some cases up to 20 yrs. get a minor slap on the wrist. Where is the justice?What a crazy country - what a crazy justice system. It makes my blood boil. Fri 19 Nov 2010 23:16:55 GMT+1 Peter Bassey http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=74#comment218 This post has been Removed Fri 19 Nov 2010 22:55:15 GMT+1 Rather_Be_Cycling http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=74#comment217 " 205. At 7:06pm on 19 Nov 2010, Globalist80 wrote:Open and scrupulously fair trials are essential if we are to prresent ourselves as champions of the "Rule of Law""So in the war against those who want to destroy us, you reduce our response to what? Self-congratulatory, self-validating drivel about "presenting ourselves as champions of the Rule of Law"? The jihadists don't care about our rules, our laws or how we perceive ourselves or wish them to perceive us. They aren't about perception, symbolism or word games. They are about reducing the world to a 13th century caliphate by every means necessary possible. They fight with sword and you wish us to fight with symbolism and symantics. Any guess who's going to win this war? Fri 19 Nov 2010 22:08:53 GMT+1 MagicKirin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=73#comment216 ref #216I don't care that they're not US citizens, they are still human. Perhaps military tribunals were necessary in the extreme circumstances of civil and world wars. But in order to use these inferior means of justice we have declared that the entire earth is a battlefield, and that we are in an unending war with whoever we accuse of wanting to harm us.______________This is a world war. The islamic terrorist threat has the same genociadal issues that Hitler Nazis due. Intolerance of those who do not follow it's dictates.Never Again!! Fri 19 Nov 2010 21:59:33 GMT+1 entr0py http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=73#comment215 As an American, I have always been proud of our legal system and the protections it grants the accused. Once we abandon a presumption of innocence, once we abandon the right to a a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury, once torture is considered an acceptable means of acquiring evidence for a trial, we have all lost something precious. I don't care that they're not US citizens, they are still human. Perhaps military tribunals were necessary in the extreme circumstances of civil and world wars. But in order to use these inferior means of justice we have declared that the entire earth is a battlefield, and that we are in an unending war with whoever we accuse of wanting to harm us. Fri 19 Nov 2010 21:32:57 GMT+1 Mike Brecher http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=73#comment214 Post 3 makes an excellent point. The Bush-Cheney mob, Americans and Brits -- especially those who smugly scorn "lefty" human rightists -- are the first to scream blue murder when their citizens are tortured for confessions in what they deem to be uncivilized parts of the world. Fri 19 Nov 2010 20:37:52 GMT+1 linnett_r http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=72#comment213 And the 15 year old Canadian youth that recently pleaded guilty at the military tribunal - should he have been liquidated and / or shot as is suggested by many for all of these detainees? How about the British men who have been released?This kind of harsh treatment may well be the only way to treat extremists, but until they are found to be guilty, surely we must allow these people some change of being innocent. Fri 19 Nov 2010 20:17:39 GMT+1 jabbajockey http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=72#comment212 This post has been Removed Fri 19 Nov 2010 20:14:56 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=72#comment211 175. At 3:23pm on 19 Nov 2010, ssaaki wrote:*171/ you have to fear GOD .______________________I do FEAR God, however, I don't fear greasy blasphemers who reinvent God in their own image and claim God hates the same things they do! Fri 19 Nov 2010 20:14:53 GMT+1 Jean Dyson http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=71#comment210 responding to Globalist 80 who wrote - Open and scrupulous fair trials are essential if we are to present ourselves as champions of the rule of law.Are you saying that military trials are neither fair or scrupulous?Do you think that civilian trials are fair to the victims when the evidence of their guilt cannot be presented? Do you think that this will have any effect on the terrorists? Will they stop flying planes into buildings, cutting throats, kidnapping, abusing women and the killing of innocents. I don't think so.We celebrate life - they celebrate death.Only yesterday on the BBC News here is the USA we saw young afghan girls playing football in the stadium where ten years ago the Taliban were killing women for daring to seek emmancipation. These Islamic fundermentalists cannot be reasoned with, all they seek is death and destruction of the western culture. britexpat. Fri 19 Nov 2010 20:13:46 GMT+1 Peter Bassey http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=71#comment209 Do understand my feelings please.The nations of this earth,particularly in my neck of the woods,are not by nature democratic.But purely for the pressure of the west,primarily the US and UK,we now enjoy such freedoms as I in my lifetime never dreamed we would enjoy.It does not require special brain-power to work it out that the US and UK are the guarantors of those democracies and freedoms.Remove these nations and our goose is cooked.China wouldnt bat an eyelid,the French wouldnt care zilch,and the Germans would probably pick their noses and look the other way,lets face it.It hurts me no end therefore to see the defenders of my freedoms being threatened with extinction by a bunch of cave dwellers whose ultimate target down the line will one day be me and my children.I totally will not-to the best of my abilty-let that happen.And perhaps because a great number of westerners [mostly liberals]dont understand this threat and probably underate the abilities of these terrorists,imagining the west to be imregnable,they inadvertently lend support to those terrorists.But these criminals ride on the backs of the freedoms guaranteed in the west to hurt the west.You must therefore,if you are clever,know when to wisely suspend some of your so-called HRs in order to exterminate these people before they exterminate you.Three nukes in New York,Washington and London will do it.Do you not suspend civil laws during war?Or do you still fail to understand that this is a fight to the death?If you dont,then again I pity you. Fri 19 Nov 2010 20:04:07 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=70#comment208 This post has been Removed Fri 19 Nov 2010 20:01:08 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=70#comment207 This post has been Removed Fri 19 Nov 2010 19:33:09 GMT+1 Ali Haider Kazmi http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=70#comment206 won_hung_lo wrote:9/11, 7/7, Beslan, Madrid train bombings etc etc ad nauseum were done by Christians, right?_________________________________________________________________________No they were not. Christians only threw a couple of fire crackers on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Started a couple of minor genocidal wars in Sudan. A little apartheid in South Africa. Chopped off Che Guveras hands after murdering him. How is that for turning the other cheek?. The humanity has now understood that they they were talking about turning the other cheek of your victim for water boarding. Fri 19 Nov 2010 19:25:15 GMT+1 Tibor http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=69#comment205 Those who are above the law dictate how and what kind of law must be applied to others.I wonder... Fri 19 Nov 2010 19:12:09 GMT+1 Globalist80 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=69#comment204 Open and scrupulously fair trials are essential if we are to prresent ourselves as champions of the "Rule of Law"The civilians court system should diasarm critics of bias and political motives.Those among us who seek to hide the facts are a far greater enemy than any terrorist.as they for selfish reasons will do great damage to our nation.Sen, Schumer interference in the judicial process by stating that the Congress would not fund a NYC trial for the 9/11 bomber is a violation of his oath to up hold the Constitution .9/11 was a retaliation for US support of Isreal ,no smoke screen by the Isreal Lobby can hide that fact. Fri 19 Nov 2010 19:06:08 GMT+1 Mike Hall http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=69#comment203 No these people should face a military trial. There are too many liberals involved in civil courts with more concern for civil and human rights than obligations towards civilisation and freedom. They were not held for nothing and like our so called UK citizens and residents who just happened to be collecting butterflies (I jest but it is probably a better excuse than they give) in a known war zone and yet claim to be the victims of torture. The real torture is having these people in this country in the first place. A military trial will be fair, objective and will seek the truth - more than anyone would get in the majority of Islamic countries. Fri 19 Nov 2010 19:06:04 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=68#comment202 "This trial does not accomplish anything except to expose your investigative methods,endanger your sources,cost your tax payers endless dollars and count nothing to endearing you to men and women sworn to destroy you no matter how much you kiss them on the cheek.In all these, I deeply pity you the west."_________________________Sadly Peter, the problems in the West are two fold: terrorists and idiots (aka Liberals). The idiots think that because something is morally praiseworthy then it automatically becomes morally obligatory, and terrorist supporters (disingenuous muslims) encourage this because they benefit the most from it! Idiots (liberals) can't/won't see this because their 'principles' are made up of 'ideals', these 'ideals' are just that; 'ideals', they bare no relation to reality! Fri 19 Nov 2010 19:04:28 GMT+1 William http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=68#comment201 Iraq was not successful until the CIA incited locals to take up arms against terrorists.You cannot win in asymmetrical warfare; it will always end in a great loss of life, an indecisive end, and a high price tag for both sides. It ends when the supposedly more powerful nations give up due to pressure to do so, and then, when they leave, things go back to the way they were, and nothing was accomplished. Just many people murdered, and many billions of euros/dollars wasted.If you want to fight an insurgent...send an insurgent...not a drone. Fri 19 Nov 2010 18:44:14 GMT+1 Peter Bassey http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=68#comment200 I was standing in a banking hall when I first saw the Sept 11th attacks.I watched mouth agape and suddenly was distracted by a senior banker being dragged away by his colleagues screaming and virtually foaming at the mouth.He was raving insanely at the perpetrators of the attack and crazedly wondering in loud shouts what America had done to deserve such madness.This was the reaction of a non-American deep in Nigeria and far away from the horror being played out.I shared the man's anger at the time and am even more convinced my rage has condensed into a feeling even I can no longer control or understand.Every other terrorist attack across the world drew upon and deepened that fury.When I therefore come upon supposed westerners whining about blankets wrapped around the head of a terrorist and drenched in water to obtain information likely to save more lives,I wonder at the western-ness of such persons.This trial does not accomplish anything except to expose your investigative methods,endanger your sources,cost your tax payers endless dollars and count nothing to endearing you to men and women sworn to destroy you no matter how much you kiss them on the cheek.In all these,I deeply pity you the west. Fri 19 Nov 2010 18:24:31 GMT+1 William http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=67#comment199 No. Militants and terrorists serve political purposes. Just because they lack insignias, they are soldiers, and should be treated as such.Please, people, there is no need to be rude or uncivilized. Stating your opinions with such vehemence and insult is not a sign of credibility; being reasonable and rational, on the other hand, is. Fri 19 Nov 2010 18:24:00 GMT+1 U14366475 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=67#comment198 "174. At 3:19pm on 19 Nov 2010, ssaaki wrote:* 153/,168/,172,Absolutely there is no difference between ALLAH AND GOD "Totality agree. Neither exist. Fri 19 Nov 2010 17:48:01 GMT+1 won_hung_lo http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=67#comment197 190. At 4:19pm on 19 Nov 2010, ssaaki wrote:181/you don't deserve participation in any discussion .193. At 4:34pm on 19 Nov 2010, ssaaki wrote:*186/Now you are totally exposed , you are a racist . you are not won_hung_lo_______________________Honestly, I am won_hung_lo, really, I am!By responding to your posts, I am participating in discussion. :)So pointing out racism from your sort, makes me a racist? Whatever dude! :)"Hitler was Nazi and he was a Jew?" Unsure of Hitler's ancestry, but he did keep company with some unsavoury racist characters! http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/hitq2.htmlEnjoy :) Fri 19 Nov 2010 17:25:53 GMT+1 ssaaki http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=66#comment196 * 186/ Hitler was Nazi and he was a Jew ? Fri 19 Nov 2010 16:59:21 GMT+1 U13667051 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=66#comment195 You two should meet up for a skinny-latte, wearing your trendy Arab nationalist scarves and discuss the ways in which we can prosecute our troops more vigorously and how we can make sure the terrorists get all their full rights. That includes not allowing the poor luvs to be sleep deprived or sit on uncomfortable MFI furniture.That will strengthen our democracy and we will go to bed at night with a really smug smile across our faces.You two make me sick."Our standards, our principles" blah blah - I'm quite willing to put them on hold while we smash this lot. Then we can reinstate all these left wing ideals that at the moment are acting like hand cuffs on our troops.I'd quite like for my family to go to work without being blown up, if that's ok with you. I'd quite like them to be able to travel abroad without being blown out of the sky. And if some Islamist in the dusty mountains of Afghanistan ends up sitting in a stress position which results in the same sore thighs I get after doing squats at the gym - then so be it. If we have to smash a group of them from a drone instead of harming our troops by going into 'arrest' them, then so be it.You lefties continue to flap your gums at your dinner parties and student unions, leave the future of humanity to us.============ General_Jack_Ripper wrote:Chris mather wrote:It's part of OUR way of life, OUR standards, OUR principles, to try ANYONE accused of a crime in a court of law, according to established procedures, on the basis of innocent until proven guilty. It's entirely for OUR benefit that we should rigorously uphold those standards and principles, that we should fight to defend them, not to impress or demotivate anyone else.Very well said, I couldn't agree more. Fri 19 Nov 2010 16:44:24 GMT+1 ssaaki http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=66#comment194 This post has been Removed Fri 19 Nov 2010 16:44:00 GMT+1 Graphis http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/11/should_the_guantanamo_trials_b.html?page=65#comment193 Yes, the trials should be conducted by a legal authority that is independent of the armed forces. As we are now seeing, the Americans seem to have just rounded up a lot of people willy-nilly, simply for the crime of being in the wrong place at the time. Not everyone in Guantanamo Bay is a terrorist, and we need a proper court to sort out the genuinely guilty from the innocent. Fri 19 Nov 2010 16:38:17 GMT+1