"Justice department officials said the men were too dangerous to release, but could not be tried as evidence against them would not stand up in a US court."I am having a hard time figuring this out. First off, they can't be worse killers than Rumsfeld, Cheney, or even the notorious mass murderer, Henry Kissinger. But it seems to me if the evidence against them would not hold up in a U.S. court, surely they must be innocent of the accusations that the likes of Rumsfeld and Bush have made against them. Don't we have the fairest, most honest and best judicial system in the world. If you can't prove a persons guilt in a US court, surely they must be innocent.
The extremely dangerous issue here is that someone can be held without trial indefinitely. The British did this to Catholics they rounded up in Northern Ireland. People have already been held beyond what should be the period at which they have a chance to defend themselves. Old Stalin would be proud of his U.S. counterparts here. If readers haven't seen it already I would recommend watching "The Road to Guantanamo" the fate of three British Muslims who ended up there. It also confirms the failure of U.S. policy, a "War on Terror". Terrorism is a tactic, not an entity un to itself. In the film, one young guy who was a bit of a troubled youth with no religious verve ended up becoming a practicing Muslim, turning to his faith after the experience. He has not turned to committing acts of individual terrorism against Americans, but many have.It's amazing really that that the torture chamber that is Guantanamo can exist without a massive outcry from the freedom loving and democracy worshiping U.S. public. Just show you, the German's failure to stop the rise of the Nazi's isn't just a "German" thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment