Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gitmo Is Killing Me

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 539 posts

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#281

Post by potatolicious »

RyanMcGreal wrote: post #261
potatolicious wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tenure doesn't work this way. The whole idea about tenure is to give academics the freedom to pursue things that are controversial to the public - i.e., you can research controversial things without being tossed out by the angry mob. You can afford to go full-bore on your research rather than play politics and PR with the public. Tossing one tenured professor out is a simple thing. After all like you said, it's not w…

Violating international law against torture is not "controversial", it's criminal .

So charge him with a crime already and we can get on with this removing-tenure business.

Except you can't - because he didn't violate international nor domestic law. He never waterboarded anyone, nor did he order the waterboarding of anyone.

He worked on legal justifications for the use of torture, which is not an area of international law that's well defined. He didn't make policy nor law, he spun law so that it fit existing policy.

I won't disagree that what he has done is despicable, but what exactly would you charge him with that would actually stick?

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#282

Post by hobolobo »

rmc wrote: post #223
hobolobo wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whilst internment was a pretty nasty thing, I don't think that what went on in British prisons is comparable to what goes on in Guatanamo Bay. The point was that whilst nowhere is perfectly just and or free, there is the perception that the USA promotes itself as being so.

The British didn't do forced feeding, but I'd hardly say it was great. As well as hunger strikes the prisoners also protested wearing prison uniforms. So the staff didn't empty their toilets. The prisoners smeared their feces on the walls. I'd recommend the film Hunger , it's a bit raw.

Well, the Brits did actually do force feeding:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marian_Price

Though there are/were certain conditions on when it could be ordered such as when the inmate has an eating disorder or becomes mentally incapacitated:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/493713.stm

I believe that the inhumane treatment that went on in UK/NI was not systemic but a result of individuals acting of their own accord. Guantanamo Bay was chosen to locate the camp in order to allow these kinds of things to go on because American law does not apply there.

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#283

Post by Andrew_Quentin »

gitmothrow wrote: post #273
jpxxx wrote: post #52

Hi, future generations! Political prisoners are being raped with food intubators to prevent themselves from committing suicide in America's secret torture prison, with the express consent and approval of President Obama, the American Congress, and the numerical majority of the American people. Love, 2013

Dear future generations, Clueless middle class Western programmers on Hacker News believed everything some guy in prion said and thought they understood national security realities better than the president of the US. And they made a bunch of brave comments. Much karma was exchanged. Love, 2013

Now you guys invent a time machine and come to tell us which of these two commenter is right.

Although technically they both can be right, what we are interested to know is if you future guys, like us, consider the right to a free trial as a fundamental and unbreachable right in any circumstances.

Sure, we believe you can kill enemy combatants, but if they surrender, we believe they have a right to a free trial within 60 or 90 days of detention.

So come back and tell us how our government is able to flounder the most fundamental rules and principles of law.

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#284

Post by sequoia »

gitmothrow wrote: post #273
jpxxx wrote: post #52

Hi, future generations! Political prisoners are being raped with food intubators to prevent themselves from committing suicide in America's secret torture prison, with the express consent and approval of President Obama, the American Congress, and the numerical majority of the American people. Love, 2013

Dear future generations, Clueless middle class Western programmers on Hacker News believed everything some guy in prion said and thought they understood national security realities better than the president of the US. And they made a bunch of brave comments. Much karma was exchanged. Love, 2013

'Someone deserves the right to a defend himself in court and face specific charges before being thrown in a dungeon for life, being tortured and denied even the right to die? Ha- what a naive perspective.'

It must make you feel very clever and worldly-wise to dismiss people thus.

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#285

Post by gitmothrow »

Andrew_Quentin wrote: post #283
gitmothrow wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dear future generations, Clueless middle class Western programmers on Hacker News believed everything some guy in prion said and thought they understood national security realities better than the president of the US. And they made a bunch of brave comments. Much karma was exchanged. Love, 2013

Now you guys invent a time machine and come to tell us which of these two commenter is right. Although technically they both can be right, what we are interested to know is if you future guys, like us, consider the right to a free trial as a fundamental and unbreachable right in any circumstances. Sure, we believe you can kill enemy combatants, but if they surrender, we believe they have a right to a free trial withi…

In order to convict someone you need sufficient evidence. When someone is captured in a war zone, usually by non-Western forces, evidence collection is not a top priority.

So either you hold them indefinitely or release them.

Obviously Obama believes that it is too risky to let these people go.

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#286

Post by mef »

davidw wrote: post #229
delinka wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire process of "approving" articles is democratic. The community of users decides what is interesting enough to appear on the front page. If you personally disagree that a particular article should be on the front page, well ... your only recourse is to flag it. If a democratic site is not what you want, then you don't want HN.

Actually, there are moderators who can and do kill stories, more or less according to the guidelines ( http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html ). If a completely democratic site is what you want, you want reddit.

Democratic Reddit, where votes can be bought for 20-for-$1 https://coinbase.com/checkouts/35297a275c385a75d231fd4a6edd5...

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#287

Post by dhimes »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #17

Gitmo was the first thing that clued me that I had made a mistake voting for Obama's promises (not that McCain would have ever gotten it instead!). It was such a complete reversal that I immediately knew his promises were completely worthless. I appreciate that there may be anger outs people in Gitmo, but they have every right to a trial I have. The double standard of what human rights mean if you are a US citizen an…

Here's an interesting thought experiment: Imagine you are Obama, newly elected president. Under what conditions would you reverse yourself and let Gitmo stand? What information would you have to become privy to that you weren't before in order for you to change your mind?

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#288

Post by ck2 »

GHFigs wrote: post #214
ck2 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if that is a standing order - then they are operating Gitmo in clear defiance of a direct order by the President of the United States? Gitmo is a prison run by the military, and he is the Commander-in-Chief, so every day any soldier performs any duty there - they are in clear violation of command? Seriously? How does a country operate like this?

Not exactly. The order concerns shutting down the prison on the base within one year, not the base as a whole. More importantly, it is contingent on the law and appropriations (i.e. money) to have any teeth. Within months, that part of the order effectively became impossible to fulfill.

I've never been in the military but if someone gives you an order, even if it's "impossible", you are still in violation?

I mean how is anyone still at their post if the COMMANDER IN CHIEF tells you not to be there in a year (three years ago).

It's a flagrant violation of command.

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#289

Post by sequoia »

Somehow it strikes me as odd that the executive can go around starting wars, one of the most costly (blood & gold) behaviors a gov't can engage in, and one that explicitly requires the approval of congress, without congressional approval, but when it comes to closing a torture dungeon it's 'well gee whiz I'd love to but mean old congress won't let me. Sorry- my hands are tied!'

horseshit. There's more than one way to skin a cat and with the unchecked might of the US military (which is basically what the executive commands these days with our spineless-vis-a-vis-war congress), I do not believe the president couldn't figure out a way to dissolve Gitmo if he wanted to. He doesn't want to, this torture happens because Obama wants it to happen.

EDIT: I'm probably wrong here in my first paragraph ^

Re: Gitmo Is Killing Me

#290

Post by utunga »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #17

Gitmo was the first thing that clued me that I had made a mistake voting for Obama's promises (not that McCain would have ever gotten it instead!). It was such a complete reversal that I immediately knew his promises were completely worthless. I appreciate that there may be anger outs people in Gitmo, but they have every right to a trial I have. The double standard of what human rights mean if you are a US citizen an…

This is not a situation where we should be outraged at a president breaking his promise (yawn), but a case of an executive order not being carried out.

We should not gloss over the fact that Obama's 'promise' (or rather, executive order) to close Gitmo came after the election. One of his very first acts as president in fact. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/20/obamas-first...

The question we must ask is why did it not close? And, if Obama can't close this abomination, then who can?

Post reply on HN