|
leonine -> RE: Guantanamo rears its ugly head again. (4/30/2013 6:15:03 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
Perhaps I am misinformed but I understood the reason for the continuing existence of Gitmo is that there was nowhere to send those current inmates who have been judged innocent. It is well known that Saudi Arabia is not the world's most hospitable place for political dissidents.
If the UK Govt is willing to accept this person, and he is innocent, on what basis are the Americans insisting he be sent to Saudi? If he innocent of any crimes, how does it get to be their choice, rather than his?
Since the entire rationale of the place is that if Uncle Sam says you're guilty, you aren't even entitled to the rights the law gives to convicted murderers in prison, it seems redundant to argue legalisms. As in any other Gulag, the rules are what the man with the big stick says they are.
Once upon a time, in the days of the Soviet Union, a Russian prisoner of conscience went on hunger strike, and the state that the West considered the greatest tyranny gave in and released him. At the same time, prisoners in the UK were on hunger strike, and PM Thatcher stood "resolute" while they died. I don't give much for these people's chances.
|
|
|
|
