Many people have been taken off planes, etc. and sent to other countries for intense interrogation (rendition). This intense interrogation includes torture.
After a period of time, they are let go. No charges were laid.
We have the same thing in Gitmo where people have been incarcerated for a period of time without charges and eventually released.
If these incarcarated people are innocent , should they have the right to sue the US government?
2007-01-27 05:32:32 · 15 answers · asked by Dave 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
There is a Canadian/Syrian that was onroute back to Canada and in N.Y., he was detained and sent to Syria for questioning. Apparently, the Canadian government sent incorrect information to the USA government and there in a Syrian cell this man was held and tortured.
He was released after 11 months in captivity.
It did turn out that he had absolutely nothing to do with terrorism has received an appology and some $$ from the Canadian government.
2007-01-27 07:28:34 · update #1
It never fails to amaze me how totally uninformed people are, but looking at the answers here, it's obvious people have no idea what's going on.
It's been proven that almost all of the illegal prisoners held in Gitmo are innocent. That's why none of them get a fair trial and why the few that are released are quietly let go without any media statements.
Most of the people in Gitmo are there because the US offered 10,000 dollar bounties.
Sadly, innocent goat herders and such were sold to America.
That's why America uses torture. Because it's the only way to force an innocent man to confess.
I suggest the American's that have answered 'no' to your question do some research.
I'm afraid America has a reputation no better than communist China or Stalin's Russia. It's very sad that such a great country can have no regard for human life.
It's even sadder that the American people can comment in such inhumane and Godless terms and suggest that innocent people deserve Gitmo. I hope it's just ignorance and not a reflection of hate.
2007-01-27 07:35:30 · answer #1 · answered by Cracker 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
if they are innocent they should sue the a55 of anyone responcible ,or alternatively it could go another way , personally if i were kidnapped and tortured for years fo no apparent reason id be looking to get even and i would .
so how keeping people this way without trial helps to stop terrorism is something of a mystery .
what used to make us different and better than barbaric countries was the fact we didnt do these things to people ,they had a fare trial and if found guilty ,sentenced .
thats what used to make us better than them ,now we have sunk to a new low by kidnapping drugging and torturing people and keeping them in cages for years .
we(uk+usa) are now no different from any rogue nation so the fight will escalate
2007-01-27 05:52:35 · answer #2 · answered by . 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Ive answered this question so many times already its rediculous.. i was hoping there was some other intelligent person out there who already answered this.. but as i started scrolling down the answers... nope.. not even 1...
so ill give you the factual answer. copy+pasted from a past answer i wrote here -
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Arj.jIjzN5ycLCVXQZjU6Crsy6IX?qid=20070127092923AAGbWvp&show=7#profile-info-b3f21c2b984ae4c9341328074dd78e09aa
'
Lets see. Gitmo is not in America, so it doesnt hafta obide by American Laws. Ok, so blame the republicans, its not even in America, blame them anyways... blame Republicans for Hitler too. I heard that the Republicans told Hitler how to build concentration camps, yep. uhuh. My name is Asker and im a wee-tard.
Every1 who is captured and sent to Gitmo are people who are captured during battles. Therefore they are enemies of the US. Regardless of if they knew where Osama is, they were defending a terrorist organization, and trying to kill American Soldiers. No one there is innocent, you cant be innocent if you holding a gun, shooting at americans, and yelling 'PRAISE ALLAH.'? Thats called being caught red handed to most. Apparently, not the Democrats. The Democrats want them freed. Theres no reason for trials. Before the current administration, there were NO laws in Gitmo. Only global laws. Bush's administration has helped clean up Gitmo over the past few years. Now there are restrictions on the torture methods investigators can use. You can thank Bush for those.
Who found these camps in Gitmo? Before Bush, no other president was told about these camps. No one knew about them. I believe only the CIA knew about them. Bush found them. And he did the best he could to make them more humane.
Still, the democrats take credit for finding them. And people believe them.
How many times are the American people going to stab Bush in the back? I feel sorry for him...
'
also..
the only people captured and sent to Gitmo are people who are captured on the battle field. Therefore, they ARE in-fact.. terrorists. Therefore, the Geneva Conventions don't lawfully apply to them.
2007-01-27 05:53:22 · answer #3 · answered by Corey 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
No. They were suspected terrorists. And rightly so. Most of them were captured during the downfall of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Besides, much of what you state is nothing but pure conjecture and has not been substantiated. You might want to layoff the Michael Moore movies a bit.
2007-01-27 05:37:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Not only that, but the law should be changed in light of the torture of individuals, and some elements in that area should be held accountable and summary to prosecution.
'Enemy combatants' or not, you can't simply just pick up people in the middle east, imprison them without trial and torture them because they are Arabs. That's not defending America at all, in fact it makes the US look interested in genocide and torture on innocents, and we all know what happened last time.
2007-01-27 05:40:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
We should have never put them in prison in the first place....we should have interogated them then quietly made them disappar from the face of the earth...... it's time the USA learned that good rarely trumps evil!
2007-01-27 05:51:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I believe they should have the right to sue if they are abused and the Geneva Conventions are not followed. We are insulting the brave veterans of WWII by ignoring the conventions and it is sad.
2007-01-27 05:36:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
No. The US government can not be sued by a foreign party. It says so in the constitution.
2007-01-27 05:39:51 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
No they were illegal combatants!
Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful. The spy who secretly and without uniform passes the military lines of a belligerent in time of war, seeking to gather military information and communicate it to the enemy, or an enemy combatant who without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property, are familiar examples of belligerents who are generally deemed not to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals.
2007-01-27 05:38:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Most definitely. Wouldnt you want the abibility to sue another government if you had been incarcerated?
2007-01-27 05:35:29 · answer #10 · answered by tchem75 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋