Posted on Jan 24, 2021
Obama wanted to close Gitmo. Will Biden be able to finally do it?
1.32K
7
5
2
2
0
MY COMMENT:
Poppycock. Nonsense. The 40 or so unlawful combatant Isamists left at the US military detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are lucky to be alive, let alone 10 of them enjoying virtually the SAME rights you or I would enjoy in a US federal court of law, which is absurd. According to the Geneva Conventions and Law of War, unlawful combatants are entitled to absolutely ZERO rights of any kind. The only reason they are still alive is due to the benevolence of the United States, who, in 2002, declared they would be "treated within the spirit of Geneva." Then the Military Commissions Acts of 2006 (under George W. Bush) and then 2009 (under Barack Hussein Obama) gave those accused of war crimes virtually the SAME rights US citizens enjoy in federal court. Unprecedented. And so is the time it has taken to prosecute them. 731 detainees have already been RELEASED, and NONE have been executed, beheaded, blown up, hacked to death, dragged naked and lifeless through the streets, drowned or burned alive. All things our enemies have done to US and/or our allies. There is no moral comparison between Gitmo and how our enemies treat their captives. 30 percent of those released have returned or are suspected of returning to the fight. Gitmo is a small piece to the big puzzle of how we WIN the Global War on Terror, which is ongoing. It must also remain open in case of any high value detainees in the future. It is the most secure detention facility in the world. Sincerely, MAJ (RET) Montgomery J. Granger, former ranking US Army Medical Department officer with the Joint Detainee Operations Group, Joint Task Force 160, GTMO. Author: Saving Grace at Guantanamo Bay: A Memoir of a Citizen Warrior. Narrator: Heroes of GITMO, by PolitiFlix on YouTube, short documentary film based on my book.
Poppycock. Nonsense. The 40 or so unlawful combatant Isamists left at the US military detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are lucky to be alive, let alone 10 of them enjoying virtually the SAME rights you or I would enjoy in a US federal court of law, which is absurd. According to the Geneva Conventions and Law of War, unlawful combatants are entitled to absolutely ZERO rights of any kind. The only reason they are still alive is due to the benevolence of the United States, who, in 2002, declared they would be "treated within the spirit of Geneva." Then the Military Commissions Acts of 2006 (under George W. Bush) and then 2009 (under Barack Hussein Obama) gave those accused of war crimes virtually the SAME rights US citizens enjoy in federal court. Unprecedented. And so is the time it has taken to prosecute them. 731 detainees have already been RELEASED, and NONE have been executed, beheaded, blown up, hacked to death, dragged naked and lifeless through the streets, drowned or burned alive. All things our enemies have done to US and/or our allies. There is no moral comparison between Gitmo and how our enemies treat their captives. 30 percent of those released have returned or are suspected of returning to the fight. Gitmo is a small piece to the big puzzle of how we WIN the Global War on Terror, which is ongoing. It must also remain open in case of any high value detainees in the future. It is the most secure detention facility in the world. Sincerely, MAJ (RET) Montgomery J. Granger, former ranking US Army Medical Department officer with the Joint Detainee Operations Group, Joint Task Force 160, GTMO. Author: Saving Grace at Guantanamo Bay: A Memoir of a Citizen Warrior. Narrator: Heroes of GITMO, by PolitiFlix on YouTube, short documentary film based on my book.
Obama wanted to close Gitmo. Will Biden be able to finally do it?
Posted from pbs.org
Guantanamo Bay
War on Terror
Barack Obama
George W. Bush
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
2
2
0
Either you kill them on the battlefield or try them in court. I don’t think that’s asking for too much. You can’t hold people in perpetuity. That’s just unAmerican and inhumane considering they’ve released inmates in the past that may have not been jihadists.
(2)
(0)
MAJ Montgomery Granger
During WWII the US held over 400,000 LAWFUL combatant mostly German POWs without charge or trial, IAW Geneva Conventions. No one claimed they were being mistreated. Geneva says they can be held (without charge or trial) "until the end of hostilities." 731 unlawful combatant Islamists who wanted to kill us have been RELEASED. Only 40 remain, and 10 of those face trial. The Law of War stipulates only UCMJ rights for accused war criminals, but Bush and Obama tweaked the law with their 2006 & 2009 MCAs, respectively. Now we are stuck with a quagmire of injustice.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Why would those people enjoying the same rights you or I enjoy in US federal court of law be absurd? If your rights extend from God, then do they not apply to everyone? If that is not the case, then are they actually "rights", or are they just benefits or privileges the US government extends US citizens?
(2)
(0)
MAJ Montgomery Granger
Rights cannot exist without RESPONSIBILITIES. God made that clear with Adan and Eve and He cursed mankind with CHOICE after the Garden of Eden incident. So, too the unlawful combatant Islamists who want to kill us CHOSE their path. God's Law is written, and so is man's law. They broke BOTH. They deserve absolutely NOTHING. However, as stated, the benevolence of the US granted them rights they did not earn. Now it is a quagmire, thanks to bungling Obama.
(0)
(0)
MSgt Steve Sweeney
MAJ Montgomery Granger - How do you know they are unlawful combatants or broke any laws unless you have an investigation into the charges and a trial where the charges can be presented and argued? Don't the people taking and holding the prisoners have responsibilities as well?
Let's extend your argument about responsibilities to the right to own a firearm. Could not the government dictate the responsibility to register a firearm along with mandatory training, licensing, and insurance as responsibilities required to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights?
It seems like you want to play the role of God and dictate who has rights and who does not. You do realize that when you said the pledge of allegiance, the "liberty and justice for all" applied to ALL people, not just those born within a border line marked on a map by men, right?
Let's extend your argument about responsibilities to the right to own a firearm. Could not the government dictate the responsibility to register a firearm along with mandatory training, licensing, and insurance as responsibilities required to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights?
It seems like you want to play the role of God and dictate who has rights and who does not. You do realize that when you said the pledge of allegiance, the "liberty and justice for all" applied to ALL people, not just those born within a border line marked on a map by men, right?
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google