Is this seriously worth it? Guantanmo inmate never charged with a crime, dies after 11 years in US custody

[Hovik]

Not splitting hairs, Hovik. Pointing out an unproven statement that should have had no place in your OP.

No, you're splitting hairs because you have a need to be contrary. We have no reason to assume he was involved in terrorist activities, and all evidence points to the contrary. How is it an unsafe assumption to presume his innocence?

I'm not about to get into a pissing match with you over this. The point stands regardless of my wording.

[Reforged]

Did you even look at his injuries or his condition?

Are we discussing the same article? The article linked in the OP has two photos, neither of which would enable me to evaluate his injuries or his condition? What are you looking at?

A video of an interview carried out with him among other things. Check the link. It should be on the page if you scroll down, the window is quite small and easily missed.

[Tino]

Are we discussing the same article? The article linked in the OP has two photos, neither of which would enable me to evaluate his injuries or his condition? What are you looking at?

A video of an interview carried out with him among other things. Check the link. It should be on the page if you scroll down, the window is quite small and easily missed.

The video is about a Canadian named Omar. The OP subject is a Yemeni named Adnan.

[Waratah]

Is prolonged imprisonment without due process or conviction torture?

This is a general question.

To be specific, the deceased was provided a pillow on humanitarian grounds given that he had epilepsy. That was the extant of his treatment.

Which somewhat raises the specter of denial of reasonable medical treatment as well, which is considered neglect and possibly torture.

It is psychological torture. Imagine being proven right about your story in a court after so many years. The relieve you would have felt, only for that to be ripped away with no where to go.

[Reforged]

A video of an interview carried out with him among other things. Check the link. It should be on the page if you scroll down, the window is quite small and easily missed.

The video is about a Canadian named Omar. The OP subject is a Yemeni named Adnan.

Ah, you're right. Not even sure why they put that in the article.

Anyway, point still stands. According to Omar he was tortured both physically and psychologically and his injuries are consistent with this claim. Thats during a short period of time.
Try and fathom what they do to people who are subject to their hospitality for longer periods of time.

Also the point still stands that Yemeni was held for eleven years without ever being charged for a crime. He did not kill himself for fun and all who have stayed at the bay have made claims to having been tortured and physically abused just like he made. Some with substantial evidence to back it up.
Evidence would suggest he was pushed to it.

This cannot be ignored.
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info...ed.1001027

You cannot defend the bay without defending this treatment they administer to seemingly all prisoners regardless of guilt or innocence with the hopes of extracting confessions regardless of their truth value.

[Tino]

Anyway, point still stands. According to Omar he was tortured both physically and psychologically and his injuries are consistent with this claim. Thats during a short period of time.
Try and fathom what they do to people who are subject to their hospitality for longer periods of time.

Also the point still stands that Yemeni was held for eleven years without ever being charged for a crime. He did not kill himself for fun and all who have stayed at the bay have made claims to having been tortured and physically abused just like he made some with substantial evidence to back it up.
Evidence would suggest he was pushed to it.

This cannot be ignored.

So now we have an article that Aljazeera disclaims and a video of unknown origins about a different prisoner, and based on those sources I'm supposed to believe that for 11 years the US tortured a man they knew to be an innocent know-nothing with no ties to Al Qeda or terror, in hopes that he would disclose intelligence information he was known not to have? Sorry, I just don't buy it. It is much more plausible that the article author simply has an axe to grind with the US, and that the Yemeni man had some involvement with Al Qeda, was picked up and imprisoned as a prisoner of war, and was caught in a situation where the US refused to return him to Yemen and no other country would take him.

[Reforged]

Anyway, point still stands. According to Omar he was tortured both physically and psychologically and his injuries are consistent with this claim. Thats during a short period of time.
Try and fathom what they do to people who are subject to their hospitality for longer periods of time.

Also the point still stands that Yemeni was held for eleven years without ever being charged for a crime. He did not kill himself for fun and all who have stayed at the bay have made claims to having been tortured and physically abused just like he made some with substantial evidence to back it up.
Evidence would suggest he was pushed to it.

This cannot be ignored.

So now we have an article that Aljazeera disclaims and a video of unknown origins about a different prisoner, and based on those sources I'm supposed to believe that for 11 years the US tortured a man they knew to be an innocent know-nothing with no ties to Al Qeda or terror, in hopes that he would disclose intelligence information he was known not to have? Sorry, I just don't buy it. It is much more plausible that the article author simply has an axe to grind with the US, and that the Yemeni man had some involvement with Al Qeda, was picked up and imprisoned as a prisoner of war, and was caught in a situation where the US refused to return him to Yemen and no other country would take him.

You obviously started typing your reply before I altered my response. Theres a link attached, read it.
If you don't think that in combination with the video evidence of how they attempt to extract false confessions while ignoring obvious abuse of a Canadian citizen, the suspicious circumstances surrounding the suicide, the signs evident in almost all prisoners of severe physical abuse, the detaining without evidence, charge or trial and how desperately they try to stop anyone inspecting their prisoners or witnessing anything from inside the place then I'm really not sure what to say to you.
In a state where water-boarding is referred to as a "advanced interrogation technique" and therefore fair game I really have no idea how you can be so shocked by this.

[Creed of Heresy]

and died never having committed terrorism.

Making absolutely no statement on him being held or the veracity of his detainment, I have to mention one thing. You cannot say with any certainty that the above statement is true. I completely understand being upset about him being charged, but assuming that he never committed an act of terrorism when all you know about his life was that he was imprisoned without charges is a fucking stretch. He could be as innocent as a baby, but you're definitely making a claim without evidence. No charge =/= to innocent.

As I last recall, the justice system in this country was founded on the basis that people are "innocent, until proven guilty," and he wasn't even charged, much less proven guilty, so by law, yes, he was innocent.

I keep thinking of one of my most favorite quotes by one of our founding fathers, the crazy kite-in-the-storm man himself...

"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither."

Freedom of due process. We're giving it up for the idea of safety. Don't we have, like...the most over-inflated military budgets in the entire world, so big it is that the second largest nation, China, only spends...what was it, a TENTH of what we spend yearly, to the tune of a paycheck filled out to the Department of Defense for the estimated total of $553 billion as of 2012's fiscal year?? Pretty sure with a budget like that we sure as fuck don't need to trade our god-damn liberties and ideals in the name of security, cuz we already bought the fucking security with cash! AND A LOT OF IT, I might add.

So, also, to answer Hovik's OP...no. No it isn't. It never has been worth it, and it never will be worth it. Liberty is priceless, amigos.

[Shell B]

No, you're splitting hairs because you have a need to be contrary. We have no reason to assume he was involved in terrorist activities, and all evidence points to the contrary. How is it an unsafe assumption to presume his innocence?

I'm not about to get into a pissing match with you over this. The point stands regardless of my wording.

And, here we go again. I point out you overblew your argument and you assume it must be because I'm a big, fat meany head. Well, I tried. It is not unsafe to presume he is innocent. It is unsafe to rage off willy nilly saying that the man "has never committed an act of terrorism." That's like me saying, "Hovik has never wiped his ass because no one has ever proven it." That you fail to see this baffles me.

It's not a pissing match. Well, I'm not in a pissing match with you. That you can't keep your emotions where they belong is no problem of mine. I will relieve my bladder without measurement, thank you very much.

I do agree with most of the sentiment in this thread. It is the histrionic bullshit artistry that the argument does not even need that I object to. It's simple. Don't make shit up, and you won't feel the need to piss against me.

[Hovik]

No, you're splitting hairs because you have a need to be contrary. We have no reason to assume he was involved in terrorist activities, and all evidence points to the contrary. How is it an unsafe assumption to presume his innocence?

I'm not about to get into a pissing match with you over this. The point stands regardless of my wording.

And, here we go again. I point out you overblew your argument and you assume it must be because I'm a big, fat meany head. Well, I tried. It is not unsafe to presume he is innocent. It is unsafe to rage off willy nilly saying that the man "has never committed an act of terrorism." That's like me saying, "Hovik has never wiped his ass because no one has ever proven it." That you fail to see this baffles me.

It's not a pissing match. Well, I'm not in a pissing match with you. That you can't keep your emotions where they belong is no problem of mine. I will relieve my bladder without measurement, thank you very much.

I do agree with most of the sentiment in this thread. It is the histrionic bullshit artistry that the argument does not even need that I object to. It's simple. Don't make shit up, and you won't feel the need to piss against me.

That's certainly not an apt comparison. It's reasonable to assume that I've wiped my ass before. Is it reasonable to assume the man has never committed an act of terrorism? This seems to be the point at which we differ. Lacking any evidence that he's done so and apparently plenty of evidence that he hasn't, I'd say it's a pretty sure bet he's never been implicated in terrorism. The reality of the matter might be very different, but I'm going with the assumption of his innocence, as any rational individual should.

You're literally nit-picking my wording. Had I written "and died presumably never having committed terrorism," we wouldn't even be having this ridiculous discussion.