Is Guantanamo bay detention camp a violation of human rights?

Posted by: discomfiting

http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/usa-close-guant-namo-and-end-human-rights-hypocrisy-2014-01-22

  • It is violates human rights, the U.S constitution and the Geneva convention

  • It doesn't violate anything and entirely ethical

67% 10 votes
33% 5 votes
  • LeOver a decade later, more than 150 detainees remain at Guantánamo Bay. The majority are in indefinite detention without charge or trial. Those who have been charged face unfair trial by military commission and some can face the death penalty if convicted. The government claims that even those found not guilty can be returned to indefinite detention. There has been essentially no accountability or redress for the human rights violations to which they and other detainees have been subjected. Human rights concerns in Guantánamo Bay remain an unfinished story. How long before the US government closes the book on Guantánamo, ends the use of unlawful detention in other facilities, and meets its human rights obligations?

  • 1) Everyone that we jail should be tried in a court of law, by a jury of the American people. 2) The way in which prisoners are tortured is a clear violation of the constitution (cruel and unusual punishment) 3) The amount of secrecy surrounding it is quite disturbing considering the past two points. 4) Our current president, Obama, had promised to close it down for the aforementioned reasons, among others.

    Posted by: Seido
  • Holding prisoners at the Guantanamo Detention Center is a violation of human rights, particularly since most of these prisoners have not been charged with a crime. The U.S. does not have the right to hold prisoners of war for long indefinite periods of time without ever charging them with a crime. This is immoral and criminal. The U.S. must either charge these individual prisoners with specified crimes or it must let them free!

  • If we have been at "war", then they are POWs. The war in Iraq has ended & is winding-down in Afghanistan. So, it is time to free them. If they can be directly connected to an act of terrorism ... charge them & allow the justice system to work. To hold anyone indefinitely against their will ... without telling them why ... charging them, etc. ... is inhumane.

  • These people gave up any claim to " human rights" when they took up terrorism. They are scum, hardly deserving of the title human being, and no punishment is to "inhumane" for this lot.

  • Actually the people there have it good. The gitmo pic above isn't the current camp. That's camp x ray which was closed in 2003 when the current facilities opened. The current facilities resemble that of a modern day prison with three square meals a day.

  • While I am by no means a Neoconservative, I see the necessity for the camp.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
missrepresented says2014-06-01T14:42:32.8845595-05:00
Ararmer 1919 how comprehensive you opine with know knowledge to back your speculative nature.
missrepresented says2014-06-01T14:42:54.5193670-05:00
**without**
Juan_Pablo says2014-06-01T14:56:38.8609254-05:00
Holding prisoners at the Guantanamo Detention Center is a violation of human rights, particularly since most of these prisoners have not been charged with a crime. The U.S. does not have the right to hold prisoners of war for long indefinite periods of time without ever charging them with a crime. This is immoral and criminal. The U.S. must either charge these individual prisoners with specified crimes of war or it must let them free! If the U.S. fails to do this, it is violating the prisoners' right to due process both within this country and with respect to international norms.
ararmer1919 says2014-06-01T15:17:31.3865241-05:00
Terrorist are the acception. In "normal" warfare against a "normal" enemy you don't expect your POWs to turn around and bomb your arse the momment you free them. These men will in fact do just that. And the war being over in Iraq and winding down in Afghanistan will NOT end the bloodshed. As much as you guys don't want to admit the war does not end when we pull out of there. THEY will keep fighting and continue to fight and no amount of peace offerings or diplomacy or talk will change that. They will fight until we either kill them all or they kill us. Letting these prisoners go is basically like saying "bye now, we will see you when you bomb us next :)"
Juan_Pablo says2014-06-01T15:34:10.1504604-05:00
No, aramer, most of those staying at Guantanamo Detention Center have no history of being "terrorists". Instead they were detained on hearsay and for fighting in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere against U.S. forces. Virtually all of them ARE NOT terrorists (they did not inflict harm against civilian populations). The U.S. government has a responsibility to either charge these individuals with specified war crimes or let them go free. The UN has announced for several years now that the U.S. is in violation of International laws with respect to detainees at Guantanamo. Many have been held at the detention facility without ever being charged of a crime . . . And for goodness sakes, it's been a decade now since the Iraq War ended and major combat operations in Afghanistan have finished!
SweetTea says2014-06-01T15:37:15.1669358-05:00
Ararmer1919 ... If these individuals can be directly connected to acts of terrorism, then they should be prosecuted in the Justice System. There is a difference between "guilty" & "guilty by association". The SCOTUS, back in 2006, said they could not be tried by a War-Crimes Tribunal. So, that won't happen. My personal feeling is that Gitmo was set-up without much consideration for the legal system & the vast majority of these detainees are being held in limbo. I have no sympathy for terrorists, but when America begins to adopt terrorist actions we become hypocrites. America IS better than that!
Juan_Pablo says2014-06-01T15:52:35.6918660-05:00
Sweet Tea is correct. If the only reason the United States is detaining these individuals is because they're prisoners of war (POWs), the United States cannot hold them indefinitely AFTER the war has ended. Under the fourth Geneva Convention Every person in enemy hands must be either a prisoner of war or a civilian combatant. The Geneva Convention clearly states that there is no intermediate status where such a prison can be deprived of their humans rights and a right to a fair tribunal or court trial. The U.S. has to comply.
Juan_Pablo says2014-06-01T15:53:17.8588781-05:00
Prison = prisoner

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.