20 responses

  1. Brian
    September 21, 2012

    Good timing in the wake of the Libyan Embassy attack orchestrated by a former GITMO detainee — killing four Americans. Good timing indeed.

  2. Brian
    September 21, 2012

    And "Transfer" is not the same as "release". If you want these 55 individuals walking around the United States you must be suicidial or have a death wish.

    • Zeke Johnson
      September 21, 2012

      Brian: there's only one way to determine who is guilty or not guilty of a crime: a fair trial. The government has determined these 55 should not be charged and fairly tried, so they should be released.

  3. Zeke Johnson
    September 21, 2012

    Brian: there's only one way to determine who is guilty or not guilty of a crime: a fair trial. The government has determined these 55 should not be charged and fairly tried, so they should be released.

  4. fart
    September 21, 2012

    Oh fair trial, shmair trial! They have ugly beards that small animals live in. They shouldn't be released until they dress more fashionably!B-)

    • S.R
      September 22, 2012

      From pictures we have seen of Jesus, he has a big beard init.not that I believe that's him though but I'm just saying…

      • fart
        September 22, 2012

        PETA believes no man should shave as it destroys habitat for small animals and insects. Jesus H. Christ belonged to PETA, Romans didn't like it so they got rid of ole JC.

    • Paul
      September 23, 2012

      Ugly beards? From what i can remember back in the days from shake spears, queen victoria times you will find every man with a beard. It was up until when the sodomites came about demanding their rights and stuff so they shaved their beards off to be different from men more to the feminine side. You seriously need to check your history before talking nonsense here.

      • fart
        September 24, 2012

        Are you a big time sodomite-er?

  5. Brian
    September 22, 2012

    Zeke – as always you are disengenous. Of course no one is guilty of a crime without first being convicted. That is not the issue or debate concerning the detention of unlawful enemy combatants.

    • Zeke Johnson
      September 22, 2012

      Brian: The US government defined the term "unlawful enemy combatant" to try to justify detaining people without charge or trial, and subjecting them to "enhanced interrogation techniques"–aka torture. All people have rights, a government's definition can't take that away. You'll appreciate that if you're ever detained.

      • fart
        September 22, 2012

        I've been detained…by my dentist keeping me waiting! I demand a trial!

      • Paul
        September 23, 2012

        Fart what is wrong with you? You need to grow up seriously and i think i just done a fart.

      • fart
        September 23, 2012

        I had a bad brain injury when I read too much of this crappy, boring blog! Don't worry, you won't have ole Fart to kick around much longer!

      • Brian
        September 22, 2012

        There is a difference between a convicted criminal and a detained enemy during armed conflict. You can pretend otherwise all you want and argue until the end of time.

    • fart
      September 25, 2012

      I think Zeke is disingenuous.:-)

      • fart
        September 25, 2012

        No, jejeune!

      • fart
        September 25, 2012

        No, Zekie is naive, a veritable virgin, n'est-ce pas??

  6. hotbunshair.com
    December 20, 2012

    I had a thought that the prisoners in Guantanamo will have their justice after the Obama administration elected in the U.S. But there is no respect for their human rights from the government still exists.

  7. george
    April 29, 2014

    I think all of the prisoners at Guantanamo should get a fair trial and then be freed or moved to other prisons. Guantanamo must be shut down!

Back to top
mobile desktop