EU To Lift Sanctions Against Cuba

[Peter Parka]

Again--you aren't understanding what's happening. You are under the mistaken belief that GB prisoners can be held indefinitely with no hearing or charges and that simply is not true. Until you actually understand that point, there's no reason to debate it--you are laboring under a factual lack of foundation.

Wrong, prisoners have been held indefinately there without charge, that is a fact, you are trying to deny facts which holds no water at all.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

I see a draw in the making.

 

[Peter Parka]

Well, your understanding of "poltiical prisoners" is different than mine. Under your reasoning, if I murder a local politician because I differ in political belief, and I am then imprisoned for the crime, I am "political prisoner." That's not a correct definition. A "poltical prisoner" is held for committing the crime of having a political viewpoint that differs from those in power and unaccompanied by any illegal act (such as murder, or property damage or some other unlawful act which is unlawful regardless of the reasons). In some cases, political prisoners are held for long periods for minor infractions--such as organizing an opposition rally or disseminating materials in opposition to the government. I am not aware of ANY prisoners held in the US or the UK for the latter.

So I take it the British government was incorrect in finally giving them political prisoner status? Maggie Thatcher tried to bury her head in the sand and deny it like you and it made things 10 times worse.

 

[Peter Parka]

Prove it--provide me an example of a prisoner held a GB that has never been before any tribunal and charged or released for the failure of the same.

Did you even read the BBC article I cited for you? I read yours.

I did in the links I gave you in this thread. Maybe you should actually read it and stop living in denial.

 

[Peter Parka]

I did read it and it doesn't say what you claim it does.

Ok, seeing you obviously have trouble with your reading skills, I've quote one of the specific bit in there which back up what I'm saying.

Yet these 50 to 70 prisoners could not be charged either, he said. This is presumably because there is not enough or no evidence against them.
The prospect for these prisoners therefore is indefinite detention, which raises its own legal and moral problems.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

BTW--prisoners here are also held for some period of time both without being charged and after charges, without trial. Most major criminal trials don't occur until many months after arrest and confinement and sometimes years.

Same here. And then after, most times too the lawyers for the accused will drag things out with numerous appeals and whatnot stretching verdicts or whatever to point infinitum to frustrate the system.

 

[Minor Axis]

I'm far more of an expert on US law than you are, but that doesn't seem to stop you from making baseless claims for which you have no support. You'd be wise to actually read my last post and understand it to get the "perpective" you think is so important (apparently only important for other people to see your perspective).

The world according to Fox, excuse me I'll pass.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Where is "here" CB?

Here is Trinidad where I live.

 

[Minor Axis]

Same here. And then after, most times too the lawyers for the accused will drag things out with numerous appeals and whatnot stretching verdicts or whatever to point infinitum to frustrate the system.

Don't assume the legal wrangling has been going on in Gitmo, where you've got secret hearings without legal representation, for what ever the reason, the goal is to hold prisoners indefinitely because the system can't construct proper cases against most of them. There is no parallel at all with any civil court proceedings when it comes to the accused rights at least until last week.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Wait a minute!!!!!!!

So what's this with Fox? They are a reputable news company.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Fox Mulder is reputable!

That too.

 

[Minor Axis]

Take of the tin foil hat Minor--the goverment is not out to get you.

Actually I don't think they are. However you appear to be very submissive to authority. Nobody in the U.S. government would ever lie or misrepresent their position to you, especially when lead by the sterling examples of honesty and truth above all else, the Bush Administration.

You know it really is a total waist of time to try to argue most of these topics with you. I'm sure you feel the same way about me. Just be assured that when the black bag crew drags you off to a secret location, I'd be the one arguing for your civil rights, not against them.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Cold as ice.