Taliban Coming to Hawaii?

[hikatz]

Just in case you missed the news release that the Uigher detainees were cleared of wrongdoing by the Bush administration last year!

The NY Times article covers it very well.[]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/world/...nted=print

hikatz

[mdd7000]

Isn't another part of the issue being that some of the evidence, if revealed, will then show the enemy how we obtained such evidence, meaning that secret methods and personnel would be exposed?

[loffelkopffl]

secret evidence? don't you mean torture?

if texas can accept bush, can't we accept the uighers?

[Wao nahele kane]

I didn't read the article so sorry if I missed something here obvious...
Why are they even thinking about releasing them anywhere within the U.S.?
Why not just send them back home?

E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.

[Rob Tucker]

Because the Chinese will likely treat them very harshly if returned.

I can't help but think Kelly Greenwell is a bit of a troll and loves to create a tempest once in awhile.

[mdd7000]

For those that have been following it, some of the most liberal countries in the world (including Germany, France, etc.) have already been refusing to take any of these people after they have been given the facts on them.

[Bullwinkle]

They were (are) refugees, leaving their own country in search of liberty, only to be caught up in the armed sweep of Iraq and labeled insurgents. After a couple of years in gitmo, the truth has surfaced and we the (US) is in a dilemma, send them back to home countries to face elimination or resettle them. I think the western Europeans will not accept them because they don’t have a dog in this fight. How about we send them to Texas?
I do think the councilman’s heart is in the right place, the execution however leaves something to be desired

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/07...index.html

Note how the ethnic Hans are still going after this tribe. I bet a liitle grass shack looks really good to the Uyghur refugees today.

[Rob Tucker]

The Big Island Chronicle expands on this topic...

http://www.bigislandchronicle.com/?p=6561#comments

[centipede]

I was watching Fox News (I'm kicking myself for not paying more attention to what was being said) when they reported on one of the prisoners of war that were released during the Bush administration. He was a Mullah, and was among about a dozen that the government had "lack of evidence" and felt they couldn't successfully prosecute, so due to "pressure" from people of the same cut as our illustrious Councilman, they were released and sent back to Afghanistan. That Mullah is now leading a major fighting force that is killing Americans. If anyone out there has additional information, it would be of benifit to all, regardless of which side of the issue you may be on.

There is talk of giving these "detainees" the same rights as Americans. How nuts is this? Like it or not, we are at WAR and these people are not "detainees", they are PRISONERS OF WAR and were captured in a WAR ZONE (I'm using this term in the broadest possible sense because the war is global).

Let's get real. These people were captured by combat troops, not cops who called in CSI teams to go over the evidence at the crime scene. How, in most cases, in an American court, can sufficient "evidence" be offered in order to convict people such as these when they would be defended by the likes of our illustrious Councilman? IMPOSSIBLE. Are a few of them truly innocent? Perhaps. But those are the breaks, and in WAR, as horrible as WAR is, innocent do suffer. The notion of letting 10 guilty go free in order to save one innocent does not apply to WAR, and most people do not want the possibility of WAR being deposited at our feet with people who are "no more than suspects".

[Kahunascott]

Unfortunately they are not prisoners of war. They don’t fight for a country and don’t wear uniforms.
I don’t believe that they should be given the same rights as American citizens they should be tried by a military court outside of the US of A, then shot.