Afghanistan Taliban leader was at Gitmo

Sounds like this one was released by bush's gang. < :-)

Sounds like this one was released by bush's gang.

Yup. According to the article, he was released in December 2007.

Im all for closing Guantanamo but I dont see why this should imply I want terrorists on the loose. Just try the prisoners and if found guilty lock them up in any high security prison you want.

The officials, who spoke anonymously because they are not authorized to release the information" so why are they releasing the info?

We need to be careful, this could be another way for the current admin to shore up more fear... I don't put it past anyone.

paolo27th: Just try the prisoners

That's the complicated part....

paolo27th said:

Im all for closing Guantanamo but I dont see why this should imply I want terrorists on the loose

It's called a "red herring" Paolo. The real issue is closing Gitmo not a mistake Bush's administration made with a prisoner. Whether a prisoner is improperly released or not could happen in a new place or an existing place of detention.

AP reported:

Although the militant detainees who have resurfaced were released under the Bush administration, the revelation underscores the Obama administration’s dilemma in moving to close the detention camp at Guantanamo and figuring out what to do with the nearly 250 prisoners who remain there.

Logic might dictate that an alternative conclusion is reached. It could just as easily be concluded that Gitmo is an inefficient detainee center and a new operation at a new location should be sought.

I am in agreement that the solution is to try these individuals. It may turn out that a special court is needed when extremely secret information would be revealed as a result of such a trial but I think we could have a determination made as to which type of proceeding is needed for every individual. I have yet to hear any liberals claim that all the prisoners should be released. If any conservative can name any, please feel free to do so. I think every one deserves a trial even if it is preliminary tribunal to determine if the individual should be held until the end of a conflict. You could have a special classification of a defense lawyer who needs to pass a security clearance. The detainee may not be entitled to hear certain classified information for fear that he forwards it to others who could possible be released or any other individual for that matter. But his attorney should be privy to such information. I had a security clearance and I knew of countless others who also held one. I am quite sure we could put in place a process where rigorous actions qualify only attorneys that are not a threat to out national security. I don't think there was anything that special about the people I knew in the military with Top Secret clearances; I knew many of them to be ordinary individuals. I worked in an office at Base Operations so I knew many such individuals.

Everyone deserves a trial, hearing or some kind of proceeding before being detained for a long period of time. Those who say these scum deserve no such right do not have a clue as to whether one of them may be perfectly innocent. I did see early on a 14 year old boy who had been detained there (on television). All he kept saying after being released was that someday he wanted to come to America and live the dream. He was an innocent kid and I dare anyone to say there are not other examples of someone with absolutely no guilt at all. It happens all the time in the American judicial system. What is there to prevent it from happening in the chaotic environment that existed in Afghanistan where many of these individuals and others now released came from. It was a more chaotic timeframe also. I believe we are probably better with our intelligence in that region now that we have been established for some time now.

I hope the fundies don't have the technology to remove the GPS grafted into their skin, something I'm sure the captors must have thought of doing....