BBC: Judge Orders Guantanamo Release (12 year old)..

Judge orders the release of a guy who was 12 years old when he was captured six an a half years ago. :doh:

12 year old is the "Worst of the Worst" held at Gitmo.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8176770.stm

Judge orders Guantanamo release

The judge had described the case against Mr Jawad as an "outrage"

A US judge has ordered the release of one of the youngest detainees at the US detention centre in Guantanamo Bay. US District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle said Mohammed Jawad would be released by late August. If so, he is expected to return home.

But government lawyers say they have not yet decided whether to pursue a criminal case against him.

Mr Jawad has been accused of injuring two US soldiers and their interpreter by throwing a grenade at their vehicle.

He was 12 when he was arrested in Afghanistan in 2002, his lawyer says, but 17 according to the Pentagon. He has been held at the camp for the past six-and-a-half years.

Earlier, Mr Jawad's lawyer, Jonathan Hafetz, told the BBC he was "cautiously optimistic" his client would be set free.

"They've not produced any evidence so far and enough is enough. It's time for Mr Jawad to go home," he said.

Enough has been imposed on this young man to date

Judge Ellen Huvelle

Deputy Assistant Attorney General Ian Gershengorn told the court the US was still deciding whether to pursue a criminal case against Mr Jawad.

That would mean he could still be returned to the US, or have his repatriation delayed, to stand trial in a criminal court.

Should have just shot him, instead of arrest him. Then there wouldn't be a problem.

IF he is released, and IF he kills somebody, I hope it would be someone who advocated his release.

IF he was innocent, then he can always be thankful that they DIDN'T just shoot him.

Deputy Assistant Attorney General Ian Gershengorn told the court the US was still deciding whether to pursue a criminal case against Mr Jawad.

To which, I think the Judge's response is "Habaes Corpus has been issued. You have 24 hours to release him or produce an indictment."

But that's just me.

(Although I also recall discussing this case, before. IMO, the government has an excellent case that he's an enemy combatant, and as such, can be held (in conditions which comply with Geneva) "for the duration", no criminal charges necessary.)

Should have just shot him, instead of arrest him. Then there wouldn't be a problem.

IF he is released, and IF he kills somebody, I hope it would be someone who advocated his release.

IF he was innocent, then he can always be thankful that they DIDN'T just shoot him.

Should have just shot him, instead of arrest him. Then there wouldn't be a problem.

IF he is released, and IF he kills somebody, I hope it would be someone who advocated his release.

IF he was innocent, then he can always be thankful that they DIDN'T just shoot him.

If he kills somebody after he's released it will likely have more to do with how he's been treated and what he's learned over his last 6.5 years in a terrorist detention facility with no rights or priviledges and less to do with who he was when he was arrested at the age of 12....

Advocating the killing of 12 year olds. You sir are more of a problem than any 12 year old could be.

Can someone tell me which bleeding-heart liberal said this, of an enemy who's policy of murder and mutilation of American prisoners had been well-documented?

... Treat them with humanity, and Let them have no reason to Complain of our Copying the brutal example of [our enemy] in their Treatment of our unfortunate brethren ...

(Although I also recall discussing this case, before. IMO, the government has an excellent case that he's an enemy combatant, and as such, can be held (in conditions which comply with Geneva) "for the duration", no criminal charges necessary.)

Perhaps, but my problem with this is two fold.

(1) This 12 year old wasn't the youngest guy taken, he was one of the youngest. We already have examples of kids aged 11 who were captured and heald for years in Gitmo from the International Red Cross and Amnesty International.

(2) The American public was told Gitmo housed the worst of the worst. I submit a 12 year old could never be considered among that catagory. It calls into quesiton the entire motivation and purpose of the detension facility.

Was it as Cheney claimed a place for the worst of the worst, or was it as critics have claimed just a place to hold folks of varying levels of danger and guilt; just a dump for soles caught up in our nets. Which is certainly what history will consider it.

Can someone tell me which bleeding-heart liberal said this, of an enemy who's policy of murder and mutilation of American prisoners had been well-documented?

I'll say it again and I've said it before. The worst thing I've ever heard a government doing was North Korea, stealing children off the streets of Japan and holding them for years without any notification to their parrents, no documentation, nor rights, no independent review of the policies.

That's exactly what the United states has done in the name of the war on terror. It's horrific and it's as unAmerican as any policy which has ever been implemented in our nations history. As bad as the trail of tears.

It was George Washington after the Battle of Trenton. After the British and Hessian armies had smashed it's way through New York, down to New Jersey and was parked a few days march from Philadelphia. While our very existence was hanging by a thread.

Go figure.

Can someone tell me which bleeding-heart liberal said this, of an enemy who's policy of murder and mutilation of American prisoners had been well-documented?

Why, if I recall correctly that would be that noted pinko and terrorist sympathiser General George Washington.

edit - aw crud. beaten. Shouldn't have answered the phone when I was typing my response.

I believe you knew the answer.

I believe you knew the answer.

George Washington's treatment of prisoners and Tories is a special interest of mine. One of my ancestors was Sir Guy Carleton, the guy who took over command of the British Army right after the war and negotiated the movement of the remaining loyalists to Canada. Lots of letters went back and forth between those two.

George Washington truly was a great man. He was no genius, but he was an almost mythically honorable person and leader.

Unless I misread the article this kid threw a grenade at our soldiers injuring two. He should have never left the battle field, this shouldn't be an issue.

Unless I misread the article this kid threw a grenade at our soldiers injuring two. He should have never left the battle field, this shouldn't be an issue.

So we execute children on the battle field but we continue to take adults prisoners? Or are you for executing all prisoners on the battle field regardless of age?... Or haven't you thought that deeply on the subject?

you know in our legal system if this kid pulled out a machetti and chopped you into little pieces in front of a cop, he would have gotten out of jail with a clean record when he turned 18 or 21. Cause in many states in the county we don't measure childrens crimes with the same yardsticks as adults.

Maybe we should be putting kindengardeners who throw rocks in federal lock up for hate crimes and assult charges; and charging kids with libel for taunting one another too.

So we execute children on the battle field but we continue to take adults prisoners? Or are you for executing all prisoners on the battle field regardless of age?... Or haven't you thought that deeply on the subject?

Last time I checked, when the enemy is shooting at you, you shoot back.

America has been completely brain washed with this politically correct BS, and it's turned them into a bunch of pansies. This 12 year old "kid" has bigger balls than you.

So we execute children on the battle field but we continue to take adults prisoners? Or are you for executing all prisoners on the battle field regardless of age?... Or haven't you thought that deeply on the subject?

So we execute children on the battle field but we continue to take adults prisoners? Or are you for executing all prisoners on the battle field regardless of age?... Or haven't you thought that deeply on the subject?

you know in our legal system if this kid pulled out a machetti and chopped you into little pieces in front of a cop, he would have gotten out of jail with a clean record when he turned 18 or 21. Cause in many states in the county we don't measure childrens crimes with the same yardsticks as adults.

Maybe we should be putting kindengardeners who throw rocks in federal lock up for hate crimes and assult charges; and charging kids with libel for taunting one another too.

This kid did not commit a crime, he commited an act of War and if I were there and in a position I would have fired upon the kid as soon at it was obvious he decided to become a combatant against our military.

Umm, if they are firing at you, or lobbing grenades at you, you return fire. When you return fire, you shoot to kill. It can't matter if it is a 12 year old, a woman or a man. If it matters, your brothers in arms can die from your hesitation.

He doesn't seem to understand the difference between war and citizens commiting crime.

Umm, if they are firing at you, or lobbing grenades at you, you return fire. When you return fire, you shoot to kill. It can't matter if it is a 12 year old, a woman or a man. If it matters, your brothers in arms can die from your hesitation.

Granted. But the facts are that even following those rules of engagement; we still take prisoners. Helpless combatants still fall under our control. Have in every war we've ever fought.

Advocating for the killing of POW's frankly is contrary to United States Law, Tradition, and international agreements which we ourselves helped author. Advocating doing so to children is just not very bright, or thought out...

He doesn't seem to understand the difference between war and citizens committing crimes.

But they did capture him. So why are you talking about killing him?

Do we kill all prisoners of war? Or maybe you were making a different point?

You took my statement and morphed it into killing prisoners. Congratulations.

If he kills somebody after he's released it will likely have more to do with how he's been treated and what he's learned over his last 6.5 years in a terrorist detention facility with no rights or priviledges and less to do with who he was when he was arrested at the age of 12....

Advocating the killing of 12 year olds. You sir are more of a problem than any 12 year old could be.

Yeah because liberals know preteens don't have an evil bone in their body including the 9 year old who offed his dad with a gun who was living with a male companion instead of the boy's mom. He was just confused but an excellent shooter.

Or the 13 year old carjacker arrested a couple of weeks ago.

This kid did not commit a crime, he commited an act of War and if I were there and in a position I would have fired upon the kid as soon at it was obvious he decided to become a combatant against our military.

Oh now it's an act of war. I wasn't sure because the Bush administration argued for 7 years it wasn't an act of war. If it is indeed an act of war then it's a done deal. By international agreement 4th Geneva convention children under the age of 15 do recieve special rights as protected status, even when used as soldiers against a signatory force.

Thanks for clearing that up.

But they did capture him. So why are you talking about killing him?

Do we kill all prisoners of war? Or maybe you were making a different point?

My point was that best case this kid should have been killed in the act of attacking our soldiers. Unfortunately that didn't happen and now we are stuck in the position of holding him as a prisoner.

Oh now it's an act of war. I wasn't sure because the Bush administration argued for 7 years it wasn't an act of war. If it is indeed an act of war then it's a done deal. By international agreement 4th Geneva convention children under the age of 15 do recieve special rights as protected status, even when used as soldiers against a signatory force.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Bush was wrong IMO, on a great many things. And the kid doesn't receive special treatment DURING the act. Which is the ONLY time I've promoted killing him.