Hacker News Reader

Comment by tgv | Hacker News Reader

> Key figures in US military and US leadership need to be held accountable.

Isn't that a bit of a one-sided, vindictive point of view? I don't know who are still being detained in Guantánamo, but if there are terrorists among them, shouldn't these key figures then also be rewarded?

I don't have the answer neither, but IMO the way the responsible people should be treated depends on their intentions, willingness to accept suffering of innocents, external limitations on their powers, and the net effect of their actions, not only on a seemingly simple case of wrongdoing.

View on HN

No. That's what due process is for. If you can't reasonably prove someone is a criminal, they don't belong in jail.

Compare: Throw the whole population of your country in prison. Clearly, you've also imprisoned every terrorist of your country. Should you be rewarded for that?

The Guantanamo situation is comparable: The US picked random people from the street based on gossip at best, or because they looked funny at a soldier at worst, and threw them in jail and tortured them. No process, no nothing. Nobody should be rewarded for that.

> Compare

High ranking officers (I am thinking of Sir David Omand) reported a switch in the past two decades in the practiced decision making parameters, which accept more false positives to avoid false negatives in alarms.

As if one calibrated a spam filter to discard messages from the Embassy and stationery supplier to be sure as little Viagra and inheriting princes come through. "More security, too bad for the few innocents."

> Compare: Throw the whole population of your country in prison.

That's not a comparison to the situation in Guantanamo. 780 people were detained there, out of a potential 400 million (depending on where you draw the borders).

> Nobody should be rewarded for that.

One strike, you're out? Is that the rule you judge by?

Are 780 people, of which only 8% were actually "bad", "one strike"? Not to mention even most of the "bad" ones were not tried or given a due process, and most were tortured.

>> Nobody should be rewarded for that.

> One strike, you're out? Is that the rule you judge by?

That's how law works isn't it? Just because you've done a lot of good things doesn't mean that you shouldn't be tried for stabbing a person.

It’s worse than that. The US offered cash equivalent to several years wages for turning in suspected terrorists. People immediately started reporting any tribal or personal enemy to collect a check and rid themselves of a rival.

The first suspect who died in custody was a cab driver named Dilawar. He died in handcuffs that were attached to a chain link cage. One of his interrogators said he knew the guy was innocent —- he had some experience interrogating terrorists —- but his superiors wouldn’t listen and he continued the torture.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com