First detainee arrives in U.S.
Ahmed Ghailani, a Guantanamo Bay detainee facing charges for his alleged involvement in two U.S. Embassy bombings a decade ago, arrived in New York June 9 to stand trial. Ghailani, who pled not guilty to the charges, is the first Gitmo detainee to be tried on American soil in a civilian court system.
Congressional Republicans have repeatedly contended that transferring terrorist suspects to U.S. soil will threaten public safety. The Guantanamo issue has seemed one of the few issues falling the Republicans’ way, as polls suggest that most Americans want to keep the Cuba-based prison operating.
But if Ghailani can be handled without serious incident in New York and elsewhere, the GOP argument may lose steam and Congress may rethink its refusal to fund the closing of Guantanamo. The move also could bolster Obama’s efforts to persuade other nations to accept some detainees from the prison.
Previously, four other individuals were sentenced to life in prison for their roles in the bombings.




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top14 Comments to “First detainee arrives in U.S.”
If we put folks on trial for what are essentially acts of warfare against us, does this mean the Serbians could one day put American veterans on trial for what we did to Serbia under Bill Clinton?
Report comment to moderator
Once again this is pure politics. Prosecute one guy who is almost certain to be convicted in a civil court and this clears the way for the remaining detainees to come to the US, get book deals and go on Oprah.
Already a terrorist who was released (in France I think) said that he was tortured more under Obama than Bush. It is false of course, but these lies will now be broadcast around the world as part of the media circus we are about to see.
Report comment to moderator
Xion, you mean the terrorist not only blow up buildings and kill innocents but they LIE to make their captors look bad?
Well now, I am shocked. Shocked shocked I say!!
Report comment to moderator
Didn’t the Senate say (quite overwhelmingly vote-tally-wise) not to spend money to do this?
Report comment to moderator
Not in my backyard.
Yours is OK, though.
Report comment to moderator
What is so mystical and powerful about these men that to even have them IN PRISON on American soil endangers you and me?
Report comment to moderator
Frank: I rarely agree with you, but I have been asking myself that question for a long time. This is purely symbolic politcal argument.
Report comment to moderator
Wait a minute – his four cohorts were tried, convicted, and sentenced through our judicial system. So what’s the problem with this guy undergoing the same procedure?
Report comment to moderator
Why should a foreigner be held responsible for following our laws in a foreign country?
International law might be a better fit for these people. they, for the most part, do not fit under the Geneva Conventions, they weren’t fighting for signatories to the treaty. They weren’t wearing uniforms.
Most likely the closest to how to treat them is like pirates. Catch them in the act. Question them as you will. Execute them, immediately.
Report comment to moderator
Re: #9
As Bob Herbert pointed out on the Rachel Maddow Show last night, America was founded on a unique idea: the rule of law. It’s a principle that we have upheld, albeit imperfectly from time to time. Never-the-less it is one of the things that has been a beacon around the world and made America such a great nation all these years.
If we give that up in the face of terrorism, have the terrorists not won?
I say we keep a stiff upper lip and remain resolute to uphold the rule of law.
Report comment to moderator
“Never-the-less it is one of the things that has been a beacon around the world and made America such a great nation all these years.”
Wow did a liberal actually just call America a “great nation”…
You feeling okay Anlir?
Report comment to moderator
#10 Anlir
“I say we keep a stiff upper lip and remain resolute to uphold the rule of law.”
I am suggesting that we do follow the law. Not imposing our law on someone from a different country in a different country.
How does international law treat these people? That is what I am suggesting should be done. Foreign people in foreign lands should not be held to US laws. Nor should they be afforded the protections of our laws. They didn’t do their dirt in the US.
Report comment to moderator
It’s great to be a great nation. However, to talk the talk it helps to walk the walk. Which is hard.
Report comment to moderator
Refreshing comment, Anlir.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!