Danatra Taylor
Did this soldier receive just reward for his crime, or did he deserve more. I believe rape, especially of a 14 year old is a heinous crime, premeditated murder is equally wrong. The average verdict of the premeditated murder (first degree murder) is 25 to life. Should he have received a heavier sentence? I believe so. I am not saying that anybody the kills another person deserves the death penalty, but this crime is among those that do. This crime included hatred/discrimination for and against a certain people because of the situation he was placed in. Many including myself, believe this crime was deserving of the death penalty, however many can also argue that the sentence he received was just. There are many elements to cover. Like the psychological strains of the war, the mental stability of the soldier at the time of the crime. What frame of mind was he in, can he claim temporary insanity. Can an ‘I was drunk’ excuse certify that the crime as a spur of the moment type or did his inebriety heighten his quest. Then there were many warning signs detected and overlooked by the army.
According to the army stress counselor, Private Green wanted to take revenge on Iraqis including civilians. The counselor labeled Green’s unit ‘mission incapable’ because of poor morale, high combat stress and anger over the deaths of their fellow soldiers. The counselor said that it needed stronger supervision and rest. It received neither, testimony revealed. The counselor told the Kentucky jury that most of the soldiers have thoughts like this and dismissed it thinking that Private Green knew that the killing of innocent civilians was wrong. Obviously the neglect and overlooking of the army resulted in those innocent deaths in part. Looking back however showed that Green was considered very impulsive. He only got into the army on a so-called moral waiver because he had had problems with drugs and alcohol.
Could these murders have been prevented by denying his entry into the army way back when? The army recruited a highly volatile person. Impulsive people do not think about their actions before the do them nor do the show much remorse for doing so; instead they try to justify it. However I do not believe that the tragedy that occurred would have been prevented just by the denial of entry of one soldier. Any of the soldiers that claimed to want to harm civilians could have done it. The army having had privy to feelings such as those of the Ex soldier, should have made some attempt immediately, at extensive therapy for him, and others like him. In my opinion there were enough warnings to suggest that Private Green was a volatile soldier. Private Green had left after being given an honorary discharge on a diagnosis for a personality disorder just weeks before his arrest. The mere fact that he received the honorary discharge showed that they knew this all along. He should have been evaluated and diagnosed after the visit with the counselor. I know of therapy treatment for soldiers when the return home, however there should also be effective modes of therapy for soldiers still abroad.
Although I do think the Army could have prevented this tragedy, most the blame must of course goes to the perpetrator. This crime however many people contributed was solely the result of an impulsive angry man. The punishment for his crime was indeed lighter than he deserved. He raped a child, killed another child and both their parents, regardless of their nationality. The Iraqi authorities were outraged and felt if he had been tried in Iraq he would have gotten a heavier sentence. I have not doubts about that and I do believe that is why it was not. This crime is the first since 2000 that has been tried in America that was done overseas. I do not know if premeditation has levels but the way this crime was done clearly showed that the ex soldier was very much aware of what he was doing, not mentally challenged.
According to the New York Times (pub may 21 2009) on the night of May 11th 2006, after drinking Iraqi whiskey, Mr. Green, along with other soldiers, wearing civilian clothing, broke into the home of the Iraqi girl who lived nearby. The soldiers that were with Private Green, testified that the soldier killed the girl’s parents and younger sister, before raping her. Then the soldier shot the girl in the head with an AK-47 that was in the family’s possession. According to both Iraqi and American authorities, the murders/murder scene was so bloody that they thought it was done by insurgents. A fellow soldier acknowledged Private’s Green and the others as the criminals. This was malicious and heinous, he knew what he was doing and he wanted to do it. The crime was vengeful, and in my opinion showed more of his impulsive nature than.
The Kentucky jury after 12 hours of deliberation ended up being hung, which resulted in the lesser sentence. If not would he have gotten the death penalty? Whatever the case, it is what he really deserves? I do believe Private Green was given grace. I guess he should thank his lucky stars, because the Iraqi judges feel that death was the only retribution. Of course we can argue that the Iraqi government just wants the serve the death penalty because perpetrators are American. I am on the fence about that because it could be true, but a premeditated murder is wrong no matter who does it, or who the victim is. He raped a 14 year old and killed her whole family. I believe had he done this in America, the American public would feel the same as the Iraqis. This was a vengeful act yet it cannot be based on vengeance alone. This man, regardless of his trauma, was clearly racist and discriminating. They jury and Judge allowed a man to live and be eligible for parole after taking 4 innocent lives, purposefully and maliciously. Not punishment enough in my opinion. Why is his life being spared after he decisively and vengefully disregarded the lives of others? Fair is fair, yet as the saying goes, life is not fair.
Reference:
https://online.valenciacc.edu/webct/ Discussions, Current events: Ex Soldier receives capital punishment for killing Iraqi citizen http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/22/us/22soldier.html?_r=2&hpw
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
The Closing of Guantanamo bay Pros and cons.
Danatra Taylor
July 19, 2009
The Guantanamo Bay Detention camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba has been the subject of many news columns. (Such as CNN news articles to articles from the New York Times talking about the treatment of prisoners, to the recent talks of closing the Facility. Established in 1903, it is a detainment facility operated by the Joint task Force, Guantanamo of the United States Government. It houses prisoners found guilty of supporting and engaging in terrorism. The type of people detained have either been people suspected of having key roles in terrorism, moles, messengers or even chauffeurs, for instance, A man named Salm Hamdan had been imprisoned at GITMO for being a driver for Osama Bin Laden.(Adapted from Wikipedia.com article on Guantanamo bay Detention facility.)
There have been many allegations that suggested that the Guantanamo bay prison was very inhumane prison. There have been a number of complaints from the prisoners, citing torture, sexual degradation, forced drugging and religious persecution. There have also been a substantial amount of Suicides and Suicide attempts. In 2004 Three Muslims prisoners from Britain, commonly known as the Tipton three (because they hailed from Tipton England), were released without being charged. These three men complained of experiencing torture, sexual degradation, forced drugging and religious persecution, from the U.S. forces at Guantánamo Bay. According to Wikipedia’s article on the Guantanamo bay’s detention camp, former prisoners, upon their release have talked about their horrible situation there. Mehdi Ghezali whom was also freed without charge in 2004 claimed that he was the victim of repeated torture. Other former detainees Omar Deghayes, Juma Al Dossary and David Hicks have claimed to have suffered being blinded by pepper spray, being interrogated hundreds of times, beaten, tortured with broken glass, barbed wire, burning cigarettes, and being sexually assaulted.
According to CNN, during the first 100 days of his presidency, President Barak Obama proposed an order to close Guantanamo Bay prison. However his plan was beyond being set in stone. This proposal has induced strong opinions from people both for and against the closing of the prison facility. In a New York Times article, it was revealed that the proposal to close the Prison and relocate the detainees into the United States, provoked a bipartisan Congressional protest, And after Lawmakers expressed alarm, over the fact that detainees, considered not to be security threats, might be resettled in the United States, the House and Senate voted to bar the resettlement of the detainees in this country. However the Obama administration is obviously for the effort of closing the prison, but they are worried that with all the problems against them, they might not make the January 2010 deadline for closure. Senior officials believe that the treatment of detainees at The Guantanamo Prison symbolizes the excesses of the Bush administration’s counterterrorism policies.
I believe that before the prison is closed, some pros and cons should be written to determine whether it is a profitable proposal or an arduous situation. According to one of the officials close to the transition (one who was not authorized to speak of the proceedings), one of the reasons for closing military prison was that “the legal framework at GITMO has failed to successfully and swiftly prosecute terrorists”. Closing the prison will indeed place a strain on those who must decide the fate of the prisoners. President Obama has said that ‘although it is difficult, it is going to be done, but part of the challenge is that a number of persons have been detained at the prison facility in Cuba, many of whom have not been put on trial for their alleged crimes. I fail to see how the closing of the facility in Cuba will solve the problem of a speedy and fair trial for detainees who are enemies of these United States. In fact the United States of America is now faced with the problem of possibly housing significantly dangerous terrorist on her own soil, bringing the enemy within striking distance. If the problem is just that prisoners have not been granted a speedy trial, how is closing the whole facility going to guarantee justice for the detainees of Guantanamo Bay detention centre or peace and safety to the people of the United States of America?
The closing of the prison should be because of the torture and inhumane treatment. The fact the some of the prisoners are being detained without having had a proper trial is wrong, but no grounds for closing down the prison. We must ask how safe is it to close a facility that contains some of the world’s most dangerous and formidable criminals, terrorists. In CNN news article on His proposed closer of the Guantanamo prison, President Obama has also stated that he was trying to develop a process that, "doesn't result in releasing people who are intent on blowing us up.” How does closing the maximum security prison that detains such vile people fit into this process? Is it then safe to assume that these detainees will be in a prison while waiting and during their trial somewhere else? If so, it will obviously have to be a local American prison that pales in comparison, to the security of Guantanamo bay.
In my opinion, the president should instead implement ways and means by which the prisoners at Guantanamo prison are treated as humanly as possible, while keeping the fact that they are extremist killers in perspective. Although there should not be any rendering of evil for evil, it is quite ironic for these detainees to be complaining of the same injustices that they bestow upon their victims. In the interest of justice and democracy the voices of the detainees need to be heard and those who are guilty of inhumane acts against them be made to answer for such evil. However one must ask how many of Americas own dangerous criminals are released because of inhumane acts of prison officers? Could be very or few none. Consequently they should not have a right to be released just because of ill-treatment, its prison, they need to adapt, and as the old saying goes ‘if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.’
It is difficult for prison guards to realize that these are indeed people (people who view the average American as casualties to their just cause). Yet I don’t believe that there will be any less torture if they were in gismo or any federal prison. We must consider that the terrorist are not remiss in their effort to undermine the security of the United States. They do their homework well in studying and analyzing the security system of their target the fact that they are multifaceted, intelligent and educated makes them infiltrate society unnoticed. Subsequently the complaints of torture may be another ploy for early release. I believe that lower security prisons are inadequate hence dangerous for holding extremists and terrorist. Terrorist have a hatred for America and the absence of torture will not change their attitude. Guantanamo bay should stay open because, regardless of what goes on there, it is safer for the average American to facilitate these detainees at Guantanamo bay prison, but the torture should not be allowed.
Reference:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/us/politics/14gitmo.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp#Prisoner_complaints
http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/news/national/usstatesterritoriesandpossessions/guantanamobaynavalbasecuba/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/12/obama.gitmo/
July 19, 2009
The Guantanamo Bay Detention camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba has been the subject of many news columns. (Such as CNN news articles to articles from the New York Times talking about the treatment of prisoners, to the recent talks of closing the Facility. Established in 1903, it is a detainment facility operated by the Joint task Force, Guantanamo of the United States Government. It houses prisoners found guilty of supporting and engaging in terrorism. The type of people detained have either been people suspected of having key roles in terrorism, moles, messengers or even chauffeurs, for instance, A man named Salm Hamdan had been imprisoned at GITMO for being a driver for Osama Bin Laden.(Adapted from Wikipedia.com article on Guantanamo bay Detention facility.)
There have been many allegations that suggested that the Guantanamo bay prison was very inhumane prison. There have been a number of complaints from the prisoners, citing torture, sexual degradation, forced drugging and religious persecution. There have also been a substantial amount of Suicides and Suicide attempts. In 2004 Three Muslims prisoners from Britain, commonly known as the Tipton three (because they hailed from Tipton England), were released without being charged. These three men complained of experiencing torture, sexual degradation, forced drugging and religious persecution, from the U.S. forces at Guantánamo Bay. According to Wikipedia’s article on the Guantanamo bay’s detention camp, former prisoners, upon their release have talked about their horrible situation there. Mehdi Ghezali whom was also freed without charge in 2004 claimed that he was the victim of repeated torture. Other former detainees Omar Deghayes, Juma Al Dossary and David Hicks have claimed to have suffered being blinded by pepper spray, being interrogated hundreds of times, beaten, tortured with broken glass, barbed wire, burning cigarettes, and being sexually assaulted.
According to CNN, during the first 100 days of his presidency, President Barak Obama proposed an order to close Guantanamo Bay prison. However his plan was beyond being set in stone. This proposal has induced strong opinions from people both for and against the closing of the prison facility. In a New York Times article, it was revealed that the proposal to close the Prison and relocate the detainees into the United States, provoked a bipartisan Congressional protest, And after Lawmakers expressed alarm, over the fact that detainees, considered not to be security threats, might be resettled in the United States, the House and Senate voted to bar the resettlement of the detainees in this country. However the Obama administration is obviously for the effort of closing the prison, but they are worried that with all the problems against them, they might not make the January 2010 deadline for closure. Senior officials believe that the treatment of detainees at The Guantanamo Prison symbolizes the excesses of the Bush administration’s counterterrorism policies.
I believe that before the prison is closed, some pros and cons should be written to determine whether it is a profitable proposal or an arduous situation. According to one of the officials close to the transition (one who was not authorized to speak of the proceedings), one of the reasons for closing military prison was that “the legal framework at GITMO has failed to successfully and swiftly prosecute terrorists”. Closing the prison will indeed place a strain on those who must decide the fate of the prisoners. President Obama has said that ‘although it is difficult, it is going to be done, but part of the challenge is that a number of persons have been detained at the prison facility in Cuba, many of whom have not been put on trial for their alleged crimes. I fail to see how the closing of the facility in Cuba will solve the problem of a speedy and fair trial for detainees who are enemies of these United States. In fact the United States of America is now faced with the problem of possibly housing significantly dangerous terrorist on her own soil, bringing the enemy within striking distance. If the problem is just that prisoners have not been granted a speedy trial, how is closing the whole facility going to guarantee justice for the detainees of Guantanamo Bay detention centre or peace and safety to the people of the United States of America?
The closing of the prison should be because of the torture and inhumane treatment. The fact the some of the prisoners are being detained without having had a proper trial is wrong, but no grounds for closing down the prison. We must ask how safe is it to close a facility that contains some of the world’s most dangerous and formidable criminals, terrorists. In CNN news article on His proposed closer of the Guantanamo prison, President Obama has also stated that he was trying to develop a process that, "doesn't result in releasing people who are intent on blowing us up.” How does closing the maximum security prison that detains such vile people fit into this process? Is it then safe to assume that these detainees will be in a prison while waiting and during their trial somewhere else? If so, it will obviously have to be a local American prison that pales in comparison, to the security of Guantanamo bay.
In my opinion, the president should instead implement ways and means by which the prisoners at Guantanamo prison are treated as humanly as possible, while keeping the fact that they are extremist killers in perspective. Although there should not be any rendering of evil for evil, it is quite ironic for these detainees to be complaining of the same injustices that they bestow upon their victims. In the interest of justice and democracy the voices of the detainees need to be heard and those who are guilty of inhumane acts against them be made to answer for such evil. However one must ask how many of Americas own dangerous criminals are released because of inhumane acts of prison officers? Could be very or few none. Consequently they should not have a right to be released just because of ill-treatment, its prison, they need to adapt, and as the old saying goes ‘if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.’
It is difficult for prison guards to realize that these are indeed people (people who view the average American as casualties to their just cause). Yet I don’t believe that there will be any less torture if they were in gismo or any federal prison. We must consider that the terrorist are not remiss in their effort to undermine the security of the United States. They do their homework well in studying and analyzing the security system of their target the fact that they are multifaceted, intelligent and educated makes them infiltrate society unnoticed. Subsequently the complaints of torture may be another ploy for early release. I believe that lower security prisons are inadequate hence dangerous for holding extremists and terrorist. Terrorist have a hatred for America and the absence of torture will not change their attitude. Guantanamo bay should stay open because, regardless of what goes on there, it is safer for the average American to facilitate these detainees at Guantanamo bay prison, but the torture should not be allowed.
Reference:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/us/politics/14gitmo.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp#Prisoner_complaints
http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/news/national/usstatesterritoriesandpossessions/guantanamobaynavalbasecuba/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/12/obama.gitmo/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)