?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Wakum Mata!
Politcally Incorrect Musings
We're screwed 
12th-Jun-2008 06:50 pm
Uncle Sam
Court says detainees have rights, bucking Bush

Jun 12, 9:36 PM (ET)

By MARK SHERMAN

WASHINGTON (AP) - In a stinging rebuke to President Bush's anti-terror policies, a deeply divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign detainees held for years at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba have the right to appeal to U.S. civilian courts to challenge their indefinite imprisonment without charges. [...]

Guantanamo Inmates May Seek Release, High Court Says
(Update5)


By Greg Stohr
More Photos/Details

June 12 (Bloomberg) -- Guantanamo Bay inmates have constitutional rights and may seek release in federal court, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a rebuke to the Bush administration and Congress on their handling of accused terrorists. [...]

---

Now expect the civilian courts to immediately fill with 270 writs for habeas corpus for UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANTS. By Geneva convention III defintions, they are civilian attired enemy combatants and HAVE NO PROTECTION.

To whit:

Under Article 4, Section A, Paragraph 2, a prisoner of war is defined as:
Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfill the following conditions: (a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; (b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; (c) that of carrying arms openly; (d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.


Al Qaeda does not meet these requirements.
The Taliban only meets part a.

The prisoners detained at Guantanamo by The United States are not afforded protection.

By international conventions of war, these prisoners cannot be classified as "Prisoners of War". They have no rights.

They should have no rights under the US Constitution as they are not on, nor have they been, on US soil. The US Supreme Court has greatly overstepped its bounds of authority and has de facto extended US constitutional protections to foreign persons outside the US territories.

There is a very good discussion on this and other points here.

What could be the solution to the problem of taking terrorists prisoner? The proposition is a bloody one. Don't take prisoners.

It is simple, if they shoot at you, kill them. If you suspect them of terrorist ties, kill them.

Other than that, expect a big change in how we fight wars. We fight to lose now.

Read the dissent by Justice Scalia.
Read the dissent by Chief Justice Roberts.



Comments 
13th-Jun-2008 03:07 pm (UTC)
while i agree with the frustration that these men will go unpunished (although i do feel that not all of them are criminals, just soldiers in the "army" of the nation in which they live (ie: taliban))
I feel as a veteran and as one who has bled for our flag, i must point out the precipice here, if we do not afford them the same rights we take for granted, we become them, we cannot afford to pick and choose when to hold the moral high ground, we either have it, or we do not. also, by instituting these "hold until we damn well feel like it" policies we are endangering the men and women who fight for our freedoms, how would you feel if 300 marines were held by north korea or russia or even the brits under the same terms?
The pure fact of the matter is that these policies practiced at gitmo are detrimental to both our position in the world as "the good guys". Although that rep is already blasted to hell by the current admin, we are loathed and hated around the world now, only britain and the countries we prop up with money have not turned on us.
While i agree that it is folly to allow these people to run free they must be either declared prisoners of war and treated as such, or they must be afforded the same rights as a common criminal, do you realize a child molester has more rights then these men?
I have spoken to many friends in the military establishment and they all universally despise this situation as both dangerous to them and morally corrupt, but they are not allowed to challenge it, they just have to implement it.
Like i said, this is a precipice, we cannot afford to fall off of it, Were supposed to be the good guys, we need to remember that and act like it
13th-Jun-2008 03:09 pm (UTC)
and btw, please ignore the grammatically butchered rant, i just woke up.... =P
This page was loaded Nov 23rd 2017, 10:54 am GMT.