Author Topic: Federal Judge rules about Gitmo (Read 942 times)

patrone · « **on:** January 31, 2005, 05:35:29 PM »

Us federal Judge ruled the military trails against Gitmo prisoners to be against the constitution of USA.

And against the International law of war.

reuters

Thrawn · « **Reply #1 on:** January 31, 2005, 05:38:01 PM »

Source?

patrone · « **Reply #2 on:** January 31, 2005, 05:44:33 PM »

Sorry, didnt get the link to work at first

Elfie · « **Reply #3 on:** January 31, 2005, 05:46:54 PM »

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-11-08-gitmo-court-halt_x.htm

It appears the court isnt accepting the Bush administrations claims that the people held at Gitmo are enemy combatants and not POWs. As enemy combatants those men could be held indefinately. Heck, even as POWs they dont have to be repatriated until the war is over. When the war on terrorism will end is anyones guess though.

patrone · « **Reply #4 on:** January 31, 2005, 05:52:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Elfie
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-11-08-gitmo-court-halt_x.htm

It appears the court isnt accepting the Bush administrations claims that the people held at Gitmo are enemy combatants and not POWs. As enemy combatants those men could be held indefinately. Heck, even as POWs they dont have to be repatriated until the war is over. When the war on terrorism will end is anyones guess though.

Well as this court ruled the prisoners to have constitutional rights, so it will be brought up at the US Supreme court of Justice and no matter what even the President has to follow their rule....

(He can cry and kick, but he will get a good ol´menthal spanking...this was just the initial "pulling out the belt, stripping the pants....... "Blue moon of Kentucky keep,,, err, Texas,, keep on shining".....)

Toad · « **Reply #5 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:08:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by patrone
so it will be brought up at the US Supreme court of Justice

Which is exactly how the system is supposed to work. Those old Founding Fathers were real smart.

Thrawn · « **Reply #6 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:15:41 PM »

Thanks for the source Elfie.

Quote

Originally posted by patrone
Well as this court ruled the prisoners to have constitutional rights,

Not constitutional rights. Rights under the Geneva Conventions.

Elfie · « **Reply #7 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:19:16 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
Thanks for the source Elfie.

Not constitutional rights. Rights under the Geneva Conventions.

Thats correct Thrawn, the court ruled he does have rights under the Geneva Conventions. Even if someone is classified as an enemy combatant they still have some rights under the GC.

patrone · « **Reply #8 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:20:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
Thanks for the source Elfie.

Not constitutional rights. Rights under the Geneva Conventions.

Sorry, i used this word, because it was used as a reason for the US supreme court not to bring it up, even if it was ruled to have the juridstiction.

And beause of this:

Quote

She ruled that the special military tribunals to determine the status of each Guantanamo detainee as an "enemy combatant" violated the constitutional protection of a fair hearing.

Thrawn · « **Reply #9 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:29:48 PM »

Thanks patrone, that is wierd. As far as I know, no non-US citizens had constitutional rights.

Raider179 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:31:19 PM »

I am glad to see it. I felt we had a double standard in the way we treated them. They are POW's. If they are terrorists then try them in court and shoot them. Holding them for years seems pointless. Not to mention it is just asking for any american serviceman that gets captured to face the same type of treatment. Ever notice all the people in the beheading video's are wearing GITMO outfits.

patrone · « **Reply #11 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:35:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
Thanks patrone, that is wierd. As far as I know, no non-US citizens had constitutional rights.

No, you might be right. But the actions of US goverment must be according to the constitution.

Gunslinger · « **Reply #12 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:54:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Raider179
I am glad to see it. I felt we had a double standard in the way we treated them. They are POW's. If they are terrorists then try them in court and shoot them. Holding them for years seems pointless. Not to mention it is just asking for any american serviceman that gets captured to face the same type of treatment. Ever notice all the people in the beheading video's are wearing GITMO outfits.

captured US servicmen??????

are you high? Any US servicemen captured now by insurgents wont get rights, trial, or even fair treatment. IIRC not one captured US servicement caught after end of major operations has survived.

Lizking · « **Reply #13 on:** January 31, 2005, 06:57:04 PM »

I didn't realize we were beheading Gitmo detainees, much less publicly, re: terrorists earing orange jumpsuits.

I think it is a good decision, though.

patrone · « **Reply #14 on:** January 31, 2005, 07:01:22 PM »

CIA need more funds to make better videos, then people might actully belive what they see.