Jose Padilla anyone know who this is?

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by miko2d
We have a bunch of germans who are not citizens of US to disembark from a german sumbarine in 1942 carrying a supply of explosives, fuses and incendiary and timing devices and wearing German Marine Infantry uniforms.
 Without delving into details, I'd say they had a much better case to hold those people than they have with Jose Padilla.
 

FFS read the damn judgement the next time before talking out of your ass.

Haupt was a US citizen.

All except petitioner Haupt are admittedly citizens of the German Reich, with which the United States is at war. Haupt came to this country with his parents when he was five years old; it is contended that he became a citizen of the United States by virtue of the naturalization of his parents during his minority and that he has not since lost his citizenship.

Citizenship in the United States of an enemy belligerent does not relieve him from the consequences of a belligerency which is unlawful because in violation of the law of war. Citizens who associate themselves with the military arm of the enemy government, and with its aid, [317 U.S. 1, 38]   guidance and direction enter this country bent on hostile acts are enemy belligerents within the meaning of the Hague Convention and the law of war. Cf. Gates v. Goodloe, 101 U.S. 612, 615 , 617 S., 618. It is as an enemy belligerent that petitioner Haupt is charged with entering the United States, and unlawful belligerency is the gravamen of the offense of which he is accused.

[miko2d]

read the damn judgement the next time before talking out of your ass, Hortlund.

It is as an enemy belligerent that petitioner Haupt is charged with[/b] entering the United States, and unlawful belligerency is the gravamen of the offense of which he is accused.

 What part of "charged with" don't you understand?
 Charging the damn Padilla, that's all we want, as an emeny belliegrent or otherwise.

Elfie: Sounds like to me they are treating this guy like a POW and not a civilian criminal. In the former case I think the military has the right to hold him as long as they like.

 If they pick you up in a US airport (not in combat) without weapons, explosives, uniform or any other proscribed material and call you a POW, does that mean they can hold you forever without pressing charges or seeing a lawyer?
 Actually, it does not matter what you think or even what they think because US Constitution is quite specific on that matter.


Im neither dumb

 You are very dumb.

 You think that an opinion that "Padilla be either freed or charged with a crime" - which is shareb by million americans, including noted legal schoolars - is "the dumbest statement".
 You think that an opinion about supremacy of habeas corpus widely shared by US and UK population is a "troll".

 Even if those opinions are mistaken, you reaction towards them as if you heard them the first time rather than them being quite common betrays your stupidity.

 Also, you keep illustarting your case for not pressing charges against Padilla by citing examples where charges are prominent - "hold citizens on certain charges" and "charged with". Isn't that stupid?

or scared
Well, at least you have your perspectives in order... 9-11 and the anthrax letters sure proved that

 Sorry, I misspoke. I meant "coward", not "scared".
 Your perspectives are obvious - you would lose your liberties rather than risk 9-11 and anthrax. You are a coward that may not be scared at the moment.

 ...or pro-socialist



 Come to think of it. Your entries of late contain no content beyong "it's a troll", "it's dumb" or quoting inappropriate crap that has nothing to do with your position.
 Just like Martlet. I should probably stop wasting my time on your posts.

 miko

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by MJHerman
Perhaps part of the problem that I have understanding all of this is that, as a Canadian, I have no experience with the concept of constitutional rights and/or the rule of law only applying to citizens.

Sure you do.  From the Charter.

"Democratic Rights
 
3. Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein."

[MJHerman]

Originally posted by Thrawn
Sure you do.  From the Charter.

"Democratic Rights
 
3. Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein."

OK.  Now show me where the reference to Canadian citizenship appears as a pre-requisite in Sections 7 to 13, which is what we are talking about here.

[Sandman]

JUSTICE

[Raider179]

"Padilla is believed by the government to have betrayed his country by conspiring with al Qaeda members, not to have joined a foreign arm to fight against the United States. As a result, it seems that the government should be charging Padilla with treason, not claiming he is an "unlawful combatant."


Think that sums it up for me. He is an American he deserves his rights. He may be innocent for all we know. Doubtful, but still the possibility exists. He is an American citizen. If you think declaring him an unlawful combatant is right then you dont believe in trials or judges for any Americans. He has as much a right to have his day in court as the BTK killer.Charge him with treason, let him have his day in court, then string him up by his (#)% until he expires.

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Raider179
"Padilla is believed by the government to have betrayed his country by conspiring with al Qaeda members, not to have joined a foreign arm to fight against the United States. As a result, it seems that the government should be charging Padilla with treason, not claiming he is an "unlawful combatant."


Think that sums it up for me. He is an American he deserves his rights. He may be innocent for all we know. Doubtful, but still the possibility exists. He is an American citizen. If you think declaring him an unlawful combatant is right then you dont believe in trials or judges for any Americans. He has as much a right to have his day in court as the BTK killer.Charge him with treason, let him have his day in court, then string him up by his (#)% until he expires.

or untill some ACLU lawyer uses a technicality to set him free and he ends up killing thousands in an attack.  IMHO he did join a foreign army to fight against the US.  The problem here is that the rules of warfare in this case are unconventional.  The enemy does not have a state....he doesnt wear a uniform....he has no "border".  Hence the rules change.

But that's just me.  I do agree this is in fact a slippery slope.  Thanks for the follow up sandy.

[GRUNHERZ]

Can he be charged with treason?

[Shamus]

Constitutionality of it aside,I guess I just can't understand why, if the administration has valid evidence against this guy, they wouldnt want to charge and try him.

The only thing that makes sense to me is that they dont have the evidence, that's the chilling part.

shamus

[Nashwan]

It's not justice yet. A federal court ruled in 2003 that Padilla must be released, he's still in custody.

I find it amazing that the US passed powers allowing the executive to lock up citizens without trial with so little fuss.

[john9001]

i say let the guy go ,but make him promise not to blow anything up.

after he kills a couple hundred people they can arrest him for breaking his promise, if they can find him.

and wile they try to find him, you people can come on here and whine about how bush had him but let him go and now bush can't find him.

[Sandman]

Hell... why even bother with trials for anyone in this country? Only guilty people are ever arrested.

[GtoRA2]

If they have evidence give him a trail, if not holding a US citizen is bad news.




Letting the government have this kind of power is bad news for everyone.

[greentail]

Originally posted by Martlet
He's right where he belongs.  I'm glad they have him tucked away where dirt bag lawyers can't get at him.

How can someone as anti-American as you wrap himself in the flag?

You feel more comfortable living in a police state? Move to Singapore and take your hero with you.

Here in the United States, we respect our freedoms and the Constitution that preserves them for us all.

[Martlet]

Originally posted by greentail
How can someone as anti-American as you wrap himself in the flag?

You feel more comfortable living in a police state? Move to Singapore and take your hero with you.

Here in the United States, we respect our freedoms and the Constitution that preserves them for us all.

You're confusing anti-Americanism with anti-terrorism.

Why do you support criminals?


Edit:  I won't even get into the fact that it's a 16 month old quote.