Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Gitmo Fiasco

  1. #1

    Gitmo Fiasco

    Anyone detained anywhere on Earth by the United States Government has the right to a fair trial, as established under the American Constitution. If the US Government is going to try someone for a crime, then they are obligated to abide by its own rules of criminal procedure, whether that someone is a citizen or not. The question regarding "unlawful combatants" remains entirely separate from whether or not constitutional protections apply to non-citizens. They do, and they always have, since day one.

    In fact, that's exactly why Bush had to eliminate habeas corpus and of course decamp to Guantanamo. With habeas corpus in place, terror suspects had an opportunity to contest the circumstances of their detention. Terror suspects had an opportunity to appear before a judge and demand a fair trial. Bush can't abide giving them a fair trial, because he knows that many of them are undoubtedly innocent, and letting them go looks bad. As long as they don't get fair trials, most people will just assume that they're guilty. And as long as they don't have habeas corpus, they'll never get fair trials.

    That's the idea.

    The Constitution allows for the suspension of habeas corpus in times of rebellion or invasion when public safety demands it. There is neither a rebellion nor invasion currently threatening the United States.

    The internees at Guantanamo Bay have not yet, by any court of law, been established to be guilty of the crimes for which they are being held - in flagrant abuse of their human rights under both the American Constitution and the Geneva Convention. Try them, and fairly convict them, and I and many others will give our whole-hearted support to them being locked up for life.

    I know the Republicans (especially the supporters of the irrational cheese brain currently in power) aren't exactly au fait with the truth - but you might remember that all of this stuff about the Constitution is readily available for checking to any of us.

  2. #2
    Hey, Sub, where've you been?

    Frankly, the idea that detainees have a right to trial is a false underlying assumption.

  3. #3
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,955
    For the legal/constitutional minds here, can someone detail what portion of the Constitution states that it applies to non-Americans. This seems to be one of my most difficult items when it comes to my understanding on these types of topics.

    I cannot see how our overarching document covers non-Americans at all, but I can buy into it to some degree for those here (via our laws) legally. My trouble is how the rights provided are extended to those here in breach of our laws, or those not here at all, but outside the U.S. or, conversely U.S. Prisoners of War.

    So I guess I am looking for some education on what part of the Constitution enumerates that the document covers the entire World, not just the United States of America, and covers all human beings, and not just U.S. Citizens and legal visitors/residents.

  4. #4
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2586954]
    So I guess I am looking for some education on what part of the Constitution enumerates that the document covers the entire World, not just the United States of America, and covers all human beings, and not just U.S. Citizens and legal visitors/residents.[/QUOTE]
    Enemy combatants, by this logic, also have a right to trial in US court. Golf clap, Ysub.

  5. #5
    By your logic the U.S. should be able to take anyone they feel like, lock them up and pretend they never existed.

    [QUOTE=sackdance;2587020]Enemy combatants, by this logic, also have a right to trial in US court. Golf clap, Ysub.[/QUOTE]

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us