Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaver
Because no POW has ever been given a trial? Very few insurgents/spies/saboteurs have ever been given habeas corpus in a time of war?
|
I'm sure you can see how labeling someone an insurgent/spy/saboteur without evidence in order to avoid trying them would be prone to abuse, Seaver. Lakhdar Boumediene was not an insurgent, spy, or saboteur at all. He was totally innocent. And yet he was kidnapped and tortured for 8 years. The Supreme Court even had to step in to get him released and it was only a 5/4 decision!
A man kidnapped from his home country and for which there was no evidence of wrongdoing wasn't just held without trial and tortured, but people here in the US are fine with him not being tried. When did people stop caring about guilt?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaver
The fact of the matter is capturing combatants in a combat situation can not lead to enough evidence to pass a modern trial. Any half-retarded lawyer can say everything is unprovable as there's no fingerprint evidence, other witnesses outside of the soldiers who picked him up, et al.
|
You really think everyone in Gitmo is a combatant? Lakhdar Boumediene was not a combatant. Most of the people released from Gitmo weren't captured on the battlefield but were rather taken off the street (extraordinary rendition). Lakhdar Boumediene was arrested off the street by the Bosnian government because of pressure from the US government. He was found innocent by a Bosnian court, but the US
abducted him and then held him in Gitmo for 8 years.
I will not abide a break with reality on this. Lakhdar Boumediene was not a combatant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaver
In regards to closing Gitmo, I say put them in general prison population and let them be handled like child molesters get handled.
|
After being tried and found guilty, yes, but not before then. You don't get to ignore habeas corpus because it challenges your preconceptions about the guilt of detainees.