Quote:
Originally posted by MuadDib
As far as the first Patriot Act I am mostly referring to 213, 215, & 216 because I don't find most defenses of them adequate (I think those numbers are right, I didn't take the time to relook them up).
|
But why? In the cases of 213, 215, and 216 they either 1) require a judge's approval, or 2) simply accomodate new technology. Again, if the federal government wants to look at someone's library records, "sneak-and-peak" and inform them later, or tap their cellular telephone, the basic fact remains that they must prove that it's necessary and the target is a credible threat to a judge. There's still a legal process involved; they can't just go in and demand library records out of the blue if they don't like what books you're reading.
Quote:
Originally posted by MuadDib
Also our friend at Gitmo Bay are all suspected terrorists who are almost universally denied legal council and who's trials take place before military tribunal because they are considered POWs. The problem with this is that some of these "POWs" are US citizens and have a constitutional right to a fair and expediate trial as well as a right to not be cruelly or unusually punished.
|
That's not true. Briefly Hamdi was held at Gitmo, but once discovered that he was an American citizen he was transferred to a prison in Norfolk, VA. John Walker Lindh was not imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay, and neither was Jose Padilla. Padilla and Hamdi were both held too long without being charged, yes, but it doesn't have anything to do with the POWs at Gitmo.
Quote:
Originally posted by MuadDib
Now one can not really say what is happening to the prisoners there so it isn't necessarily that they are being mistreated but they very well could be. Furthermore, we have had inspectors (either UN or Amnesty, I can't remember) report that the POWs are being mistreated.
|
Would you believe the International Red Cross? In January 2002, Urs Boegli, "chief Washington representative of the International Committee of the Red Cross," visited Gitmo and found no mistreatment of prisoners. "The Red Cross delegation leader told reporters that the impression of outside groups is not the same as those who have actually seen the camp, indicating there were some distortions." (CNN, January 22, 2002)
Quote:
Originally posted by MuadDib
This is even suspect according to rules of war. Finally, the majority of the prisoners though not US citizen ought to have the same rights in American court as we do. The thing is we consider these rights as fair and just treatment for all mankind and the way we treat those who we think oppose us really speaks volumes about our country.
|
I'm not sure any country treats citizens and non-citizens equally. If they did, there wouldn't be a distinction. Especially in regards to war, the only rights any country is bound to uphold are the ones laid out in the Geneva Convention. In any case, the United States has by far the best record in the humane treatment of prisoners.
Quote:
Originally posted by MuadDib
[B]In reference to citizens being deported that would be made available under the Expanded Patriot Act that is currently being proposed. No one has fallen victim yet [B]
|
That brings up an interesting logistical problem. Where would we deport them to?
-- Alvin