Results 1 to 10 of 65
Threaded View
-
06-17-2008, 03:34 PM #34
Senior Member
McCain blasts Supreme Court's Guantanamo ruling
P4B, you keep going back to the idea that these detainees are prisoners of war, and while I might tend to agree with you on that, the government has claimed that they are not POWs. So just forget it -- they aren't POWs.
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
And even if they were considered POWs, the rule of law and due process do apply to POWs. You are wrong if you are saying it doesn't. The definition of a POW is a legal definition and there are laws that apply to the treatment of people with a legal status of POW. So POWs receive due process in accordance with their status as POWs. You are right that they do not get their day in court, but that doesn't mean they don't have protections under the law or receive due process as POWs. Both civilians and POWs recieve due process, but under different rules.
The reason that they are being given their day in court is because the governemnt has chosen not to process them as POWs, so the court has said they must be given due process under civilian rules. It's the government's blunder, not the court's.
When I refer to the breakdown of the rule of law, I am referring to the government's attempt to designate these people as neither POWs nor civilians. They were attempting to create a situation in which the detainee could not recieve due process as a POW nor as a civilian. They wanted to create a legal black hole in which they could do whatever they wanted with these people, subject to neither set of rules. That is an attempt to circumvent the rule of law by creating a situation in which no laws apply.
Nick Berg and Eugene Armstrong did have rights. Thier rights were incorrectly taken from them and they were beheaded. It's an atrocity, and everyone the world over knows it was wrong. What makes us different from the terrorists is that we respect the rule of law and don't do that kind of thing. I think that is what this court ruling is about --- keeping us from taking a step toward ignoring the rule of law and just doing whatever the hell we want to people.
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
Similar Threads
-
Cal Supreme Court Ruling on MMJ - People v. Kelly
By boaz in forum LegalReplies: 10Last Post: 11-09-2010, 02:38 PM -
Has the Recent State Supreme Court Ruling Affected You?
By Club420 in forum Washington (WA)Replies: 2Last Post: 02-05-2010, 07:50 AM -
Wa. State v. Jason Fry: supreme ct. ruling
By jamessr in forum LegalReplies: 14Last Post: 01-24-2010, 09:53 PM -
McCain Blasts Obama Over William Ayers
By Psycho4Bud in forum PoliticsReplies: 1Last Post: 04-21-2008, 02:13 AM -
Supreme Court delivers blow to property rights; ruling in Conn. case has Toledo...
By pisshead in forum PoliticsReplies: 1Last Post: 08-07-2005, 06:22 PM










Register To Reply
Staff Online