SCOTUS sides with Gitmo detainees.

[AlmostThere]

Just saw on FOX that in 5 - 4 decision, SCOTUS says Gitmo detainees have rights under Constitution to be tried in Fed court and all the rights an American citizen would have. We should just let them all go and them see them again on the battlefield.

[jinxmchue]

Just saw on FOX that in 5 - 4 decision, SCOTUS says Gitmo detainees have rights under Constitution to be tried in Fed court and all the rights an American citizen would have. We should just let them all go and them see them again on the battlefield.

Through a weapon scope, right?

[noonwitch]

I personally agree with their decision-not because I am sympathetic to the individuals involved, but because of the principle of a fair trial that we base our legal system upon is an important principle-we criticize other countries when they institute secret "kangaroo" courts, we can't be doing the same thing and expect to be respected by other nations.

I just hope that the judges involved are serious, like the one who heard McVeigh's trial, and not ridiculous, like Judge Ito on the OJ case.

[gator]

Granting citizen rights to combatant non citizens is a damn stupid thing to do and an indication that we a re a damn weak ass country that can't take care of itself.

We have got to the point where we never get it right anymore.

[Molon Labe]

Granting citizen rights to combatant non citizens is a damn stupid thing to do and an indication that we a re a damn weak ass country that can't take care of itself.

We have got to the point where we never get it right anymore.

Pesonally...I am not sure I believe that those detainees have rights to our court system or our bill of rights....but I'm open to hearing other's views.

In your quote you say we should listen to the founders.

Part of me wonders what the founders would say about detainees? I personally haven't studied it enough to really make an educated guess.
It seems it is a fair question to ask that if by denying people rights our founders said were "inalienable" to "All men", then this could lend itself to some hypocrisy. I've heard it argued that if the means that justify the ends conflict with your morality...then can you really say you are true to the morality you are trying to preserve?

Then again if they are released and they meet us again on the battlefield, they can be killed on that battlefield....case closed....no messing around with rights. ;)

[Constitutionally Speaking]

I personally agree with their decision-not because I am sympathetic to the individuals involved, but because of the principle of a fair trial that we base our legal system upon is an important principle-we criticize other countries when they institute secret "kangaroo" courts, we can't be doing the same thing and expect to be respected by other nations.

I just hope that the judges involved are serious, like the one who heard McVeigh's trial, and not ridiculous, like Judge Ito on the OJ case.

They WERE getting a fair trial. NOw we cannot use some of the evidence against them because revealing it would endanger our troops in the field.


A military tribunal is NOT a railroad session, it is FAR more fair than even some of the European courts use.

[gator]

Pesonally...I am not sure I believe that those detainees have rights to our court system or our bill of rights....but I'm open to hearing other's views.

In your quote you say we should listen to the founders.

Part of me wonders what the founders would say about detainees? I personally haven't studied it enough to really make an educated guess.
It seems it is a fair question to ask that if by denying people rights our founders said were "inalienable" to "All men", then this could lend itself to some hypocrisy. I've heard it argued that if the means that justify the ends conflict with your morality...then can you really say you are true to the morality you are trying to preserve?

Then again if they are released and they meet us again on the battlefield, they can be killed on that battlefield....case closed....no messing around with rights. ;)

I don't rememberthe Founders making the Constitution applicable to everybody in the world, do you?

[Molon Labe]

I don't rememberthe Founders making the Constitution applicable to everybody in the world, do you?

No.., but I still wonder how it must look to other's (like say Iraq) when our politicians like Bush go around talking about promoting "freedom" in other countries.

[namvet]

here's the story..............source

and how much do the taxpayers cough up here?????

[gator]

This will probably change Obama's view about Gitmo.

Before he talked about closing Gitmo. Now that the Trail Lawyer stand a chance of making tons of money at taxpayer's expense then he will probably keep it open. Second only to the unions the Trial Lawyer's Association is the largest contributor to the Democrat Party and they have Obama in thier back pocket.