http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-detain29sep29,1,6381532,full.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage
Senate has passed an act that prevents the court from hearing cases involving non-Americans
that are labeled as enemy combatants.
No court, justice or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States [who] has been determined … to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant.
This means that, if a non-American gets labeled this way, they will not have access to a lawyer,
evidence, or even be able to demand that they be accused of a specific crime. They can be tried
and sentenced to death without having a reasonable opportunity to defend themselves. Only after
being sentenced, can they appeal, only in the highest courts.
Now, my understanding of the formation of this once-great country was that the three branches of
government exist in no small part to form a check against each other, so that one division doesn't
become unusually powerful. For the Legislature to pass a law that says that it is illegal for the
court to consider the Constitutionality of the application of another law is just a way to shield itself
from court review.
Aren't people getting annoyed about this?
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioNo, not at all! The laws were devised for AMERICAN CITIZENS! Why should I have to pay for a lawyer for an Illegal alien or enemy combatatnt? Did Americans get court-appointed lawyers in Vietnam? Hell no! Until the war on terror is won, the scumbags can rot in Gitmo, and illegal aliens should be deported once they have been found to have NO proper (legal) ID. If non-Americans play by the rules, they shouldn't have any problems; if they are afraid, they should catch the next plane back to Karachi!
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-detain29sep29,1,6381532,full.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage
Senate has passed an act that prevents the court from hearing cases involving non-Americans
that are labeled as enemy combatants.
[i]No court, justice or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of ha ...[text shortened]... y to shield itself
from court review.
Aren't people getting annoyed about this?
Nemesio
Originally posted by chancremechanicDitto.
No, not at all! The laws were devised for AMERICAN CITIZENS! Why should I have to pay for a lawyer for an Illegal alien or enemy combatatnt? Did Americans get court-appointed lawyers in Vietnam? Hell no! Until the war on terror is won, the scumbags can rot in Gitmo, and illegal aliens should be deported once they have been found to have NO prope ...[text shortened]... uldn't have any problems; if they are afraid, they should catch the next plane back to Karachi!
1 edit
Originally posted by NemesioThe law is unconstitutional, period.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-detain29sep29,1,6381532,full.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage
Senate has passed an act that prevents the court from hearing cases involving non-Americans
that are labeled as enemy combatants.
[i/]No court, justice or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of h ...[text shortened]... y to shield itself
from court review.
Aren't people getting annoyed about this?
Nemesio
Originally posted by no1marauderI'm not so sure.
The law is unconstitutional, period.
If this is a war and the detainees are POW's, then they may have no right of habeus corpus.
Under the Geneva Convention -- and again assuming the detainees are POWs -- they cannot be treated inhumanely, and they are not required to answer questions or give information other than their name, rank, and serial number.
They can be held without legal recourse until the war is over when, presumeably, they will be released.
This is an odd situation of course -- maybe a historical first -- for the US to be at war with an organization, not a country.
Originally posted by spruce112358They're not being treated as POWs.
I'm not so sure.
If this is a war and the detainees are POW's, then they may have no right of habeus corpus.
Under the Geneva Convention -- and again assuming the detainees are POWs -- they cannot be treated inhumanely, and they are not required to answer questions or give information other than their name, rank, and serial number.
They can be ...[text shortened]... se -- maybe a historical first -- for the US to be at war with an organization, not a country.
Originally posted by NemesioNO, to the contary I'm quite pleased with it.
Aren't people getting annoyed about this?
Nemesio
However, if it is believed that the U.S. Constitution can be applied to
enemy combatant aliens, then there should be no problem with America
applying it to the rest of the worlds population.
signed;
(hmm...why bother)
1 edit
Originally posted by spruce112358if they were being treated like POWs, there'd be no problem. If they were being treated like criminals, there'd be no problem. But trying to create a third class and apply rules of your own making contrary to international agreements and the US Constitution is the problem.
I know, but they should be.
Compromising our value system to go for a "quick win" is the wrong way to go.
Originally posted by PhilodorThe enemy within a free country is people like you who want to dispense with the fundamental rights that the country was created to protect.
It is only in the opinion of subversives like you in any society that such laws are deemed 'unconstitutional'. Of course, since they are designed to deny shelter to the enemy within.
Originally posted by no1marauderNo. It's those who have been allowed to abuse the easy-going attitude of democratic societies until such time that they clearly show their determination to subvert that society. As, for example, the hook-handed muslim cleric who incited the London suicide bombers.
The enemy within a free country is people like you who want to dispense with the fundamental rights that the country was created to protect.
Such people can, unfortunately, always find apologists like you for their actions, thereby showing that they too are to be regarded as subversives.
Originally posted by PhilodorYou're an extremely stupid person though I must congratulate you on your single minded bigotry. I have no idea what the London suicide bombers have to do with this thread; as far as I know those allegedly responsible are being treated as the criminals they are. I haven't made any apologies for them so you are a liar as well as a raving nutcase.
No. It's those who have been allowed to abuse the easy-going attitude of democratic societies until such time that they clearly show their determination to subvert that society. As, for example, the hook-handed muslim cleric who incited the London suicide bombers.
Such people can, unfortunately, always find apologists like you for their actions, thereby showing that they too are to be regarded as subversives.
Originally posted by no1marauderThat's the real problem;
if they were being treated like POWs, there'd be no problem. If they were being treated like criminals, there'd be no problem. But trying to create a third class and apply rules of your own making contrary to international agreements and the US Constitution is the problem.
They're not being treated like POWs.
They're not being treated like criminals.
Because what they are is a new third element, what we are seeing
is the three branches of the U.S. government trying to deal with it.
(We are not alone, other countries have the same problem.)
While the process of our still-great country is sometimes slow,
it works.
1 edit
Originally posted by xsNo they are not. If they are soldiers in a war, they should be treated as POWs. If they are alleged to have committed crimes against the rules of war, there are well established procedures for trying them.
That's the real problem;
They're not being treated like POWs.
They're not being treated like criminals.
Because what they are is a new third element, what we are seeing
is the three branches of the U.S. government trying to deal with it.
(We are not alone, other countries have the same problem.)
While the process of our still-great country is sometimes slow,
it works.
If they are simple criminals, there are well established procedures called the US criminal justice system for dealing with them.
This is a "problem" created by the illegal actions of the US Executive Branch.