The Supreme Court Backs Guantanamo Bay Prisoners

g under p
g under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,253
edited June 2008 in A Moving Train
WASHINGTON (June 12) -- The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts.

In its third rebuke of the Bush administration's treatment of prisoners, the court ruled 5-4 that the government is violating the rights of prisoners being held indefinitely and without charges at the U.S. naval base in Cuba. The court's liberal justices were in the majority.


High Court Backs Guantanamo Detainees and it's about fricking time. Many of these detainees are there based on no evidence for them being there.

They should not be there indefinately without being charged and without an oppertunity to defend themselves.

Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    hell yeah, I saw this on the news today. It is about time.
  • Urban Hiker
    Urban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    Awesome. Hopefully, some good lawyers will be heading their way. Pronto.
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • g under p
    g under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,253
    Seriously though it'll take some time maybe years before these detainees are able to get in court, in front of judge and get some kind of a ruling.

    However, this is certainly a hell of a start to find out their guilt or innocence.

    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • beachdweller
    beachdweller Posts: 1,532
    I don't think this was the big part of the story, Bush's remarks in regards to this ruling should be front page.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25112374/

    Bush says Gitmo ruling may prompt new law

    updated 11:42 a.m. PT, Thurs., June. 12, 2008
    ROME - President Bush said Thursday in Rome that he strongly disagreed with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that clears foreign terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay to challenge their detention in American civilian courts.

    Bush suggested new legislation may now be needed to keep the American people safe.

    "We'll abide by the court's decision," Bush said during a news conference in Rome. "That doesn't mean I have to agree with it."
    "Music, for me, was fucking heroin." eV (nothing Ed has said is more true for me personally than this quote)

    Stop by:
    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14678777351&ref=mf
  • g under p
    g under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,253
    beachdweller wrote:
    I don't think this was the big part of the story, Bush's remarks in regards to this ruling should be front page.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25112374/

    Bush says Gitmo ruling may prompt new law

    updated 11:42 a.m. PT, Thurs., June. 12, 2008
    ROME - President Bush said Thursday in Rome that he strongly disagreed with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that clears foreign terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay to challenge their detention in American civilian courts.

    Bush suggested new legislation may now be needed to keep the American people safe.

    "We'll abide by the court's decision," Bush said during a news conference in Rome. "That doesn't mean I have to agree with it."

    It's always great for him to go back to keeping the FEAR FACTOR high in America. I aint buying it and most of have America has or is learning that today.

    Can you imagine being there in Guantanamo and being innocent, I would turn into a terriost because of how angry I would be. We'll know some there are innocent.

    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    beachdweller wrote:
    I don't think this was the big part of the story, Bush's remarks in regards to this ruling should be front page.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25112374/

    Bush says Gitmo ruling may prompt new law

    updated 11:42 a.m. PT, Thurs., June. 12, 2008
    ROME - President Bush said Thursday in Rome that he strongly disagreed with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that clears foreign terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay to challenge their detention in American civilian courts.

    Bush suggested new legislation may now be needed to keep the American people safe.

    "We'll abide by the court's decision," Bush said during a news conference in Rome. "That doesn't mean I have to agree with it."
    we should be glad then it seems that the president doesn't decide the law.
  • flywallyfly
    flywallyfly Posts: 1,453
    In the words of Harold and Kumar -- no more cockmeat sandwiches for those at Gitmo. This is great news. Seems like we're getting our country back slowly.
  • unsung
    unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    These people would kill you and not think twice about doing it. I'm not saying that it is right about how long they have been there but people need to remember they were with the Taliban. These aren't Iraqis, these are the ones that supported those who killed almost 3000 people.

    I hope they get their trial quick. I hope if they are found guilty they get their end quick as well.
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    unsung wrote:
    These people would kill you and not think twice about doing it. I'm not saying that it is right about how long they have been there but people need to remember they were with the Taliban. These aren't Iraqis, these are the ones that supported those who killed almost 3000 people.

    I hope they get their trial quick. I hope if they are found guilty they get their end quick as well.


    If they really are "people [that] would kill you and not think twice about it" why are the authorities so afraid of a fair trial? Shit make a case, try them, let an impartial jury or judge decide. Why do they need to be tortured and held indefinitely?
  • g under p
    g under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,253
    unsung wrote:
    These people would kill you and not think twice about doing it. I'm not saying that it is right about how long they have been there but people need to remember they were with the Taliban. These aren't Iraqis, these are the ones that supported those who killed almost 3000 people.

    I hope they get their trial quick. I hope if they are found guilty they get their end quick as well.

    ....And you're talking about ALL of the detainees in Guantanamo. You do realize that these detainees come from all over this world. Some placed there based on the hearsay of Afghan citizens given monies to give up a name.

    Once at Gitmo you have no say so at all. It's a fact that they are innocent detanees there, I hope you know that.

    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • unsung
    unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    g under p wrote:

    Once at Gitmo you have no say so at all. It's a fact that they are innocent detanees there, I hope you know that.

    Peace

    A fact huh? Well now that they are getting their trials we shall see. I've read the stories how some of these so called innocents are released yet have made their way back there.

    I wish their trials would have been much sooner than now. Then either they are found innocent and can go back to growing opium or they are found guilty and meet their maker. I just hope if found guilty justice is swift.


    The problem is too many people think that giving these prisoners a hug will solve things and make them abandon their jihadist ways. Those are usually the first ones to be beheaded.
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    unsung wrote:
    A fact huh? Well now that they are getting their trials we shall see. I've read the stories how some of these so called innocents are released yet have made their way back there.

    I wish their trials would have been much sooner than now. Then either they are found innocent and can go back to growing opium or they are found guilty and meet their maker. I just hope if found guilty justice is swift.
    I can't find the link but I remember the story of the 2 british detainees that were tortured and questioned for over a year, only to be released suddenly. They did nothing wrong, yet were still subjected to this concentration camp/detention center.


    The US has no moral highground.
  • g under p
    g under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,253
    unsung wrote:
    These people would kill you and not think twice about doing it. I'm not saying that it is right about how long they have been there but people need to remember they were with the Taliban. These aren't Iraqis, these are the ones that supported those who killed almost 3000 people.

    I hope they get their trial quick. I hope if they are found guilty they get their end quick as well.

    Let's see if I can find a few innocent ones....U.S. Sends Home 33 Detainees From Guantanamo Bay

    Ex-Terror Detainee Says U.S. Tortured Him

    U.S. Said to Overstate Value of Guantánamo Detainees

    Innocent, but in limbo at Guantánamo

    Enemy Combatant: Moazzam Begg on his Imprisonment at Guantanamo, Bagram, and Kandahar


    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    I can see both sides of this issue.

    But if the Supreme Court says it's illegal, it's illegal.

    Saw some congressman or other saying he wants to propose a constitutional amendment to keep them there. I somehow doubt that would pass anyhow.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    slightofjeff wrote:
    I can see both sides of this issue.

    But if the Supreme Court says it's illegal, it's illegal.

    Saw some congressman or other saying he wants to propose a constitutional amendment to keep them there. I somehow doubt that would pass anyhow.
    2 sides? Is there really an argument for holding individuals without trial indefinitely?
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    Commy wrote:
    2 sides? Is there really an argument for holding individuals without trial indefinitely?

    When you take prisoners of war on the battlefield, you don't run them through your court system. That's never been done in the history of the world. You catch a guy shooting at you, that's pretty much it.

    Not every single Nazi captured in WWII got his day in the U.S. judicial system.

    However, I can understand the argument that, in the case of some of these people, it's somewhat different. Some of them aren't enemy combatants in the true sense of the word.

    So I guess can understand the need for some judicial oversight here.

    EDIT: What I don't understand is how some guy who got picked up in the Middle East can be hauled to the U.S. and tried under U.S. law. What U.S. law was he breaking, half a world away?
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • g under p
    g under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,253
    unsung wrote:
    A fact huh? Well now that they are getting their trials we shall see. I've read the stories how some of these so called innocents are released yet have made their way back there.

    I wish their trials would have been much sooner than now. Then either they are found innocent and can go back to growing opium or they are found guilty and meet their maker. I just hope if found guilty justice is swift.


    The problem is too many people think that giving these prisoners a hug will solve things and make them abandon their jihadist ways. Those are usually the first ones to be beheaded.

    You seem to think that most or all of these Gitmo detainees are from Afghanistan. I don't think that's the case, it's people from all over this planet not just the ones you think are growing opium. Growing opium and being accused of being a terriost are two totally different things.

    Certainly not worthy of the torture and abuse being dished out this modern day Goulag and for growing opium?

    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • unsung
    unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    If they all aren't from Afghanistan what other countries were they picked up from? Where were they captured?
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    slightofjeff wrote:
    When you take prisoners of war on the battlefield, you don't run them through your court system. That's never been done in the history of the world. You catch a guy shooting at you, that's pretty much it.

    Not every single Nazi captured in WWII got his day in the U.S. judicial system.

    However, I can understand the argument that, in the case of some of these people, it's somewhat different. Some of them aren't enemy combatants in the true sense of the word.

    So I guess can understand the need for some judicial oversight here.

    EDIT: What I don't understand is how some guy who got picked up in the Middle East can be hauled to the U.S. and tried under U.S. law. What U.S. law was he breaking, half a world away?

    So Gitmo detainees are pows? that alone comes with a list of rights, from the Geneva convention, which the US agreed too.

    not being tortured is pretty high up on the list as I recall.
  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    Commy wrote:
    So Gitmo detainees are pows? that alone comes with a list of rights, from the Geneva convention, which the US agreed too.

    not being tortured is pretty high up on the list as I recall.

    I think, officially, the term is "enemy combatants."

    And I think the U.S. would claim a pretty narrow definition of the word "torture" -- as in "anything we aren't doing."
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do

Categories