Bye Bye Habeas Corpus

Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

juliaoceania -> Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 5:36:36 PM)
Senate Rejects Habeas Corpus in Interrogation Bill The Senate passed a bill Thursday on the prosecution and interrogation of suspected terrorists, rejecting an amendment that would have allowed the suspects to file challenges against their detention. Experts discuss this and other aspects of the legislation. Listen on this link http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/terrorism/homeland/

WyrdRich -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 6:05:09 PM)
What part of the phrase "Enemy Combatant" do you not understand?

juliaoceania -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 6:18:39 PM)
It is news, it is not about understanding, it is about information... people can form their own opinions. I did not make the MP3 file, I am just passing it around

ScooterTrash -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 6:23:01 PM)
If they were taken in a combat situation or caught in the act (or process/planning of it)....I have to agree with the decision. If on the other hand they were simply "thought" to be suspects, due to profiling, hearsay or some other, say, perhaps not the most reliable of sources....then they should perhaps have some rights of challenge.

popeye1250 -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 6:33:38 PM)
I haven't lost any rights since Sept 11th. I have been inconvenienced at airports though. Thanks a lot al qeada!

juliaoceania -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 6:37:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ScooterTrash If they were taken in a combat situation or caught in the act (or process/planning of it)....I have to agree with the decision. If on the other hand they were simply "thought" to be suspects, due to profiling, hearsay or some other, say, perhaps not the most reliable of sources....then they should perhaps have some rights of challenge. My question for the sake of discussion here is this... if caught in combat do they get prisoner of war status? If they do can we apply the Geneva Conventions to their captivity?

WyrdRich -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 6:46:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ScooterTrash If they were taken in a combat situation or caught in the act (or process/planning of it)....I have to agree with the decision. If on the other hand they were simply "thought" to be suspects, due to profiling, hearsay or some other, say, perhaps not the most reliable of sources....then they should perhaps have some rights of challenge. Well, that is the problem Scooter. If the accuser is the one guy in the organization we have managed to turn, should a detainee have the right to confront him? They are not citizens. They have no rights under our Constitution. Pretending they do, worse, insisting on it as the 'cause du jour' method of attacking the Bush Administation is, IMO, dumb and dangerous.

Chaingang -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 6:48:51 PM)
Habeas Corpus is a fundamental right that should be respected of anyone accused of a crime. An honest government should be able to produce some minimal evidence indicating why a person should be held for a crime. The denial of habeas corpus gives government the ability to punish anyone for anything without even having to state a pretended offense - they require no reason whatever because there is no oversight whatever. A good explanation of what is going on is this case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/José_Padilla_(alleged_terrorist) So, this isn't really new news - it's the follow-up from things like the Padilla case. This administration wants impunity for everything it does. And if you think that doesn't mean we are one step away from a dictatorship or a quasi-dictatorship then you simply don't know enough to discuss the issue intelligently. We are in very dangerous territory here and Americans would seem to approve of it all (which is scarier still).

WyrdRich -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 6:50:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania My question for the sake of discussion here is this... if caught in combat do they get prisoner of war status? If they do can we apply the Geneva Conventions to their captivity? Read the Geneva Conventions. It says if you are fighting out of uniform and captured, you can simply be shot.

juliaoceania -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 6:52:18 PM)
It is not new news at all, but seeing as this bill was just passed (which I am sure will be challenged in court) it seems a timely discussion of whether or not this is comparable with the Alien Sedition Act ... talking about this as Americans is crucial no matter a person's opinion. These are our laws, our constitution, our government...it is up to us to talk about how we want them to represent us...smiles

juliaoceania -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 6:53:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WyrdRich quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania My question for the sake of discussion here is this... if caught in combat do they get prisoner of war status? If they do can we apply the Geneva Conventions to their captivity? Read the Geneva Conventions. It says if you are fighting out of uniform and captured, you can simply be shot. But you cannot torture people once you have them in custody... and we are talking about people in custody are we not?

WyrdRich -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 7:11:32 PM)
A better question is whether we want to blur the lines between military justice in wartime and the civilian justice system. When an enemy combatant is taken into custody, they are sort of in limbo until their status is determined. There are specific rules about who is and who isn't entitled to the status "Prisoner of War." These issues are rising because most of the people we are taking into custody do not qualify. If this administration was 10% as bad as some on this board would have us believe, the issue would never come up. They would have been promptly hung or put in front of a firing squad.

juliaoceania -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 7:19:45 PM)
The question is do we want some sort of judicial proceding that is not reviewed by our courts. The Bush Admin has set up Gitmo to be untouchable by judicial review because our constitution does not only cover American citizens, it covers anyone on our soil. This is why Gitmo was used. Do we want the Bush Admin to be able to hold people without the Geneva Conventions, without constitutional protections, without the right to face their accusors... habeas corpus.... these are questions that will be with us long after the threat of terrorism fades.

LadyEllen -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 7:35:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WyrdRich They are not citizens. They have no rights under our Constitution. Pretending they do, worse, insisting on it as the 'cause du jour' method of attacking the Bush Administation is, IMO, dumb and dangerous. Just to put my nose in here - if they have no rights under the US Constitution, it could equally be said that the US government has no rights to have them in custody? E

LadyEllen -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 7:37:28 PM)
Excellent. Habeas corpus no longer exists? I hereby denounce the following people as members of Al Quaeda; (insert names) Dont protest. This is the nature of a system which operates absent habeas corpus. Its kinda why it was invented. Them barons didnt like being hauled off to the king's dungeons on the say so of their rivals and enemies. E

juliaoceania -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 7:39:26 PM)
But they do have rights under the constitution if they are apprehended here.. except Bush says they do not, but not being a citizen does not deprive one defacto of rights under the constitution.. being declared an enemy combatant does... which it is not clear that this status has been declared completely constitutional as far as I know.

ScooterTrash -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 7:44:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WyrdRich quote: ORIGINAL: ScooterTrash If they were taken in a combat situation or caught in the act (or process/planning of it)....I have to agree with the decision. If on the other hand they were simply "thought" to be suspects, due to profiling, hearsay or some other, say, perhaps not the most reliable of sources....then they should perhaps have some rights of challenge. Well, that is the problem Scooter. If the accuser is the one guy in the organization we have managed to turn, should a detainee have the right to confront him? They are not citizens. They have no rights under our Constitution. Pretending they do, worse, insisting on it as the 'cause du jour' method of attacking the Bush Administation is, IMO, dumb and dangerous. Nodz, if he was fingered by one of his own, that would not be grounds for complaining, but I bet he's off his Xmas list..lol. I was just referring to the poor guy from Canada that they locked up, after packing him off to Syria I think, that was just returning from a business trip. I am hoping that was one of them rarely occurring things however.

sissifytoserve -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 7:48:43 PM)
With this Bill the government now CAN detain and imprison (ie..send you to GULAGS) ANYONE..including American citizens....if they believe you are "Aiding terrorists". Whats so frightening about this is THE GOVERNMENTS DEFINITION of WHO that is. I have already posted a link to a breakdown of this new bill and thus far no one has said BOO about it. http://www.collarchat.com/m_611594/tm.htm I have a feeling ..the average Bush worshipper will fully support it. "yeah man!!...I don't care if he is an American citizen......if you protest the war...you're with the terrorists!!!" I can see it now. Just WAIT after the next Government sponsored terrorist attack on the US. You heard it here first. People have NO CLUE how the noose is being fitted around our necks. Hope YOU don't meet the GOVERNMENTS description of "enemy combatant"...cause' its ASTOUNDINGLY EASY to be defined as one by THEIR standards.

juliaoceania -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 8:23:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen Excellent. Habeas corpus no longer exists? I hereby denounce the following people as members of Al Quaeda; (insert names) Dont protest. This is the nature of a system which operates absent habeas corpus. Its kinda why it was invented. Them barons didnt like being hauled off to the king's dungeons on the say so of their rivals and enemies. E This new legislation will wend its way through our federal court system... hopefully judicial review will slap down our congress for over-reaching

Lordandmaster -> RE: Bye Bye Habeas Corpus (9/30/2006 8:44:07 PM)
I'd love to see where it says in the Consitution that non-citizens have no rights. Let me know when you find it. Besides, an "enemy combatant" CAN be a citizen. quote: ORIGINAL: WyrdRich They are not citizens. They have no rights under our Constitution.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125