Thursday, June 12, 2008
|
|
Welcome to Our Courts, Terrorists
|
|
Posted by:
Carol Platt Liebau at
12:04 PM
|
If anyone needed a clear understanding of just why judges matter, today's Supreme Court decision bestowing habeas corpus rights on terrorists at Guantanamo is a perfect example.
First, imagine giving the same procedural protections afforded to American citizens to Nazi war prisoners in the midst of World War II -- imagine if they had been able to challenge their "detention" as prisoners of war as the conflict raged . . . even if we were holding them, say, in Lichtenstein.
Now understand that the people at Guantanamo have even less status under international law than the Nazis would have had, because under the Geneva Conventions, they're not even titled to the same protections that real prisoners of war -- wearing a uniform, part of a nation-state -- are entitled to.
Yet because of Supreme Court fiat (in a 5-4 decision), they're to receive the panoply of protections reserved for American citizens. In other words, Osama bin Laden would be entitled to the same rights to challenge his detention as, say, a man accused of burglary here in L.A.
Such decisions do nothing to protect us. They simply offer terrorists a way to exploit American legalities in order to find a way to return to the battlefield to attack our soldiers -- and civilians (because, for them, everwhere is a battlefield . . . including the streets of Manhattan).
To the extent the Democrats laud this decision as a great triumph, it's fair to ask them: Whose personal liberty -- and security -- are you most worried about? American citizens' -- or accused terrorists'?
|
|
Stop it, just stop it.
It isn't "welcome to our courts terrorists." It's welcome to our courts prisoners suspected of terrorist activities.
I'll even concede that probably the vast majority of detainees in Guantanamo are terrorists, fine. That still does not change the fact that many innocents still remain within those walls.
Your statements belie an extreme lack of respect for humanity. It sounds like your reality has two classes of humans, us and them, and frankly that puts you a lot more in common with those "terrorists" you are so afraid of. |
|
Stop it, just stop it.
It isn't "welcome to our courts terrorists." It's welcome to our courts prisoners suspected of terrorist activities.
I'll even concede that probably the vast majority of detainees in Guantanamo are terrorists, fine. That still does not change the fact that many innocents still remain within those walls.
Your statements belie an extreme lack of respect for humanity. It sounds like your reality has two classes of humans, us and them, and frankly that puts you a lot more in common with those "terrorists" you are so afraid of. |
|
|
when you find yourselves having to make extremely broad comparisons to the Nazi's or forced to present an analogy involving Osama bin Laden, does it ever occur to you that your argument wouldn't need these extremely inflammatory distractions if you could make your point on the actual merits? |
|
|
correct. Habeas corpus means the government is supposed to explain why the prisoner is being held -- I do not see why that should be hard at all, espeically after 6 years. It is also my understanding that many (I think at least 100) Gitmo prisoners have already been released. Presumably, then, the govt has grounds for holding the rest that it can assert. I really do not see why this is such a big deal. |
|
|
|