Just Curious if anyone else is angry over this?

aerial1313

It does not matter that they had already been convicted, and as you state above, they were convicted by a US military commission in China.  That is exactly what the US government wishes to do today with the prisoners at Guantanamo, but the current Supreme Court says otherwise. 

Sorry. YOU are incorrect.   The people at Guantanamo have not even been CHARGED with anything (after 4 YEARS). Not even "terrorism". The government can't put them on trial (and convict them) because there are no charges. No evidence. No indication at all that they are criminals. If the US wishes to convict them of "something", they are free to do so, but they must say what that "something" is. And since they have no charges, there can be no conviction.

Many of them are just regular people who were doing nothing wrong at all. Driving cabs, making a living for their families. The US basically kidnapped them and are holding them for no reason.

READ about it.  

We will agree to disagree, then.  Just to clarify, the person who was the plaintiff in the SC decision has never denied that he is an enemy combatant.  And yes, I have read about it, extensively.

ETA:

Here's a story about what can happen when one of the innocents that was kidnapped by the US and held at Guantanamo gets released.  For those of you looking for the "spin" on this story, please note the source.

"One of the suicide bombers responsible for a series of attacks in the Iraqi city of Mosul last month is a former detainee at Guantanamo Bay, reports the New York Times. The Kuwaiti, originally detained in Afghanistan, is said to have traveled to Iraq via Syria to join jihadists after his release in 2005. Several Gitmo detainees are known to have returned to insurgent status, officials say.

“Some have subsequently been killed in combat and participated in suicide bomber attacks,” said a US military spokesman.

Source New York Times "

All this can be debated back and forth.....but, guess what.....since 9/11 there haven't been any attacks on US soil....so, I am feeling good about that...and this might get to some people....if some innocent ones got scooped up to keep us all save, that is unfortunate, and I really hate that, but it beats more additional attacks and more deaths.......war and terrorism is ugly....there is no fair and nice way to play when it comes to that....

BCMixs

Imagine for a minute you're on vacation outside of the US.  When you return, you're seized at the airport and "detained".  You ask why, you're told "Classified, you know what this is about."  You ask for a lawyer, you're told no.  No lawyer you exclaim!  That's unAmerican!  You're told no lawyer because you're not under arrest, just under "investigative detention" and therefore, not entitled to a lawyer.  Your family gets a lawyer on your behalf even though they've not been able to contact you, that attorney files a habeas corpus action that  requires those holding you to justify your detention by presenting reasonable evidence (not ALL the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt evidence, just something that indicates the detention is a valid action).  During the night of the Sunday prior to your hearing, you are transported to a naval brig off the coast of the US and then held there without contact to family or attorneys for YEARS.  When a hearing finally requires that the US prove that the reasons they've held you for this time, they opt not to and instead turn you over to civilian authorities and NEVER PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER OF THE ORIGINAL CHARGE OF "ENEMY COMBATANT" that they originally detained you on.

And as 4IC pointed out in her earlier post, this could happen to ANYONE. If all these people are truly guilty, then bring charges against them. Try them in court. If there's sufficient evidence against them, a conviction will follow, and then an appropriate sentence. I have absolutely no problem with that. But why is a suspected terrorist guilty until proven innocent, (although it's kinda hard to prove innocence when you never get the opportunity to hear what you've been suspected of doing in the first place, not to mention that it's practically impossible to prove that you DIDN'T do something anyway), but suspected murderers, rapists, child abusers, drug dealers, and any other suspected criminal is innocent until proven guilty?

snownose

if some innocent ones got scooped up to keep us all save, that is unfortunate, and I really hate that, but it beats more additional attacks and more deaths.......war and terrorism is ugly....there is no fair and nice way to play when it comes to that....

If it was your family member would you still feel the same way? 

Liesje

snownose

if some innocent ones got scooped up to keep us all save, that is unfortunate, and I really hate that, but it beats more additional attacks and more deaths.......war and terrorism is ugly....there is no fair and nice way to play when it comes to that....

 

If it was your family member would you still feel the same way? 

You beat me to it Lies, I was thinking exactly the same thing.
 

I'm not saying that to make a stink either.  I thought the same thing (utilitarian - as long as it keeps the greatest number of people safe it works for me) until an innocent family member was the target....yes it happens.

Liesje

If it was your family member would you still feel the same way?

That is a weird question due to my heritage and we don't have relatives in the countries suspected of high terrorism.....my grandfather is from Norway and he didn't have a favorable run in with the Germans......but, on the other hand, say we cut all the suspected terrorists lose and some cause real harm, let's say .....hmmmm bomb a school your DH is working at(just an example folks), how are you going to feel then?

There is no doubt that there are innocent people within that prison......like I said, war and terrorism is never pretty......or fair.....

If DH and I were to travel to Iraq.....I am pretty sure my life or his wouldn't be save.......and what did we do?....What did the victims on 9/11 do......

snownose

.....but, on the other hand, say we cut all the suspected terrorists lose and some cause real harm, let's say .....hmmmm bomb a school your DH is working at(just an example folks), how are you going to feel then?

Cassidys Mom

snownose

.....but, on the other hand, say we cut all the suspected terrorists lose and some cause real harm, let's say .....hmmmm bomb a school your DH is working at(just an example folks), how are you going to feel then?

That's one of those fake either/or questions. We have more than two choices here, it's not just leaving them incarcerated without charges forever, or letting them all go immediately free. Nobody has suggested that we just "cut all the suspected terrorists loose", nor is that the only other option.

Exactly.  Terrorists have not been bombing inner-city elementary schools in the Midwest.  Also, the question seems to imply that I was not personally impacted by the events of Sept. 11, 2001....

Due process =/= "cutting suspected terrorists loose".

Cassidys Mom

snownose

.....but, on the other hand, say we cut all the suspected terrorists lose and some cause real harm, let's say .....hmmmm bomb a school your DH is working at(just an example folks), how are you going to feel then?

That's one of those fake either/or questions. We have more than two choices here, it's not just leaving them incarcerated without charges forever, or letting them all go immediately free. Nobody has suggested that we just "cut all the suspected terrorists loose", nor is that the only other option.

I don't see how that question is any more "fake" than the "what if it were your family member" question, and I think it's much more likely that someone's family member would be a victim of a terrorist than would be a suspected terrorist.  Please remember - the detainees are NOT US citizens, and they were captured in other countries and brought to Cuba.

aerial1313

Please remember - the detainees are NOT US citizens.  They were captured in other countries and brought to Cuba.

I don't see the relevance, with regard to the question.  Plenty of friends and family are not US citizens... 

Anyway, I don't see the point of holding someone without a formal charge because they *might* do something.  Jail "suspected terrorists" because they *might* get out and bomb my DH's school?....That's like saying we might as well round up all the GSDs and kennel them because a bunch of them DID bite people so hey, maybe mine was going to bite your dad so lets get rid of them all!  Um....no.  

Like Cassidy'sMom said, I have no problems with dealing justice - charging, trying, sentencing.  I don't think anyone here is advocating for terrorists to be turned loose run at large and bomb our communities...

There is a lot of day dreaming going on here.....

You guy have a clue how most of these people get scooped up? Most of them are raids through suspected terrorist hide outs......when there are weapons and other things on the premises. Some of them get killed some of them get picked up, simple.......I have military members in the family who report on a weekly basis......I am sorry, this is not a conventional war situation at all ....these people don't wear uniforms and are identified by their garb who's side they are on.....very difficult in war fare........don't play armchair quarterback......just sayin'

I have not actually read the decision, but I suspect that a large part of this decision (whether it was stated or not) was based on the fact that we have no evidence regarding the guilt of many of these people. Our SC did their job in providing a check/balance to the laws and practices of the other branches of our government.

Thank the lord that is starting to happen! It is high time that the legislative, executive and judicial branches all do their jobs. There was a reason our government was set up with this system and we have suffered in recent years when this balance disappeared.

Also, most people will admit to anything under torture. Our own "war hero" John McCain denounced the USA when he was being held, and I don't think any of us believe for a minute that he meant what he said.

ETA: was missing a word. 

Liesje

Exactly.  Terrorists have not been bombing inner-city elementary schools in the Midwest.

OK, we'll change location....what if you were living in a more "Interesting" area and your DH fell victim to a terrorist attack?