Two military judges have ruled with respect to two Guantanamo prisoners that their combatant status review tribunals determined only that the prisoners were “enemy combatants” but did not make the necessary determination that they were “alien unlawful enemy combatants.” The determination that an enemy combatant is “unlawful” (for example, fights without uniform or conceals his weapon) was a necessary prerequisite for the military tribunal to acquire jurisdiction over the individual.
Under directives from President Bush and senior Defense Department officials, military officials here have held detainees after finding simply that they were “enemy combatants.â€
This legal deficiency is potentially an issue for all 380 Guantanamo detainees. Everybody at Guantanamo is an enemy combatant, but that doesn’t mean the combat was unlawful. One of the detainees was a 15 year old kid at the time he was apprehended. He apparently threw a grenade during a firefight in Afghanistan. War is hell; throwing a grenade during a firefight is presumptively “legal.”
There’s that darn Constitution getting in the way of the Decider.
Silly piece of paper.
You do get the feeling in a lot of these that fighting against the United States was the “illegal” action that got them into trouble.
Since most of those GITMO detainees were just delivering lunch to friends near troublespots,(just misunderstood muslim youth) the most logical way to dispose of the problem is to transfer them to John Edwards home, he has promised to close GITMO and of course he has the extra room.
Since this whole “war on terror” turned out to be just a silly misunderstanding, I’m sure John & Elizabeth have the welcome mat out!
Why not just shoot them in the head and be done with it? If the sole desire is to dispose of people we are certain are terrible people who have done terrible things, why try to dress it up with a faux due process?
Well, that certainly is a viable and less expensive alternative to the current status quo of nutritious meals, excercise, prayer time and 24-7 access to the Johnnie Cochran of their choice.
I think you misinterpret our “sole” desire, though. It is to “dispose” of people hell-bent on “disposing” of us before they do, in fact “dispose of us”.
Well, first, you have to separate those who want (and actively seek) to dispose of us from those we merely think want to do so. Any suggestions?
The Bush administration hasn’t proven to be notably competent with respect to anything else, but probably we could just trust them on matters of life and death.
Um, we’ve already trusted him with the lives of those serving in our armed forces …
Let’s impeach the president for lying
And leading our country into war
Abusing all the power that we gave him
And shipping all our money out the door
He’s the man who hired all the criminals
The White House shadows who hide behind closed doors
And bend the facts to fit with their new stories
Of why we have to send our men to war
– Neil Young, “Let’s Impeach The President”, Living With War
Ah yes, the THC laden ramblings of a once great musician. How profound.
Well, it’s more profound than a Congress that’s going to let the President use the Constitution as toilet paper so they can do better in the next elections.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the Democrats only problem with Bush’s unchecked power is that he’s a Republican. Sad.
Wow. Even a THC-soaked musician (from Canada, no less) can see this administration for what it is.
Look, some of the people at Gitmo are terrorists. Some were fighting us conventionally, defending their country against invasion. It really appears that Bush has tried to make it illegal to fight against the U.S., period. It’s really simple–if they’re terrorists, they we must have evidence of that. Try them, then imprison or execute them as appropriate. But at some point you have to ask if the government has *anything* on most of these people, since it is so reluctant to give them due process.