Released detainee now Yemen al-Qaida commander

[DiveCon]

Most every single official in charge of formulating a response policy wise and other had no combat experience and many of them ran away from duty when called. Combat experience might not have been needed (it wasn't in my opinion) to deal adequately with 911, but couple that with the cocky spirit and insecurities of the Bush/Cheney WH and their management style and you get what we got. Bad fukin' policy all around, from going after career intel and CIA assets who had credible opinions, to Bremer, to GITMO, to Abu G.....

thanks, but that had nothing to do with why i asked that question of Ray, i'll wait for his reply

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

They can't be tried. Their 4th, 5th, and 6th amendment rights have been violated, no?
Their cases will be thrown out by any judge. It comes down to keeping gitmo open, killing them, or releasing them.

have the courts ruled on what rights they have and do not have?

 

[WillowTree]

STOP ADVOCATING the USA ACT LIKE the NAZIS!!!

you are a total idiot, you prove it with each keystroke.

 

[rayboyusmc]

No, they sent me to Westpac and then cancelled my orders in country.

Now tell me what this has to do with our locking up these prisoners and never trying them so that now as was stated:

Their cases will be thrown out by any judge. It comes down to keeping gitmo open, killing them, or releasing them.

That is American justice?

This was the Bush/Cheney doctrine. They will be held accountable for creating this mess.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The Guantánamo Bay Detention Camp is a United States detention center operated by Joint Task Force Guantánamo since 2001 in Guantánamo Bay Naval Base, which is on the shore of Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.[1]

The detainment areas consist of three camps in the base: Camp Delta (which includes Camp Echo), Camp Iguana, and Camp X-Ray (which has been closed). The facility is often referred to as the Guantánamo, or Gitmo.

The detainees currently held as of June 2008 have been classified by the United States as "enemy combatants." After claims were made that detainees were not entitled to any of the protections of the Geneva Conventions, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld on 29 June 2006 that they were entitled to the minimal protections listed under its Common Article 3.

Following this, on 7 July 2006, the Department of Defense issued an internal memo stating that prisoners will in the future be entitled to protection under Common Article 3.

President Barack Obama announced on 21 January 2009 that the Guantanamo Bay detention facility will be shut down within a year.

From the 1970s onwards, the Guantánamo Bay Naval Base was used to house Cuban and Haitian refugees intercepted on the high seas. In the early 1990s, it held refugees who fled Haiti in Camp Bulkeley until United States District Court Judge Sterling Johnson Jr. declared the camp unconstitutional on 8 June 1993, and the last Haitian migrants departed in late 1995.

In June 2005, the United States Department of Defense announced that a unit of defense contractor Halliburton would build a new $1 billion USD detention facility and security perimeter around the base.

Since 7 October 2001, when the current war in Afghanistan began, 775 detainees have been brought to Guantánamo. Of these, approximately 420 have been released without charge. As of May 2008, approximately 270 detainees remain.

More than a fifth are cleared for release but must nevertheless remain indefinitely because countries are reluctant to accept them.

Three have been convicted of various charges:

* David Hicks was found guilty under retrospective legislation introduced in 2006 of providing material support to terrorists in 2001.

* Salim Hamdan took a job as chauffeur driving Osama bin Laden.

* Ali al-Bahlul made a video celebrating the attack on the USS Cole (DDG-67)Template:WP Ships USS instances.

Of those still incarcerated, U.S. officials said they intend to eventually put 60 to 80 on trial and free the rest.

The cell in which David Hicks, an Australian Guantánamo Bay prisoner, was detained.

On 22 September 2004, ten prisoners were brought from Afghanistan.

In July 2005, 242 detainees were moved out of Guantánamo, including 173 that were released without charge, and 69 transferred to the governments of other countries, according to the U.S. Department of Defense.

By November 2005, 358 of the then-505 detainees held at Guantánamo Bay had had Administrative Review Board hearings. Of these, 3% were granted and were awaiting release, 20% were to be transferred, 37% were to be further detained at Guantánamo, and no decision had been made in 40% of the cases.

The Center for Constitutional Rights has prepared a biography of some of the prisoners currently being held in Guantánamo Prison.

On 6 September 2006, American President George W. Bush confirmed, for the first time, that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had held "high-value detainees" in secret interrogation centers.[citation needed]

On 11 February 2008, the US Department of Defense charged Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi Binalshibh, Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi, Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali and Walid Bin Attash for the September 11 attacks under the military commission system, as established under the Military Commissions Act of 2006.

Guantanamo Bay detention camp - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

just the facts.

 

[rayboyusmc]

There was a reason this guy was detained, and there was a reason he couldn't be tried.

Actualy, you have no idea if they had a real reason to hold him. Some of the prisoners were captured on the battlefield, others were turned in by neighbors.

After five years, if you can't find something to charge someone with, then maybe they didn't fucking do anything.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

thanks, but that had nothing to do with why i asked that question of Ray, i'll wait for his reply

really? so irrelevant, eh?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

you are a total idiot, you prove it with each keystroke.

nope. your justification was "The Nazis didn't do it so why should we?"

 

[WillowTree]

nope. your justification was "The Nazis didn't do it so why should we?"

becuase I think prisoners of war fall under the Geneva convention. Not the criminal courts. Is this true? Do we or do we not adhere to the Geneva Convention. Did John McCain get a fair trial. He was held for five years without a trial wasn't he?

 

[DiveCon]

really? so irrelevant, eh?

no, but you don't have the ability to answer for Ray

 

[DiveCon]

becuase I think prisoners of war fall under the Geneva convention. Not the criminal courts. Is this true? Do we or do we not adhere to the Geneva Convention. Did John McCain get a fair trial. He was held for five years without a trial wasn't he?

except the people at Gitmo didnt fall under the status of PoW's according to the Geneva Conventions

 

[WillowTree]

except the people at Gitmo didnt fall under the status of PoW's according to the Geneva Conventions

why not? were not many of them picked off the battle field in Afghanistan?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The Guantánamo Bay Detention Camp is a United States detention center operated by Joint Task Force Guantánamo since 2001 in Guantánamo Bay Naval Base, which is on the shore of Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.[1]

The detainment areas consist of three camps in the base: Camp Delta (which includes Camp Echo), Camp Iguana, and Camp X-Ray (which has been closed). The facility is often referred to as the Guantánamo, or Gitmo.

The detainees currently held as of June 2008 have been classified by the United States as "enemy combatants." After claims were made that detainees were not entitled to any of the protections of the Geneva Conventions, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld on 29 June 2006 that they were entitled to the minimal protections listed under its Common Article 3.

Following this, on 7 July 2006, the Department of Defense issued an internal memo stating that prisoners will in the future be entitled to protection under Common Article 3.

President Barack Obama announced on 21 January 2009 that the Guantanamo Bay detention facility will be shut down within a year.

From the 1970s onwards, the Guantánamo Bay Naval Base was used to house Cuban and Haitian refugees intercepted on the high seas. In the early 1990s, it held refugees who fled Haiti in Camp Bulkeley until United States District Court Judge Sterling Johnson Jr. declared the camp unconstitutional on 8 June 1993, and the last Haitian migrants departed in late 1995.

In June 2005, the United States Department of Defense announced that a unit of defense contractor Halliburton would build a new $1 billion USD detention facility and security perimeter around the base.

Since 7 October 2001, when the current war in Afghanistan began, 775 detainees have been brought to Guantánamo. Of these, approximately 420 have been released without charge. As of May 2008, approximately 270 detainees remain.

More than a fifth are cleared for release but must nevertheless remain indefinitely because countries are reluctant to accept them.

Three have been convicted of various charges:

* David Hicks was found guilty under retrospective legislation introduced in 2006 of providing material support to terrorists in 2001.

* Salim Hamdan took a job as chauffeur driving Osama bin Laden.

* Ali al-Bahlul made a video celebrating the attack on the USS Cole (DDG-67)Template:WP Ships USS instances.

Of those still incarcerated, U.S. officials said they intend to eventually put 60 to 80 on trial and free the rest.

The cell in which David Hicks, an Australian Guantánamo Bay prisoner, was detained.

On 22 September 2004, ten prisoners were brought from Afghanistan.

In July 2005, 242 detainees were moved out of Guantánamo, including 173 that were released without charge, and 69 transferred to the governments of other countries, according to the U.S. Department of Defense.

By November 2005, 358 of the then-505 detainees held at Guantánamo Bay had had Administrative Review Board hearings. Of these, 3% were granted and were awaiting release, 20% were to be transferred, 37% were to be further detained at Guantánamo, and no decision had been made in 40% of the cases.

The Center for Constitutional Rights has prepared a biography of some of the prisoners currently being held in Guantánamo Prison.

On 6 September 2006, American President George W. Bush confirmed, for the first time, that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had held "high-value detainees" in secret interrogation centers.[citation needed]

On 11 February 2008, the US Department of Defense charged Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi Binalshibh, Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi, Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali and Walid Bin Attash for the September 11 attacks under the military commission system, as established under the Military Commissions Act of 2006.

Guantanamo Bay detention camp - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

just the facts.

 

[DiveCon]

why not? were not many of them picked off the battle field in Afghanistan?

because there are conditions that must be met for them to qualify
its all listed what constitutes a PoW in the Geneva Conventions
they dont meet those conditions

 

[WillowTree]

because there are conditions that must be met for them to qualify
its all listed what constitutes a PoW in the Geneva Conventions
they dont meet those conditions

Oh, I think I understand, I remember now, is this why. "they didn't wear uniforms or represent a country"?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

becuase I think prisoners of war fall under the Geneva convention. Not the criminal courts. Is this true? Do we or do we not adhere to the Geneva Convention. Did John McCain get a fair trial. He was held for five years without a trial wasn't he?

John McCain is on the side of the angels (and the red sox and me) on this one.

How our prisoners are treated by countries has n-e-v-e-r been the standard by which have acted towards holding prisoners from those countries.

POWs do fall under the Geneva Convention and you need to show me who says they don't. Who are you arguing with, yourself? .

Who are these POWs you speak of?

Court gives detainees habeas rights
Thursday, June 12th, 2008 10:08 am | Lyle Denniston | Print This Post

Email this • Share on Facebook • Digg This! (40 Diggs, 15 comments)

UPDATE, 1:03 p.m. The District Court judges in Washington who will hear the detainees’ habeas challenges mandated by the Supreme Court will meet soon to decide how to proceed, that Court announced shortly after the Supreme Court ruled. Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth said “I expect we’ll call in the lawyers for both sides to see what suggestions they have for how we can approach our task most effectively and efficiently.” The press release can be read here.

——————

In a stunning blow to the Bush Administration in its war-on-terrorism policies, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign nationals held at Guantanamo Bay have a right to pursue habeas challenges to their detention. The Court, dividing 5-4, ruled that Congress had not validly taken away habeas rights. If Congress wishes to suspend habeas, it must do so only as the Constitution allows — when the country faces rebellion or invasion.

The Court stressed that it was not ruling that the detainees are entitled to be released — that is, entitled to have writs issued to end their confinement. That issue, it said, is left to the District Court judges who will be hearing the challenges. The Court also said that “we do not address whether the President has authority to detain” individuals during the war on terrorism, and hold them at the U.S. Naval base in Cuba; that, too, it said, is to be considered first by the District judges.

The Court also declared that detainees do not have to go through the special civilian court review process that Congress created in 2005, since that is not an adequate substitute for habeas rights. The Court refused to interpret the Detainee Treatment Act — as the Bush Administration had suggested — to include enough legal protection to make it an adequate replacement for habeas. Congress, it concluded, unconstitutionally suspended the writ in enacting that Act.

The Court also found serious defects in the process that the Pentagon set up in 2004 to decide which prisoners are to be designated as “enemy combatants” — the status that leads to their continued confinement. This process is the system of so-called Combatant Status Review Tribunals. The procedures used by CSRTs, the Court said, “fall well short of the procedures and adversarial mechanisms that would eliminate the need for habeas corpus review.”

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s opinion for the majority in Boumediene v. Bush (06-1195) and Al Odah v. U.S. (06-1196) was an almost rhapsodic review of the history of the Great Writ. The Suspension Clause, he wrote, “protects the rights of the detained by a means consistent with the essential design of the Constitution. It ensures that, except during periods of formal suspension, the Judiciary will have a time-tested device, the writ, to maintain the ‘delicate balance of governance’ that is itself the surest safeguard of liberty.” Those who wrote the Constitution, he added, “deemed the writ to be an essential mechanism in the separation-of-powers scheme.”

Even though the two political branches — the President and Congress — had agreed to take away the detainees’ habeas rights, Kennedy said those branches do not have “the power to switch the Constitution on or off at will.”

In a second ruling on habeas, the Court decided unanimously that U.S. citizens held by U.S. military forces in Iraq have a right to file habeas cases, because it does extend to them, but it went on to rule that federal judges do not have any authority to bar the transfer of those individuals to Iraqi authorites to face prosecution or punishment for crimes committed in that country in violation of Iraqi laws.



================================

Posted Jan 9, 2009, 11:10 am CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss

About 175 cases filed by Guantanamo detainees seeking a review of their enemy combatant designations won’t get a federal appeals court hearing under a decision today by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

The appeals court ruled it no longer has jurisdiction to hear challenges to enemy combatant determinations because of a Supreme Court ruling granting Guantanamo detainees a right to habeas corpus, report SCOTUSblog and How Appealing.

Because the Supreme Court struck down the section of a federal law barring habeas appeals, the law’s provisions for enemy combatant reviews must also fall, the court said in its opinion (PDF posted by How Appealing).

 

[DiveCon]

Oh, I think I understand, I remember now, is this why. "they didn't wear uniforms or represent a country"?

thats part of it
but yeah

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Oh, I think I understand, I remember now, is this why. "they didn't wear uniforms or represent a country"?

gangs of criminals do not. that is correct.

 

[elvis]

except the people at Gitmo didnt fall under the status of PoW's according to the Geneva Conventions

I believe since they were out of uniform, Geneva doesn't apply, correct?

 

[DiveCon]

I believe since they were out of uniform, Geneva doesn't apply, correct?

thats just one of the disqualifiers