Article

2004-11-09 Home Front: WoT

Court Ruling Halts Guantanamo Proceedings

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2004-11-09 11:44:28 PM|| || Front Page|| [8 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Of course, a Bill Clinton appointed judge.

Posted by Capt America 2004-11-09 12:28:13 AM|| 2004-11-09 12:28:13 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 "He added that the judge's ruling ``has put terrorism on the same legal footing as legitimate methods of waging war."
-Exactly right. If this is allowed to stand, we're back to fighting terrorism with a law-enforcement model

Thats not how I read it. Means terrism is a form of warfare.
Since "cut-aways" are the only way to avoid nuclear response for a nuclear nation, expect to see more terrorism if we don't come down like a bag of hammers against terrorists, and states we suspect sponsor them.

hint hint, China is not the friend is seems to be.

Posted by flash91 2004-11-09 7:44:45 AM|| 2004-11-09 7:44:45 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 One more reason Specter must not be chairman; he'd continue approving judges like this if Hildebeast wins in '08 but the trunks keep the senate.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2004-11-09 7:49:40 AM|| 2004-11-09 7:49:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 The judge rejected the U.S. government's contention that Hamdan and other detainees are not prisoners of war but enemy combatants, a classification affording fewer legal protections under the Geneva Conventions.

WTF??? Was this Hamdan guy a member of some country's armed forces? Was he caught wearing a uniform of some country's armed forces? No? The he's not a prisoner of war. For the thousandth time, the Geneva Conventions only apply if both parties abide by it. How difficult is this to understand???????

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-11-09 11:44:12 AM|| 2004-11-09 11:44:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 The bad guys aren't leaving Guantanamo any time soon. If the military needs to jump through a few more legal hoops before certain individuals can be evaluated for release, I don't have a problem with that. It takes years and years for a case to wind its way up to the Supreme Court... and back down again when the SC refuses to hear it. Minds may be changed if the process takes long enough, and in the meantime they can just keep themselves busy as they have been: praying 5x/day and masturbating at their female guards. Not a lifestyle that appeals to me, but who am I to judge?

Posted by trailing wife 2004-11-09 12:41:09 PM|| 2004-11-09 12:41:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 One word solution: Transfer the f*ckers.

Posted by badanov 2004-11-09 1:00:42 PM|| [http://www.rkka.org] 2004-11-09 1:00:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 The Republicans need to start hammering Clintion appointees with every legal maneuver they can, until they either learn to follow the Constitution or they leave the government. We have way too many judges more interested in making law than in applying it.

Posted by Old Patriot 2004-11-09 1:22:22 PM|| [http://users.codenet.net/mweather/default.htm] 2004-11-09 1:22:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 I wonder if there is a legal way to stop this nonsense? These people were captured on a battlefield, not robbing the 7-11. And they are NOT U.S. citizens. How are they even remotely protected by the constitution? They are trying to drag the government into some prolonged legal battle over the detainees. Maybe we should lock up the lawyers as accessory to commit terrorists acts against the U.S.? Many of those in detention have indicated that that is exactly what they will be doing if released. Anyone forgot that Dutch-Arab that was released and told us we could use his signed promise as âtoilet paper?â Now we have lawyers and judges using U.S. and international laws as toilet paper to help these terrorists? Shame shame shame!

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2004-11-09 2:06:16 PM|| 2004-11-09 2:06:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Yes, CS there is a way, but it requires your Congressmen to have a fraction of the huevos that any marine, soldier or airman is demonstrating today. The Constitution gives Congress the power to impeach judges for bad behavior. What is bad behavior? If you listen to the judges and lawyer, they claim the authority to define it. However that is opinion not fact. Congress can by acting, impeaching, define what bad behavior is. Definition by precedent. In time of war, per Senate Joint Resolution 23 Congress could act to stop this behavior right in its tracks.

Posted by Don 2004-11-09 2:31:35 PM|| 2004-11-09 2:31:35 PM|| Front Page Top

15:39 BH
15:39 BH
15:37 BH
15:37 BH
14:51 Old Grouch
14:51 Old Grouch
14:46 Old Grouch
14:46 Old Grouch
00:04 Bomb-a-rama
00:00 Ol_Dirty_American
00:00 SOG475
00:00 Phil Fraering
23:58 Ol_Dirty_American
23:57 SteveS
23:56 SOG475
23:55 Bomb-a-rama
23:54 Mike Sylwester
23:52 Aris Katsaris
23:50 SOG475
23:49 Sock Puppet of Doom
23:40 Aris Katsaris
23:40 OldSpook
23:38 Zenster
23:37 OldSpook