No. Nor do these f*cking sick trolls.

We are better than them. We didn’t behead this guy, did we?

Comment by m12 — May 31, 2007 @ 11:45 am

But he’s just as dead as if we had.

Comment by Toliver

Nobody her is indifferent or supports jihadists. That is the typical right wing talking point.

-Toliver

Denbeaux is a professor of law at Seton Hall in New Jersey.

Comment by erock — May 31, 2007 @ 1:15 pm

His son was the coucil for detainees. None of whom have been found to be terrorists. Combatants at best.

-Toliver

Denbeaux is a professor of law at Seton Hall in New Jersey.

Comment by ForTruth — May 31, 2007 @ 12:58 pm

Agreed.

The international law that Exley cites as justification for holding these people prisoner does not in any way apply to the “War on Terror.” Terror will never sign a treaty and thus the conflict will never be over. So to apply your international law in this case, Exley, is to condemn these men to death with no trial. If you would prefer to label them as “unlawful combatants,” which arguably may be more apt, then under the Geneva convention they are entitled to trials to prove their guilt or innocence of actions that made them an “unlawful combatant.” This was the case in the Luanda Trial regarding mercenaries fighting in Angola.

Now, that said, how can we expect to be a beacon of democracy for the budding nations of Afghanistan and Iraq to emulate if we don’t lead by example. This is expecially true when it comes to the treatment of THEIR citizens.

Ercok,

Denbeaux is council for terrorists. I’ll still give that 28 page paper a read, but I think I know what concerns are coming, as they’ve most likely been addressed.

David, the Red Cross was at Gitmo. Torture? Hardly.

The people held at Gitmo have been subjected to a series of violations of the Geneva Conventions. They’ve been arbitrarily removed from the place of capture, denied access to lawyers and the Red Cross, held in solitary, tortured, and denied due process of law.

The tribunals they are only now beginning to face are also contrary to international law. And it’s taken this long to set them up because all earlier versions were so obviously kangaroo courts. Sadly, journalists see these too as inadequate.

The Republican trolls on this thread seem to demand all rights when poor Scooter or Gonzo go before the courts, but they chuck everything into the trashbin when the religion, skin color, and nationality doesn’t meet their standard.

Gitmo is NOT a POW camp. It’s a concentration camp. And torture happens there. The terms the WH uses to keep these men prisoners are deceitful. Lawful or unlawful combatants do have rights and these prisoners are denied all rights.

What is most offensive are the comments by the trolls wanting to exact vengence on these men for crimes committed since they were arrested by other people in other countries. By this logic, I should arrest and torture any Calfornian simply because a guy got mugged in LA. Where did this kind of bizarre thinking come from? And you wonder why the world hates the USA.

If you read the article it most certainly does support my assertion. Also, read the 3rd link I sent you. It cites a study which you can find here:

http://law.shu.edu/news/guantanamo_report_final_2_08_06.pdf

But by all means, don’t let facts get in your way.

Thank you, PLC. :-)

You may call me Zooey, or more simply, don’t address me at all. Thanks.

He’s dead, Exley — much to the delight of the more bloodthirsty monsters here.

The AP coumn doesn’t support your accusation. Be carefull with wiki, as anyone can edit an entry, including yours truly.

Zooely,

Tell me all you know of POWs, unlawful enemy combatants, enemy combatants, spies and saboteurs.

What’s “insupportable” is the modern liberal’s weakness in the face of an evil that’s currently seeking the means to destroy entire Western cities.

Excellent points! Kudos.

I agree with you in part Exley. However, who exactly are we at war with? Claiming that we can detain indefinitely anyone who is deemed to be an enemy combatant is comparable to saying that we can indefinitely detain a 16 year old holding a joint since we are currently engaged in a war on drugs. It’s all just a bit absurd and the U.S. can and should do better.