Egyptian returnee 'faces torture'

[Jhhnn]

From Rahvin-

"A strict interpretation of the constitution would in fact limit protections of the constitution to CITIZENS, the court has only stretched those protections to those areas contained in or part of america. Gitmo is unique, the treaty is phrased such that the ground and base is Cuban, we do not own it, we lease it. Therefore, even though we have a base there it is NOT part of America, we simply occupy it's ground as long as we pay the lease."

I'd suggest that you actually read the document, rather than taking some right-pundits' word for it. The constitution clearly says "citizen" when it means citizen, and "people", "person" or "accused" when it applies to anybody... reference particularly the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments...

http://www.law.emory.edu/FEDERAL/usconst/amend.html#art-4

You're starting to do the little squirm dance wrt gitmo, attempting to modify the question to suit the answer you want to give. Gitmo either falls under the rule of law of Cuba, or of the United States, take your pick. It can't be neither, as you'd like to pretend.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: Condor

Originally posted by: Strk

Originally posted by: Condor

OK, do some real research. Go through the history of prison camps, compare them and tell me what you find. Put your canary ass where your alligator mouth is!

Remove the insults and try and formulate a question. I said they're not POWs and that what you said is nonsense. And perhaps you shouldn't assume things. Is what is happening it Gitmo comparable to real POW camps? Hardly, but that doesn't make it right.

Perhaps you should try and make an argument that doesn't involve attacking the person or doing a blanket statement like "silly liberals?"

Well, go and seek some facts then. Research Batann and some of the past camps and find just one that was more humane than Gitmo. If they are not POWs, it is simple due to a narrow definition drafted in a document that they are not signatories of. They were at war with us and we took them prisoner! They are being treated better than any such have been treated in human history. If it ain't so, prove it!

Get this one through your head: I am not comparing Gitmo to POW camps. I am not saying Gitmo is as bad as POW camps in the past have been. I do not know why you seem to think that is what I am saying, especially since I've already said that I'm not comparing them to other POW camps.

They are not POWs, the administration has said that, otherwise we could not keep them indefinitely and that there would not be any issues of whether or not they are covered by the Geneva Conventions. That's the issue with the whole "unlawful combatants."