Should the United States have the right to execute War on Terrorism POW's?

[Roland]

"Have they (The prisoners) been given any status leagally as of yet?"

Legal status as POW could only be acknowledged, not "given". As far as one can gather esp. from that Walker guy they are treated as POWs so far. As said this does not exclude criminal investigation, arrest, prosecution etc. In an early stage I'd say nothing speaks against holding POWs also as material witnesses with a tendency to get away if they can - and those (suspects/witnesses) seem to be the only one the US is interested in anyway.

[DanS]

Point of information: we have about 350 of these prisoners. The Washington Post reports that Guantanimo (sp?) Bay is being prepared for a couple thousand detainees.

Again, we have the "right" to throw the book at these guys and then execute those who are convicted. The Geneva Convention doesn't preclude it, because we would and have done the same in the past in-country, even with our own citizens. So the headline of this thread is pointless.

Further, whether the trial is open or closed, military or civilian, has nothing to do with the headline of this thread. In any of these cases, we'll throw the book at them and convict them of piracy or whatever. And we might execute them, if warranted. As if on cue, the Washington Post does a piracy story...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11095-2002Jan7.html

The whole point of this stupid troll thread is that Horsie and many others don't like the death penalty. It's this hopelessly inane argument that a trial with the possibility of premature death at the end is unfair throughout. I don't support the death penalty, but this inane argument that some Euros trot out doesn't wash in the US or indeed much of the world, including Afghanistan and the Arab world.

They'll be represented ably in court. A court will hear their cases. If they are guilty of the crimes of which they are accused, they'll be convicted. There will be ultimate judicial review of these cases (Supreme Court). Some may be executed. Case closed.

[Roland]

Well I don't have objections of international law on the US death penalty in these cases, just ethical ones. I'm more interested in this part:

"They'll be represented ably in court. A court will hear their cases. If they are guilty of the crimes of which they are accused, they'll be convicted. There will be ultimate judicial review of these cases (Supreme Court). Some may be executed. Case closed."

The initial proposal of Bush, Ashcroft and fellow clowns was more like a star chamber commission, no appeals, cabiner justice style, with jurisdiction extending to domestic cases as far as foreigners are concerned. It's unclear what will become of this, but your optimistic description above is not assured.

[DanS]

"just ethical ones"

Which a lot of people do, even in the United States. Even me. But I recognize that it's the law of the land and even Mr. Taleban can get a very fair trial in spite of it.

"It's unclear what will become of this, but your optimistic description above is not assured."

The administration has been tight-lipped about this. So I'm not even sure that what you describe as a proposal was ever a proposal. But anyway, I agree that what will become of this is unclear.

We know kangaroo courts all too well, so we will know one when we see it. Most likely, since it's at the federal level, these prisoners will be treated like goddamn princes at the expense of the US treasury. No attorneys dozing during trial for them.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Roland
The initial proposal of Bush, Ashcroft and fellow clowns was more like a star chamber commission, no appeals, cabiner justice style, with jurisdiction extending to domestic cases as far as foreigners are concerned.

Various features of the military commissions:

1) Open trials may be permitted.
2) The participation of civilian judges and defense counsel will be allowed.
3) They will also have some form of appellate review.

All this was laid out in a recent Executive order issued by Bush according to the American Society of International Law. Perhaps you've been listening to your own equivilent of Fox News.

[Roland]

"All this was laid out in a recent Executive order issued by Bush"

IIRC the "proposal" I mentioned didn't get beyond the draft status and was watered down to something that's not very clear. "some form of appellate review" - uhm... well...

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by DanS
We know kangaroo courts all too well, so we will know one when we see it.

How will you be able to see what happens inside a closed court of a military tribunal?

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Chris 62

No offense to this poster, but this proves nothing.

El mentions Che being an "inspiration", and inspiration for what?
To be seen on mugs and T-shirts?

While Che is a fashion statement in North America, what has been his influence on Marxtist rebels in Latin and South America, such as the Shining Path? Does his life story cause others to pick up arms?

[DanS]

Tingkai: we will see the rules under which the trials are conducted. Even though these haven't been set in stone at this time, they eventually will be and then everybody can make their own judgment about them.

[faded glory]

Originally posted by Tingkai


How will you be able to see what happens inside a closed court of a military tribunal?

Umm.....they generally...tell you


Besides, we have no idea what happens in federal courts or the supreme court. Yet its very fair.

You're right. Just goes to show the power of a "martyr's" death.

Chegitz is hardly a legend or myth.And Latin America is that kind of enviroment. As Dan said.....Pancho Villa could of drew a bigger crowd.

Does his life story cause others to pick up arms?

No...

They will also have some form of appellate review.

Like in the old Soviet Union eh? All you gotta do is sign this here confession..and we will spare your life.Thats your appeal..... Then they killed them anyway

[Tingkai]

Faded glory;

Re: your comment about Che not being an inspiration to future revolutionaries, fo you know that for fact or is that an assumption? I'm not arguing with you. I'm just curious if anyone knows how Che is generally perceived in South and Central America. He's famous in North America, is he still famous there?

[faded glory]

The Chegitz Gueverra, the Docter did not inspire anybody to take up arms. The Insurgencys were already happening...and people like Gueverra were nothing more than motivational icon's.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by faded glory
The Chegitz Gueverra, the Docter did not inspire anybody to take up arms. The Insurgencys were already happening...and people like Gueverra were nothing more than motivational icon's.

So Che did not inspire anyone, but he did motivate them?

And what do you base your statements upon? Are you from South or Central America?

[faded glory]

Nope.....


*runs for cover*

[Jon Miller]

AH: Lots of Martyrs have mattered. There are even many non religious martyrs that have mattered a lot (but the number of religious ones alone have mattered). Matter /= Remembered

yes
the US shoudl have the right

Jon Miller