Supreme Court Blocks War Crime Tribunals at Gitmo!

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
No, we're guilty of violating the GC.

But violating the GC is a war crime, in'it?

[MichaeltheGreat]

There's no such thing as a "war crime" per se. There's also no specified "punishment" for violation of GC provisions, and nothing to assign such charges to any particular jurisdiction.

We're just naughty boys who are supposed to behave.

[chequita guevara]

[GePap]

Originally posted by Vesayen



If they ask you ANY questions related to the aleged crime when you feel you are coerced by them, or you are unable to leave, you have to be read your Miranda rights.

You'd have to toss someone into a holding cell without almost talking at all if you don't read them their Miranda rights so its usually best to do it immediatly.

Sorry, this is too funny.....

[GePap]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
There's no such thing as a "war crime" per se. There's also no specified "punishment" for violation of GC provisions, and nothing to assign such charges to any particular jurisdiction.

We're just naughty boys who are supposed to behave.

Given that a variety of Serbs, Croats, and Bosnian Muslims have been tried and convicted by a tribunal for war crimes, I think that this statement is no longer valid. Law has moved on, and war crimes are being codified.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Me thinks MTG was just being sarcastic.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by GePap


Given that a variety of Serbs, Croats, and Bosnian Muslims have been tried and convicted by a tribunal for war crimes, I think that this statement is no longer valid. Law has moved on, and war crimes are being codified.

Crimes against humanity, you mean?

[Sikander]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Now about my Miranda warning question.

Carmen Miranda warning?

You have the right to wear fruit on your head. If you choose not to wear fruit on your head, any fashion decision you make can be used against you by mean girls.

You have a right to an accent. If you do not have an accent or cannot afford an accent, one will be appointed for you by the court.



[paraphrased imperfectly from a National Lampoon in the 1970s]

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
There's no such thing as a "war crime" per se. There's also no specified "punishment" for violation of GC provisions, and nothing to assign such charges to any particular jurisdiction.

Mike,
I don't get to say this very often, so I'm going to take my time and enjoy this.



You're wrong.



Wow, so that's what that feels like.



Okay, enough silliness.

Sidney Blumenthal:

When O'Connor was on the court, she was considered to be the key swing vote. Now that pivotal spot belongs to Anthony Kennedy. His opinion is worthy of intense interest, however, for more than that reason. Kennedy ventures into territory where others have not. His disdain for Bush's position is palpable. He cites Justice Robert Jackson's famous opinion in the 1952 Youngstown case: "When the President takes measures incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress, his power is at its lowest ebb." But Kennedy quotes Jackson not simply to expose the depth to which Bush has sunk. He is building toward another conclusion -- those who violate the Geneva Conventions can be prosecuted for war crimes.

The Geneva Conventions, after all, constitute an international treaty, enacted by the Congress. "By Act of Congress, moreover," Kennedy writes, "violations of Common Article 3 are considered 'war crimes,' punishable as federal offenses, when committed by or against United States nationals and military personnel. See 18 U.S.C. §2441. There should be no doubt, then, that Common Article 3 is part of the law of war as that term is used in §821."

Kennedy moves on to discuss why Bush's military commissions do not meet the "general standards" of "civilized peoples." He has left dangling the open question of war crimes. But the opinion of a justice of the Supreme Court speaking in the majority is not merely a theory. Of all the justices, Kennedy, the swing moderate, has raised the most potentially volatile issue.

emphasis mine