I'm sure there are some TT members who would say that it is acceptable to hold 'suspected' terrorists in this way, but ask yourself, do you really trust your government enough not to make mistakes? What if your front door was kicked down at 5 in the morning and you were dragged off with a hood over your head to one of these places, your pleas of innocence falling on deaf ears?
Guardian: US accused of holding terror suspects on prison ships
You are viewing a low-graphics version of this page. Click the headline to view full version:
US accused of continuing the practice of rendition
Prison ships being used to hold terror suspects
No one really cares I guess.
Many do. The problem is there seems to be absolutely nothing anybody can do.
What Pas said.
And this topic has been covered in a variety of ways already, so perhaps others, like me, are tired of repeating themselves. Search "terror" or "torture" and you'll see the goods.
And this topic has been covered in a variety of ways already, so perhaps others, like me, are tired of repeating themselves. Search "terror" or "torture" and you'll see the goods.
As citizens of our respective (democratic) countries, we normally feel safe; it is even a country's duty to protect its citizens abroad.
However, the open suspension of Habeas Corpus (necessity of an arrest warrant issued by a judge and the right to a review of remand) by the Military Commissions Act 2006 for "unlawful enemy combattants", a term created in the war on terror and denoting someone who is neither considered a civil detainee nor a prisoner of war (who would have certain rights), is a slippery slope. Fortunately, there are legal initiatives to restore Habeas Corpus, and court rulings: "Judges say US can't hold man as 'combatant'", Spiegel Online Int., 12 July 2007
The suspension of Habeas Corpus actually only regarded non-U.S. citizens, and as an additional safeguard considering the Administration's dubious legal position, Guantánamo and also prison ships (if they exist) make sure the "enemy combatants" aren't detained in U.S. mainland. Nonetheless, there have been exceptions, U.S. citizen José Padilla, who was locked up for 3 and a half years as an enemy combattant, and there have been two "aliens" detained in U.S. mainland without the usual rights of a prisoner.
So the interpretation of the Habeas Corpus suspension is not even consistent within itself, and all this is quite frightening (besides being a juridical jungle, which I only understand superficially). I don't think the weakening of civil rights without people really being aware is limited to the U.S.
However, the open suspension of Habeas Corpus (necessity of an arrest warrant issued by a judge and the right to a review of remand) by the Military Commissions Act 2006 for "unlawful enemy combattants", a term created in the war on terror and denoting someone who is neither considered a civil detainee nor a prisoner of war (who would have certain rights), is a slippery slope. Fortunately, there are legal initiatives to restore Habeas Corpus, and court rulings: "Judges say US can't hold man as 'combatant'", Spiegel Online Int., 12 July 2007
The suspension of Habeas Corpus actually only regarded non-U.S. citizens, and as an additional safeguard considering the Administration's dubious legal position, Guantánamo and also prison ships (if they exist) make sure the "enemy combatants" aren't detained in U.S. mainland. Nonetheless, there have been exceptions, U.S. citizen José Padilla, who was locked up for 3 and a half years as an enemy combattant, and there have been two "aliens" detained in U.S. mainland without the usual rights of a prisoner.
So the interpretation of the Habeas Corpus suspension is not even consistent within itself, and all this is quite frightening (besides being a juridical jungle, which I only understand superficially). I don't think the weakening of civil rights without people really being aware is limited to the U.S.
I do not dare to discuss this subject as long as Schäuble is in office.
QUOTE (leeza @ Jun 2 2008, 1:03 pm) 
What Pas said.
And this topic has been covered in a variety of ways already, so perhaps others, like me, are tired of repeating themselves. Search "terror" or "torture" and you'll see the goods.
And this topic has been covered in a variety of ways already, so perhaps others, like me, are tired of repeating themselves. Search "terror" or "torture" and you'll see the goods.
Yes, the topic of rendition and terror, and torture has been discussed before, but if you click on the link, you will see that this is recent article. Just because it's been discussed before, doesn't mean it can't be discussed again.
QUOTE (FirstCitizen @ Jun 2 2008, 6:11 pm)
Just because it's been discussed before, doesn't mean it can't be discussed again.
Absolutely , the problem is there just seems to be nothing anybody can do about it so you end up giving in. Which I know is the tactic they use.
It's a little like Zimbabwe where we know it's happening but are powerless to do anything there as well.
You are viewing a low fidelity version of this page. Click to view the full page.