11-28-2006, 02:42 PM | #151 |
Avatar
Join Date: June 16, 2001
Location: Far from where I was, nearer where I wish.
Age: 41
Posts: 563
|
I think we should have Hicks shirts that say
"I spent ten years in Guantanamo Bay and all I got was this lousey t-shirt." How about clocks that go Tick-Hick Tick-Hick Or Tic-Tacs called Tic-Hics "Troi em, they're ah beute!" PMS PMS, go PMS!! Yeah PMS!!! |
11-28-2006, 03:08 PM | #152 | |
40th Level Warrior
Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
|
Quote:
I'm not saying he's innocent -- But it is against everything our country was founded upon to hold someone indefinately without a trial. He's a terrorist you say? PROVE IT! It's obvious, you say? Fine. PROVE IT! |
|
11-28-2006, 05:08 PM | #153 | |
Takhisis Follower
Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Mandurah, West Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 5,073
|
Quote:
I'm not saying he's innocent -- But it is against everything our country was founded upon to hold someone indefinately without a trial. He's a terrorist you say? PROVE IT! It's obvious, you say? Fine. PROVE IT! [/QUOTE]Hiya TL - yup - good points - if it is so obvious he is a terrorist then it really should be so simple to try him and convict him. If he is guilty I want to see this done so that the "free him" brigade (which is just as blind more often than not) can STFU. I have to doubt though that they have much on him if they are so reluctant to give and open and fair hearing. Without a trial ever happening, I can see them releasing him some day (still without trial) after 15 - 25 - 30 - 40 years, when they consider he has served an appropriate sentence. I think that perhaps they have decided to be their own judge, jury, and executioner (of sentence)and if they have that is a travesty of how an enightened civilised western nation approaches the concept of justice.
__________________
Davros was right - just ask JD |
|
11-28-2006, 06:15 PM | #154 | |||
Ma'at - Goddess of Truth & Justice
Join Date: November 15, 2001
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,253
|
Quote:
I'm not saying he's innocent -- But it is against everything our country was founded upon to hold someone indefinately without a trial. He's a terrorist you say? PROVE IT! It's obvious, you say? Fine. PROVE IT! [/QUOTE]TL, I think you missed the point of my "PROVE IT" comment. It was in response to this post by Yorick Quote:
[/QUOTE]and MY response was to THIS: Quote:
[/QUOTE]Because along with the other "enemy combatants" he's been tortured and given treatment it's been legally agreed P.O.W.s are not to receive. [/QUOTE]Like you said - PROVE IT! [/QUOTE]It was SARCASM TL. I was TRYING to point out to Yorick, that the VERY thing that he was condemning the US for - i.e. (holding Hicks without trial and assuming his guilt) was EXACTLY what He was doing on the charges of torture (assuming that the US was guilty of torture)! I said this before: - You can't demand justice if you aren't willing to dispense it fairly and EQUALLY. If you want to argue for someone right's then you damn well better be willing to grant those rights to EVERYONE regardless of what you think of them and whether you think they are guilty or not! If you read back to the earliest posts of mine here and elsewhere (think BLUE), you will find that I endorsed the call for an early trial and resolution of his case. (CHECK IT OUT) My subsequent *arguments* have simply been to clarify some of the legal groundwork for arguments about his status - at least until the torture issue came up. [ 11-28-2006, 06:25 PM: Message edited by: Micah Foehammer ]
__________________
“Every tavern’s an opportunity, I say.” |
|||
11-28-2006, 06:28 PM | #155 | |
40th Level Warrior
Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
|
The ENITRE thread? TLDR, thx, k.
But I've followed this issue quite a bit, and I do need to add this insight. If you go to This Post on Oasis you'll find a "Military Comm's Act Roundup" I prepared. Notice that the most recent case (Hamdan v. Rumsfeld) was the one where the Supreme Court found that the military tribunals were unconstitutional. So, here's the tension. The military/gov't wants to try these accused terrorists in military tribunals. If those tribunals were allowed to go forward, I suspect many suspects would have been tried already. But, there's a big long and drawn out legal rankle in the US as to whether military tribunals are sufficient. In particular, the Geneva Convention (note: treaties supercede all US law except the Constitution) requires "regularly constituted tribunals" for trying prisoners for war crimes. Because Congress and the Supreme Court, not the President, has the authority to make courts, these military tribunals were not "regularly constituted tribunals" and did not fit the Geneva Convention, and were therefore not worth spit -- according to the court. Now, as I said in that article, the Military Comm's Act may have solved this rankle because therein: Quote:
But.... that begs the question... Why do they need a special rump parliament court to try these guys in? Why can't they meet the strictures of a real federal court? Hmmmmmm? |
|
11-28-2006, 06:37 PM | #156 | |
Ma'at - Goddess of Truth & Justice
Join Date: November 15, 2001
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,253
|
Quote:
the Geneva Convention does NOT apply to guerillas, partisans, terrorists and franc-tireuers (para-military groups)! The Hague convention does, and it does NOT afford the same protections to members of those groups that the Third Geneva Convention does. In fact, according to the Hague convention, members of those groups can be SUMMARILY executed WITHOUT legal ramifications for the executing parties! Shocked the blazes out of me, but I saw it in black and white! THAT's why David Hicks status IS all important. And it's a two-edged sword! If he IS a POW, then he gets Geneva Convention protections but he can be held until cessation of hostilities. If he is held under a different classification he is NOT afford protection under the Geneva Convention and it's a WHOLE new ballgame. Somehow, I could not get some people to see the important distinction. Damn, got sucked back in AGAIN! rotfl PS: I'm not disputing the legal status of the tribunals. I will defer to your legal expertise on that one. [img]smile.gif[/img] [ 11-28-2006, 06:39 PM: Message edited by: Micah Foehammer ]
__________________
“Every tavern’s an opportunity, I say.” |
|
11-28-2006, 07:17 PM | #157 | |
Ironworks Moderator
Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: Midlands, South Carolina
Age: 48
Posts: 14,759
|
Quote:
Seriously though...I think this thread always belonged in the Current Events forum, where this degree of debate between two opposing sides is more suited and more welcomed. It should be of no surprise that you can now find it being continued there.
__________________
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Free David Hicks | wellard | General Discussion | 278 | 03-27-2007 10:24 AM |
Win A free Beta weekend and play Guild wars Three days free | TheCrimsomBlade | Miscellaneous Games (RPG or not) | 11 | 02-02-2005 12:03 AM |
Free add-on Pack from EB (Download is free) | Ziroc | Neverwinter Nights 1 & 2 Also SoU & HotU Forum | 8 | 06-24-2003 04:51 PM |
Hey David, um I mean RedBlueFlare, take a look at this... | Black Dragon | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 8 | 04-19-2002 10:28 AM |