Court Rules Detainee Names Can Remain Secret

[Timber Loftis]

MagiK, the problem is we do not KNOW the veracity of your statement that these people are intimately connected to terror. We do not know that they are intimately connected to anything, as we do not know their names, what they are linked to, or what they have done. They can't prove they're not intimately connected because they have no lawyer and no charges to dispute.

Sorry, but I don't trust the administration's word THAT much. "Yeah, trust us, but we can't tell you why."

They were so trustworthy with the WoMD determination. Aren't we all lucky they substituted their knowledge in place of the UN's and its 160 or so countries and saved us from all those horrible weapons.

It is the crack in the egg. It is the beginning of the long road to tyranny. It is a baby step now, but the path is clear.

Besides, under the often lauded FIRST AMENDMENT's freedom of association, (touted by Rhenquist and other constitutional scholars as one of the primary defining American-specific freedoms setting us apart - and central in the Boy Scouts case) you cannot be prosecuted for being a friend of a terrorist. Or knowing them. Or even belonging to Al Queda. Like the KKK, you have a right to associate with like-minded individuals and be as stupid as you like -- so long as you commit no crimes.

And, that is as it should be. Limiting association is tantamount to legislating thought and belief.

But then non-citizens don't enjoy the protection of the First Amendment now, do they? (Of course, that judge-made law in and of itself derrogates from the plain language of the First Amendment which does not mention rights of citizens but rather says "Congress shall make no law....")

[ 06-18-2003, 07:13 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Night Stalker]

Well, Timber, being that it is the US Constitution, that kinda implies US Citizens - no one else.

This is a very dangerous trend, though. The gov is trying to find numerous loop holes to abuse people. They aren't US citizens, so they don't enjoy the protection of the Constitution. OK - I can buy that. But they are also trying to claim that they don't enjoy POW status either because they were "unlawful combatants". Now there is some fine work of legal dancing.

I can understand that these people were taken from a combat zone, and their value as intelligence sources is extremely valuable, but not playing by rules that we helped create just sends the image that we are an 800 lb gorilla that does what it wants and doesn't care what anyone else thinks. That maybe true, but it's not political to actually act that way.

Since they were taken, presumably, on the battlefield, one of two things should have happened. Treated them as soldiers and executed on the spot killed them in battle. Or, taken as POWs as prescribed by Geneva Conventions.

This legal acrobatic act that the gov is taking is a very BadThing^TM. First the treatment of the detainees at GTMO, then the Patriot Act (which openly flouts every word in the Bill of Rights). Next we have Ceassar having Congress declare him President for Life. Never happen you say? Hmmmm ..... ignoring the numerous Third World examples, I seem to reacall another very succuessfull Democratically Republican Empire doing just so about 2000 years ago .....

[Donut]

I may be wrong Night Stalker but I think the article refers to another group of illegally held people rather than those who are at Camp X-ray.

Originally posted by Chewbacca: I find stark irony in the fact Saddam Hussien's regime used secret detentions to protect what was then Iraq's national security. Take away (hopefully) the torture and executions and wham you have just about the same thing. People being hauled off into the night, with no legal recourse and no way to tell loved ones what happened to them. Not disagreeing or anything...but do you find everything he did, that other nations do ironic? Or just this one issue? Oh and by the way..he detained his own citizens for the most part....I don't thinkthats the case at X-ray As far as these detainees supporting terrorists. That is whats called an allegation. I'll believe that when they are tried and convicted publicly. I'll even give Eric Rudolph the benifit of the doubt til the verdict is read. It might also be called an observation...or intelligence..or perhaps even (if you are in the right loop) common sense [img]smile.gif[/img]

Originally posted by Barry the Sprout: And you miss my point to I'm afraid MagiK. The show was displaying a fact, a fact that cannot be skewed - that the laws no exist to make these things possible. You may disagree with the writers of that program about whether or not it would happen right now in that the way they depicted, but you cannot disagree with their central point - that it is possible. And then once again you come back to the idea that these guys deserve it. Well, thats not my point, so frankly I'm not going to debate it with you. My point it that if it happens to those guys then in 10 years time who knows who its going to be happening to? So we agree to disagree [img]smile.gif[/img] We will see what we see in 10 years [img]smile.gif[/img] and hopefully both you and I and IW are still here, healthy and happy [img]smile.gif[/img]

Couple of points.

1. I am biased due to my background work in the intelligence field.
2. I am predisposed to understate in the face of what I see as "Hysteria" and Panic.
3. I truely believe that the people rounded up and put in Camp X-ray got there for very good reasons.
4. I believe the men and women involved in rounding these people up are good, decent human beings and were not out to just get "any old raghead".
5. In the case of terror suspects, I am willing to give law enforcement and intelligence services the benefit of the doubt rather than non-nationals.
6. I have no sympathy for any group who target civilians especially women and children.
7. I understand TL's concern and other peoples concerns and it is good to question authority.
8. I understand that my opinion is no more important than anyone elses and since I don't see any reason for others to agree with me, I have pretty much said all I need to say on the subject.

Thank you and goodnight Gracie [img]smile.gif[/img]

One last thought

[Donut]

Originally posted by MagiK: Couple of points. I truely believe that the people rounded up and put in Camp X-ray got there for very good reasons.

Hello! Is there anyone there?

These are not the camp X-ray detainees. The are the 750 or so that were detained mostly in and around New York, mostly of middle eastern descent and mainly muslims. It's unknown how many of them are US citizens.

Will you deny them their rights under the constitution?

Originally posted by Donut: Hello! Is there anyone there? These are not the camp X-ray detainees. The are the 750 or so that were detained mostly in and around New York, mostly of middle eastern descent and mainly muslims. It's unknown how many of them are US citizens. Will you deny them their rights under the constitution?

Hello! is anyone in there? My post did not reference the people in NY. Did you not see the "camp X-ray" in bright blue letters?

As for the people in NY you are refering to, I don't have any information on them, I haven't even read any stories on them so I have no opinion on that matter.....yet.

Did a google search for New York Detainees and didn't find even one reference...some one have a link to stories about 700 New York citizens being detained?