Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (134384)	5/25/2004 5:29:56 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) of 281500

Habeas corpus is for a very good reason Hawk. As the years roll by, prisoners sit in prison with the USA not recognizing human rights which they used to lecture China about. If he'd been traveling in the US, you might have a case.. But he was traveling in a war zone and there is no writ of habeus corpus in a war zone.. It's too bad he was detained.. But was he maltreated? Was he tortured? Was he harassed? No.. he was detained until US forces were reasonably sure he didn't represent either a threat, or was a participant in any illicit activity.. After all, it's not like we could revoke his passport, as is the case with US suspects under investigation. Hawk

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next