Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (121556)	6/22/2005 6:00:25 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793725

I think the term is unlawful combatants. That's seem suitable since they aren't combatants in any nation's army and since we don't afford them the protections of the Geneva convention Have you read the GC IV definition of a lawful combatant? Please answer a simple question: why would the treaty bother to define a lawful combatant if it was impossible to be an unlawful combatant? In fact, the GC names such an unlawful combatant, a saboteur behind enemy lines, and states that they may be shot out of hand when caught. So it's hardly like Bush is just making this stuff up.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (121556)	6/22/2005 9:21:46 PM
From: garrettjax	Respond to of 793725

Of course it's not so lucky for those who may blunder into the wrong place and end up on the wrong end of the stick. Even more so for those who chose to do so several times... -G

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (121556)	6/23/2005 7:51:23 PM
From: Neeka	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793725

Your bias is showing again cnyndwllr. -g- And they've not been properly charged, much less convicted, of being terrorists. Not in any court of the US, not in any world court and not in the courts of their home nations. Message 21440469 Every single detainee currently being held at Guantanamo Bay has received a hearing before a MILITARY TRIBUNAL, but I guess that isn't good enough for you? I guess you missed Michael D. Cumming's post yesterday? I don't think you'd approve of anything this administration, or apparently our Military, does, but here goes anyway. M Debunking another Gitmo myth Every single detainee currently being held at Guantanamo Bay has received a hearing before a MILITARY TRIBUNAL. Every one. As a result of those hearings, more than three dozen Gitmo detainees have been released. The hearings, called "Combatant Status Review TRIBUNALs," are held before a board of officers, and permit the detainees to contest the facts on which their classification as "enemy combatants" is based. Gitmo-bashers attack the Bush administration's failure to abide by the Geneva Conventions. But as legal analysts Lee Casey and Darin Bartram told me, "the status hearings are, in fact, fully comparable to the 'Article V' hearings required by the Geneva Conventions, in situations where those treaties apply, and are also fully consistent with the Supreme Court's 2004 decision in the Hamdi v. Rumsfeld case." Message 21440039