Even if it seems a democracy must fight with one hand behind its back, it still has the upper hand. So just how tenuous are the links going to get? How long till, if a judge can be convinced you have Al-Queida ties, will Gitmo tactics be used on American citizens? From the start, we have been shedding the princples we are supposedly defending. Gitmo detainees are not eligible for POW status because we are not at war. They are not eligible for civil trials because they are foreign nationals captured in a time of war. Huh??? It is a dirty secret just how many have been released from Guantanomo after it was realised they were not involved. Bet my bottom dollar they, or some who hear their story, will be making tracks to join up though!!!Isreal has backed off from use of torture, even if a bomb is ticking and innocents are at stake. It's a power far too open to abuse, and the end result is a lot of times you get told stuff you want to hear. But it could be an innocent trying to end his or her pain, or someone stalling with disinformation. The result is plenty of people tortured for nothing, and others more eager to fight because they, their friends or loved ones were tortured. There wre solid reasons for those Geneva accords.
That being said, I am astounded at the trouble lawyers go to for Al-queida. I am an American citizen, and I have been locked up for over a year without a proper trial. Nowhere in the Constitution of the United States of America is any distinction made between being deprived of your liberty in a prison or a hospital. But in Pennsylvania or New York, "Form 302" hearings are civil proceedings. Anything a patient says or does can be used against them when they are in the hospital- Miranda anyone??? Hearsay is admissable, no right to face your accuser and any staff member can write anything down with no threat of perjury. I requested a jury for my hearing to have my treatment extended past 72 Hours, it consisted of twelve staff members from my ward who were directly subordinate to the doctor who signed me in. I pointed this fact out to the judge, you can be sure. I also objected to hearsay, and was UPHELD. But the state did not appeal, the trial was a charade with a predetermined outcome and the status quo continues. It had all started a year and a half before, when I made the mistake of signing myself out of an egomaniac's care at a general hospital's mental ward. He told me then and there that I was going to the State Hospital. This was not an idle threat, and I heard him make it to other people as well. I made it without medication for over a year, but did eventually wind up in the emergency room again. That docs first words were, "He's gotta go to State." Hadn't even evaluated me yet! About a month later, at I gave up fighting and went to State just to get away from him. The doc there told my mother he would evaluate me further to be sure, "but he doesn't seem that bad. He should be released within two to three weeks." A week and a half later he transfrerred to another ward, and the new doc reevaluted me and tripled my meds. A month later he put me on Prolyxin. Every person I have seen on that drug has gotten more violent, and I had to take drastic measurements not to do likewise. When an argument over a TV channel left me shaking and wanting to pop someone half my size in the head, I went on a hunger strike till I got off Prolyxin. After some negotiation, I was put back on my old meds, at only double the dose the doc who planned to release me had me on. Months later, though I did not know it at the time, he appealed to the first doc saying "I don't know what to do with this guy!!!" The end result of that conversation was that I was transferred to an open ward. I got work priveledges, and when the time was right was on a bus to New York City by the time Security knew I was gone. I turned myself in at the Port Authority bus terminal, was examined at Roosevelt Hospital then released. Since I was across state lines and a New York doc said I was not a danger, I could not be taken back to the Allentown PA state hospital. Kidnapping, was the term used.These were not my only encounter, and a totally different doctor went so far as to complain to the FBI about my case.
Involantary commtitment is a favorite tactic of abusive life partners, those trying to get custody of children, relatives without the stomach for murder who want control of an estate. All under the American flag, to American citizens.
So it really burns my biscuits to see all the fuss you guys make over Al-Queida.
90% of people at commitment hearings are not charged with any crime. Shouldn't they get MORE protection, not less???
You misunderstand. The reason they are not eligible for POW status is because they are covered by the definitions and rules of the Geneva Convention.
Under the Law of War, different categories of prisoners are clearly defined and who falls into each category.
To categorize them as POWs would be a violation of the Geneva Convention.
It has nothing at all to do with the wording of the authorization of war, or "necessary force" that was passed by Congress.
Congress can go at any time and rescind the authorization or refuse to fund it. They just can't change the provisions of the Geneva Conventions, and call an Unlawful Combatant a Prisoner of War.