Will cross dressing be allowed?
Posted on 11/14/2005 6:09:49 PM PST by SmithL
No more prisoners. Like Iraq house them.
Complete insanity.
Darn spell check...Let
My sentiments exactly.
We do not have lawmakers, we have traitors!
What wimps. It won't be long before illegal combatants have more rights in this country than resident citizen taxpayers do.
"...the 500 or so detainees at the U.S. naval base in Cuba would be allowed to challenge in federal court."
Does this mean that each of the 500 animals will receive their own counsel? Someone please tell me this isn't the case.
And still the GOP keep sending me requests for political donations. As if...
they get that now to help them mount the habeas challenges.
I am not sure how to read this yet - remember that the SCOTUS has already injected itself into this and given them rights.
this may actually be a good thing.
Will cross dressing be allowed?
"this may actually be a good thing."
Please follow-up.
to clarify, what I am saying is that in light of the fact that they were already granted habeas rights and the lawsuits are stacking up - wiping that clean and instead giving them a single appeal to the military judgement against them, is better then the status quo.
What a f'in joke. These people are the scum of the earth, not even willing to mark themselves as our enemies, hiding among civilians. And we extend to them the American legal system, though none of them are Americans, and every one of them would piss on our Constitution faster than you can say "Teddy is a murderer."
Dubya, give them all death sentences, sentences to be carried out immediately, and let the wuss Senate figure out how the D.C. Circuit can hear the dirtbags' appeals--assuming the @#$!@%$@# detainees can file their appeals in D.C. quicker than bullets can travel a foot.
We need to move all of the prisoners back to Iraq and get them off of U.S. soil. The coward Republicans are letting this country, especially us, down.
Veto.
it is a joke - but given that they had already been extended habeas, this deal might be better. at least the tribunals can take place under this system, verdicts and sentences reached, an appeal made, followed by carrying out of the sentence.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1513207/posts?page=533#533
Graham now introducing an "in between" process, S.AMND.2524, amending S.AMND.2515.This gives all Guantanamo detainees the right to challenge the determination of "enemy combatant" status, on a case by case basis (one time), in a Federal Court. That is, the Federal Court will check the military commission/military tribunal process, and render an opinion as to whether the process has been properly applied, and the status ("enemy combatant," "civilian," "irregular combatant") is correct.
The object is to make sure the detainees are foreign national enemy combatants, and to deny the writ of habeus corpus to people being found of that status by a military tribunal -- agreed by a Federal court.
Very interesting dividing line between military law and civilian law, and it is being defined from several angles at this time. SCOTUS opinion is the impetus for this Senate action, for example.
With the way things are going in Washington the only thing to look forward to are the holidays when congress is out of session. When they are out of session they aren't doing harm.
which court will hear these appeals? is it the circuit court in Florida?
Looks like they'll still have two appeals, one to the DC circuit and one to the SCOTUS. And while it'd be better than the silly rules in place that allow them habeas, the question is why the SCOTUS or the Senate is interjecting here at all. Isn't the President commander in chief? Doesn't he decide how we fight wars? Doesn't he interpret treaties where that is relevant to fighting wars?
Heck, now I think he should let them all go...that is, let them all go driving over a few IEDs in Iraq.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.