President acknowledges secret CIA prisons

[Adam Gamradt]

The Constitution already covers this.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger;

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I'm curious about this part. Nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction I'm assuming this applies only to civil and criminal matters, but applies to citizens and non-citizens alike? Perhaps a law talking guy could comment on this?

Though not representing any state or nation, the 14 who were just transferred definately perpetrated an act of war.

My instinct wants these guys tried in the open, I'm a big fan of judicial translucency. Especially in the age of widespread governmental incompetence, I'd like to see someone tried an convicted for this particular attack. As I understand it, they must be kept offshore, or they would be entitled to habeas corpus?

Therefore, I think Bush has his constitutional bases covered on the Guantanamo issue.

Keep in mind that if they are prisoners of war, they should be handled according to the rules set forth in the Geneva Convention. If they are not prisoners of war, then what are they?

Real bummer about that pesky fourth amendment, or Bush could have avoided tramping our constitution entirely, for a whole five years.

[Sonny]

Keep in mind that if they are prisoners of war, they should be handled according to the rules set forth in the Geneva Convention. If they are not prisoners of war, then what are they?

Enemy combatants. They are not entitled to benefits of the Geneva Convention because they do not engage in normal warfare methods (fight in a uniform for a particular force/country or fight from known civilian areas, etc.)

[Gvlax]

Keep in mind that if they are prisoners of war, they should be handled according to the rules set forth in the Geneva Convention. If they are not prisoners of war, then what are they?

This is not the first time these secret camps have been around. I just read something on MSN a few weeks back that a secret camp in WW2 the violated the Geneva convention just been disclosed to the public. Im sure in every other U.S. conflict there have been such things. Im not justifying the United States actions but i dont want anyone to believe this is a new thing.

Geneva convention was to protect our troops against foreign military while being a prisoner of war. Most of those foreign military powers also follow the geneva conention. On the other hand terrorist groups do NOT follow the Geneva convention. I personally believe that if the people who you are at war with does not follow Geneva conventions guidelines, then they should be thrown out the window. Why should we not get the information out of terrorist by any means neccesary if they are not treating our troops and journalist by the guidelines?

You are probably reading this thinking the U.S. is superior, a great country, we should follow the geneva convention. But to the troops that are losing their lives because we can not get information out of these people, we need strongly reconsider how we are getting theinformation that is needed.

[Campbell]

This is not the first time these secret camps have been around. I just read something on MSN a few weeks back that a secret camp in WW2 the violated the Geneva convention just been disclosed to the public. Im sure in every other U.S. conflict there have been such things. Im not justifying the United States actions but i dont want anyone to believe this is a new thing.

Eisenhower labeled German prisoners as Disarmed Enemy Forces to get around the Geneva Convention since they were held in substandard conditions.

[Hackalicious]

Are you arguing that US Constitutional Rights should be extended to non-Americans?

Judicial protections already apply to non-citizens.

The 6th Amendment:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

"The accused" clearly applies to citizens and non-citizens alike.

[Sonny]

"The accused" clearly applies to citizens and non-citizens alike.

I'm not sure how you are drawing that conclusion Hack.