LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

Wow. The CIA operates secret prisons in other countries to avoid complying with US laws, and the president is like "whatevs".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060906/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

Who is in the prisons? Will they ever be tried?

What's stopping an arbitrary person from disappearing into one of them?

This guy was thrown into a secret prison because his name sounded like a suspected terrorists's: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khaled_el-Masri

These Chinese Uighurs (a muslim minority in west China) were held in Guantanamo for 5 years and were released without charge. They couldn't go back to China for fear of persecution, so ended up in Albania.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4979466.stm
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2006/65935.htm

Without oversight, the same mechanisms could be used against anyone. By executive fiat, any one of us could be deemed a terrorist overnight and held without charge in another country indefinitely. Or, what's worse, other countries could use the same standards against Americans abroad.

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

From the AP:

The high-value suspected terrorists include Khalid Sheik Mohammed, believed to be the No. 3 al-Qaida leader before he was captured in Pakistan in 2003; Ramzi Binalshibh, an alleged would-be Sept. 11, hijacker; and Abu Zubaydah, who was believed to be a link between Osama bin Laden and many al-Qaida cells before he was also captured in Pakistan, in March 2002.

Those are three examples of who was being held in "secret prisons".

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/09/06/D8JVGP6G0.html

Paging sohotrightnow... paging Mr. sohotrightnow.

StrykerFSU wrote:From the AP:

The high-value suspected terrorists include Khalid Sheik Mohammed, believed to be the No. 3 al-Qaida leader before he was captured in Pakistan in 2003; Ramzi Binalshibh, an alleged would-be Sept. 11, hijacker; and Abu Zubaydah, who was believed to be a link between Osama bin Laden and many al-Qaida cells before he was also captured in Pakistan, in March 2002.

Those are three examples of who was being held in "secret prisons".

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/09/06/D8JVGP6G0.html

That's great! So why can't they be brought here and put through the US Judicial system that is one of the things we're fighting to defend? Habeas corpus is still the rule of the US, stop trying to do end-arounds to deprive people of the rights we are so justifiably proud of. One of the dangers of following the present policy is that it removes us from the moral high ground and allows others to find torture acceptable. That's not what we're about as true Americans.

I agree Hack. I do think it is justly unfair to hold Americans under arrest without charging them with a crime (i.e. J. Padilla). However, I've said it once and I will say it again - I don't think non-US Citizens should receive protection, nor benefit, from the US legal/court system.

laxfan25 wrote:So why can't they be brought here and put through the US Judicial system

Unless you wish to re-write a huge chunk of our laws - Non-Americans who attack America (or American interests) in wartime are not subject to our legal system. Nor should they be.

Hackalicious wrote:Who is in the prisons? Will they ever be tried?

From your linked article....

With the transfer of the 14 men to Guantanamo, there currently are no detainees being held by the CIA, Bush said. A senior administration official said the CIA had detained fewer than 100 suspected terrorists in the history of the program.

StrykerFSU wrote:Those are three examples of who was being held in "secret prisons"

You can say that again..... Link to the govt. document containing Bios on the "detainees"
http://www.odni.gov/announcements/content/DetaineeBiographies.pdf

Lets just say that these men won't be selling girl scout cookies or going to the Sadie Hawkins dance anytime soon.

I heard Sen. Dodd (D-Conn) on Imus this morning and he expressed little surprise or anger over Bush's disclosure. In fact, his comments were limited to observing just how bad the captives were. I don't think that anyone was all that surprised by the announcement and I don't think that it will have the political results that the far-Left is hoping for. I believe that most Americans could care less about where those maniacs were held.

Sonny wrote: However, I've said it once and I will say it again - I don't think non-US Citizens should receive protection, nor benefit, from the US legal/court system.

Not being a constitutional expert, I'll have to defer. However, my feeling is that even non-citizens are entitled to due process. Any experts out there?

StrykerFSU wrote:I heard Sen. Dodd (D-Conn) on Imus this morning and he expressed little surprise or anger over Bush's disclosure. In fact, his comments were limited to observing just how bad the captives were. I don't think that anyone was all that surprised by the announcement and I don't think that it will have the political results that the far-Left is hoping for. I believe that most Americans could care less about where those maniacs were held.

The problem is not where maniacs are being held. Everyone would probably agree that a tough prison is the best place for terrorists. The problem is the existence of a secret CIA prison and the ability to incarcerate, interrogate, detain, and torture. The ability to do these things indefinitely and without public scrutiny. That is the problem. Half the people in this country are so caught up with "fighting" terror we forgot about all the bright ideals this country was founded on. So any rule we have we can just throw out the window when it makes punishing terrorists inconvenient. Everything is fine though, because we're talking about a minority of the population. I'll still go to church and soccer, live in my safe neghborhood and pray that the minority never run the world.

There is a bumper sticker I see quite often that says "If you are not completely appalled then you are not paying attention." Granted it was probably made by homosexual communists out of their branch office of the ACLU in South Austin, but when it comes to things like secret prisons and illegal wiretapping people should be worried. Not just the far left, but all sides, because it the erosion of our ideals and the erosion of our rights. That to me is un-American.

Sonny wrote:I agree Hack. I do think it is justly unfair to hold Americans under arrest without charging them with a crime (i.e. J. Padilla). However, I've said it once and I will say it again - I don't think non-US Citizens should receive protection, nor benefit, from the US legal/court system.

That doesn't make any sense and is incorrect legally. The protections in our justice system don't distinguish between citizens and non-citizens. US laws apply to foreigners on US soil. US laws can also apply to foreigners overseas -- that's why we have extradition treaties. You can't say that someone is subject to the laws, but doesn't get any of the protections. It's not "US Justice Lite: Same great punishment, half the rights!"

Sonny wrote:

Hackalicious wrote:Who is in the prisons? Will they ever be tried?

From your linked article....

With the transfer of the 14 men to Guantanamo, there currently are no detainees being held by the CIA, Bush said. A senior administration official said the CIA had detained fewer than 100 suspected terrorists in the history of the program.

That's the official press release. Up until this point, they denied the prisons even existed. Why the hell should we beleive anything they say? How do you know they are "terrorists"? Even if there is ample evidence that they are terrorists, why not try them in our legal system?

We have adequate maximum security facilities in the US and can hold hearings without leaking sensitive intelligence. They were able to try, convict, and lock-up the 1993 WTC bombers this way.

The only reason they do this overseas is to avoid US laws. Why do you think the camp is in Guantanamo? It's not on US soil and doesn't answer to any host country. They can do whatever they want.

Well it seems these high level prisoners are being moved to Gitmo....Just read about it on CNN.

StrykerFSU wrote:I heard Sen. Dodd (D-Conn) on Imus this morning and he expressed little surprise or anger over Bush's disclosure. In fact, his comments were limited to observing just how bad the captives were. I don't think that anyone was all that surprised by the announcement and I don't think that it will have the political results that the far-Left is hoping for. I believe that most Americans could care less about where those maniacs were held.

You just don't get it. It's not about playing politics and it's not about the specific people in the prisons at this moment. It's the fact that there is a mechanism set up that allows anyone, you or I included, to be thrown in a secret prison in another country that practices torture, indefinitely, without oversight, and without due process.

But, if most Americans don't care, then they will get the government they deserve.

Hack,

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

Sonny wrote:Hack,

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

aren't they already extended to non-americans?

Aaron Lozano wrote:

Sonny wrote:Hack,

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

aren't they already extended to non-americans?

No. For example, non-americans don't get to vote in US elections.