English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Washington - The senior Pentagon official in charge of military detainees suspected of terrorism said in an interview this week that he was dismayed that lawyers at many of the nation's top firms were representing prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and that the firms' corporate clients should consider ending their business ties.

The comments by Charles D. Stimson, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs, produced an instant torrent of anger from lawyers, legal ethics specialists and bar association officials, who said Friday that his comments were repellent and displayed an ignorance of the duties of lawyers to represent people in legal trouble.

"This is prejudicial to the administration of justice," said Stephen Gillers, a law professor at New York University and an authority on legal ethics. "It's possible that lawyers willing to undertake what has been long viewed as an admirable chore will decline to do so for fear of antagonizing important clients

2007-01-14 08:04:32 · 7 answers · asked by bettysdad 5 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

7 answers

I find it absolutely astonishing that you guys don't get it.

First of all, privacy is merely an illusion these days. ANYONE - not just the government - can find out pretty much whatever they want to know about you.

As to the wire taps, if you're calling Hamas or Al Qaeda, you are a threat to the country and shouldn't expect any privacy. Besides, with most people using cordless phones these days, anyone who wants to can listen to your conversations.

The LEFT is eroding OUR freedoms. I don't care how "evil" you think I am, but I really don't give a rats butt about a bunch of mercenaries sitting in Gitmo. They were NOT soldiers of Afghanistan and should not be afforded the rights of a soldier. They sure as hell aren't Americans, so they don't deserve our rights, either. Hmm - I have an idea- why don't we find out what type of charges they would face for murder, etc in their home countires, and apply that justice?

Go ahead and worry about trial lawyers and terrorists. Someone else will worry about America. I hope.

2007-01-14 08:31:01 · answer #1 · answered by Jadis 6 · 2 2

McCarthyism was only a minor threat to our country when compared to Bushism. In the last five years the Bush regime has done more to take away our civil liberties under the guise of "fighting terror" than Senator Joe McCarthy could have ever dreamed of.

It is amazing to me that all we hear about Every Day is the carnage in Iraq. When was the last time you heard the name of the guy who brought down the towers and murdered 3,000 Americans mentioned in the media?

It is very sad that our president chose to invade and occupy a nation with no just cause, only leading us closer to the brink of an all out middle eastern war. There can be justification for spending all of the resources of our combined armed forces to intervene in the civil war that we allowed, and created, when at the same time Osama Bin laden has apparent been forgotten or forgiven by this administration. Our military could have served the world much more effectively by finding the man who made America bleed, shut down our skies and still inspires hundreds of thousands to follow him to this day.

2007-01-14 16:16:53 · answer #2 · answered by Kwan Kong 5 · 4 2

Every man or woman accused of a crime has the right to a defense lawyer, and the government has no right to muscle law firms around to prevent terror suspects from enacting that right.

This clearly illustrates the sad truth, that our government does not believe in or support the idea of "innocent until proven guilty."

2007-01-14 16:50:52 · answer #3 · answered by maguire1202 4 · 2 1

McCarthyism? Way before my time if thats possiable.

2007-01-14 16:20:10 · answer #4 · answered by Brianne 7 · 1 0

We have allready allowed the US Goverment to spy on our personal lives, effects and contacts. whats one more violation or rape of the Constitution.

2007-01-14 16:14:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

McCarthy has nothing on what Bush is doing.

2007-01-14 16:26:07 · answer #6 · answered by darkemoregan 4 · 2 4

yes but worse this go round I think.........

2007-01-14 16:08:32 · answer #7 · answered by Paul I 4 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers