2007-03-27 01:29:01 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
An Australian just pled guilty, in the very first hearing they have had.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/26/AR2007032602439.html
2007-03-27 01:32:08 · update #1
People are only now pleading guilty after 5 years of torture and no hope of legal representation.
2007-03-27 01:36:30 · answer #1 · answered by Super Ruper 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
You are applying standards of the criminal justice system to wartime tribunals and enemy combatants. Two different spheres of law. Some have said that what is being done there judicially is even more than is constitutionally required, and was not done, say, in WWII.
So I can't really anser your question.
2007-03-27 09:06:02 · answer #2 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You are assuming that the purpose of Gitmo is to incarcerate convicted criminals. The purpose of Gitmo is to remove enemies of the United States from the battlefield, prevent them from harming US citizens, and extract information that may lead to the prevention of future terrorist attacks. It is not part of the American penal system. And it's residents are not capable of "rehabilitation". They have been bred and trained to hate and kill Americans, westerners, and anyone who has not submitted to their sick cult. They must be stored away until they are no longer capable of harming you, your family, and our men and women fighting to keep us free.
2007-03-27 08:44:48 · answer #3 · answered by boonietech 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
How stupid or smart does a person have to be to see that Pelosi and Hillary are NOT fighting to radically change Gitmo?
Duhhhhhhhhhhh
Let's continue with our hatred.
2007-03-27 08:33:10 · answer #4 · answered by junglejoe 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not all of them got there 5 years ago. I don't feel sorry for any of them. The worst of the worst are in Gitmo.
2007-03-27 08:44:19 · answer #5 · answered by JudiBug 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The resistance against Americas expansionism and world police policies is full of courageous honest upright moral people who do not cave in to the extreme torture and coercions the threats and tactics our evil government uses against them.
2007-03-27 08:41:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
We did not want to rush to judgment?
We wanted to make sure his rights were protected?
We gave him his free phone call but he called pizza hut?
We had to wait so he could get his story straight?
Pick any of the above they all seem reasonable to me.
2007-03-27 08:47:21 · answer #7 · answered by Sgt 524 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Let's see.... We had to determine what status they held,,, whose jurisdiction they could by tried under.... How would we try them......Combatants are generally not tried until hostilities are over.
2007-03-27 08:44:24 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋