US let them pray, read Qur'an and etc but in their interrogations try to weaken their religious commitment, thereby attempting to bring them farther from what is claimed to be pushing them to commit terrorist acts... and yet they give them no other rights whatsoever.
2007-07-06 00:28:07 · 11 answers · asked by inquisitive thinker 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
How do you know the US lets the prisoners pray and read the Qu'ran? Last I heard the US soldiers were urinating and defecating on the Qu'ran. You're way off base, pal.
To Daniel R - news media outside America shows a very different picture. In the news here, it was reported that the soldier(s) who did this were removed from the illegal prison.
We saw healthy men enter, now they suffer from tremor, can hardly walk straight, weight loss........just take a look outside your country and get a balanced view with what's going on.
2007-07-06 00:32:28 · answer #1 · answered by Ya-sai 7 · 0⤊ 5⤋
No rights to terrorist suspects and enemy combatants?
I guess the religious correct meals they get, the 3 meals a day, the prayer rugs and book, the shelter they get, the health care. Maybe you should do some research on how well they are getting treated. They get treated better than some of our own people.
Also, think about the "rights" that our American Soldiers get when they get captured. You want to talk about torture! Information gathering and cutting someones head off while they are still awake and alive are two different things.
2007-07-06 07:43:43 · answer #2 · answered by Colonel 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
To ya-sai, if you would've paid attention to that news blip, you would have noticed that it was the detainees urinating on and flushing the Koran, not US Soldiers.
To answer the question, there is a set of international laws dealing with how to treat these types of detainees. They are entitled to food, shelter, a bed, religious freedom, health care, and mail. Nothing more, nothing less.
2007-07-06 07:44:06 · answer #3 · answered by Daniel R 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The detainees at Guantanamo eat better than the children in Cuba. They get three meals a day, a roof over their head, and clean clothing and bedding. The children in Cuba do not have it so good.
2007-07-06 07:31:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
What other rights are you referring to? A prisoner will naturally have a reduced set of rights compared to free people. Be more specific so that I can answer your question.
2007-07-06 07:31:54 · answer #5 · answered by A Person 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not true. They are being treated like royalty. Fed excellent food nearly hotel accommodations. etc. In turn they throw feces at the guards. They get treated far better than any prisoners in any other penal institution.
2007-07-06 07:30:09 · answer #6 · answered by The prophet of DOOM 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
At least the prisoners get to keep their heads, which is a lot more than the Muslims do when they take somebody as a prisoner.
2007-07-06 07:31:34 · answer #7 · answered by Dina W 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Most have been there 5 years and they have yet to be charged! Probably because they have nothing to charge them with!
Many detainees weren't holding AK 47's, they were rounded up in the middle of the night in security sweeps or at check points!
And Bush can do the same to you!
Court rules in favor of enemy combatant By ZINIE CHEN SAMPSON, Associated Press
Writer
RICHMOND, Va. - The Bush administration cannot legally detain a U.S. resident it
suspects of being an al-Qaida sleeper agent without charging him, a divided
federal appeals court ruled Monday.
"To sanction such presidential authority to order the military to seize and indefinitely detain civilians, even if the President calls them 'enemy combatants,' would have disastrous consequences for the constitution and the
country," the court panel said.
In the 2-1 decision, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel found that the federal Military Commissions Act doesn't strip Ali al-Marri, a legal U.S. resident, of his constitutional rights to challenge his accusers in court.
It ruled the government must allow al-Marri to be released from military detention.He is currently the only U.S. resident held as an enemy combatant within the U.S. Jose Padilla, another U.S. citizen, was held as an enemy combatant in a Navy brig for 3 1/2 years before he was hastily added to an existing case in Miami in November 2005, a few days before a U.S. Supreme Court deadline for Bush administration briefs on the question of the president's powers to continue
holding him in military prison without charge.
Al-Marri has been held in solitary confinement in the Navy brig in Charleston, S.C., since June 2003. The Qatar native has been detained since his December 2001 arrest at his home in Peoria, Ill., where he moved with his wife and five
children a day before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to study for a master's degree at Bradley University.
Al-Marri's lawyers argued that the Military Commissions Act, passed last fall to establish military trials after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, doesn't repeal the writ of habeas corpus a defendants' traditional right to challenge their
detention.
Chalk up another loss for Bush! Everything he does is so illegal I doubt if he has ever won a case!
Oh daniel, the Geneva Conventions allow's the International Red Cross to visit them, which we have always insisted that our pow's be seen by the IRC! Why do you think Bush denied what it says they are to get under the Geneva Conventions? Torture isn't included in them either!
2007-07-06 07:47:13 · answer #8 · answered by cantcu 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋
They could be treated worse. Rights...what rights? You mean the same rights they and their ilk gave the victims of their terrorism? Oh yeah, those rights.
2007-07-06 07:32:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Good question, I don't think they deserve any rights at all. Those people are less than human and should be treated like animals.
2007-07-06 07:32:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋