Habias Corpus for Guantanamo Bay detainees?

I'm guessing some people didn't get the memo, or more accurately have a complete lack of common sense. Let me break it down for you.... The prisoners at Gitmo ARE NOT SHOPLIFTERS!.... At any point when you become guilty of participating in acts of terrorism YOU LOSE YOUR RIGHTS. Sure there are probably innocent people in Gitmo, but there are innocent people in every jail and prison in America too. It happens. I'd much rather see America being proactive with suspects of terrorism than to be reactive and us have another 9/11. Terrorists ahve cost me a lot of blood sweat and tears on the sands of Iraq, and I've lost some very dear friends. These prisoners are NOT Americans and have no rights under OUR Constitution. Of course these days half of Americans aren't Americans, you're more concerned about the crazy radical groups killing each other in Darfur, than the mother and father next door to you who's son or daughter just paid the ultimate price. Get Real. God Bless the united States and our troops

We're monsters because we violated the people's most BASIC rights guaranteed for several hundred years: The right to challenge your incarceration. (As dictated by the Magna Carta charter.)

This goes far beyond a simple 'decapitation' incident.

This is about the UNITED STATES upholding its laws and abiding by international treaties and other such laws GOVERNED by the civilized world.

Unless of course...you don't think we are...*civilized* enough?

Let me put it to you in terms you can understand:

The Nazis murdered 6 million JEWS during the second world war. Those responsible for their heinous crimes were brought before an international tribunal and given their rights to challenge their case under a set and impartial law.

Fast forward to 2001 and these so-called "terrorists" kill a mere 3000 Americans in a single day--and yet we DENY them their rights to a fair and impartial hearing, their rights to challenge their accusers, and a right to see convene with a lawyer of their choosing?

The question is: Why?

Why are these people any different from the Nazis whom killed 20+ times more people in 6 years than these people did in a single day?

Why were the Nazi perpetrators given their day in court and these terror suspects aren't?

What does the Bush administration have to fear so much from a bunch of guys being held without trial or charge?

You can't hold people indefinitely and not tell them why. No civil society would do that. If they really are terrible awful people then they will be found to be so in a court of law, or perhaps the case is weak to begin with?

Prior to 2001, there were no legal provisions to handle situations like this. 9/11 prompted some very rushed and incomplete legislation to handle these scenarios, legislation that is shoddy at best and did not adhere to constitutional principles. The Bush administration set themselves up for judicial review.

ahh, but there is the rub, GWB denied them the status of "prisoners of war" because the protections defined under the Geneva convention would have applied to them. He chose to create a new classification "Illegal Enemy Combatant". Because of this arrogant move to try and deny these individuals any rights what-so-ever he has given them more rights than they would have had if he just played by the old rules. One more of Georgie's tricks to blow up in his face.

As for the enemy giving the right of Habias Corpus, you're right but if we degrade ourselves by giving up the truths we hold as self-evident and act in like barbarism then we lose far more than we will ever re-coup.

They have purposefully NOT been designated as prisoners of war. The Bush administration designated them as "enemy combatants" in an attempt to circumvent the provisions of the Geneva Conventions that would apply to POW's.

BTW, the rights of habeas corpus (correct spelling) upheld were with respect to civil challenges, not criminal.

The fact that you fail to see how the right of habeas corpus applies is the reason that you do not sit on the SCOTUS and more learned legal scholars do.

Yes, they should be entitled to all the protection of the law.

You're an American, so you agree with the rule of law, yes? You believe a person is innocent until proven guilty, yes? Is that not the backbone of the US Constitution?

Yet here you preach that someone should be held without any right to courts, any semblance of justice, just because they happen to not be US citizens?

If you have no problem with that, no moral contradiction, I'm sorry, but i fail to see the moral high ground you think you're standing on.

"Johnny hit me, so I am going to burn down his house"?

And people wonder why the US has lost it's moral leadership....

Only 19 out of 270 Gitmo hostages have even been accused of a crime.

Out of those 19, there is almost zero evidence.

I don't agree either. Enemy combatants and POW's aren't legally entitled IMHO