Federal Court Rules in Favor of 'Enemy Combatant'

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Jun 11, 2007.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    wash post

    well, at least one branch of gov't is still checking some over-reaching executive powers...
     
  2. FFTT macrumors 68030

    FFTT

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Location:
    A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
    #2
    Even the worst criminal is permitted to have their day in court and to answer
    the charges against them.

    Otherwise, anyone could accuse another person of something terrible out of spite or propaganda induced paranoia making their life miserable.
     
  3. Motley macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    #3
    But how are they supposed to protect our freedoms without being able to take them away at a moments notice?
     
  4. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #4
    He was a legal resident, so the court did what it was supposed to do. It's called checks and balances. Don't look for those militants they picked up over in Afganistan getting the same break real soon though.
     
  5. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #5
    Give me a break- you don't believe in checks and balances anymore than I believe in Jesus. ;)
     
  6. biturbomunkie macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Location:
    cali
  7. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    The decision will be appealed by the Justice Department and probably overturned, according to the articles I've read. Then if it gets to the Supreme Court, it will face at least four "strict constructionist" justices who won't be able to find the words habeas corpus in the Constitution using both hands.
     
  8. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #8
    None of them has both hands free.
     
  9. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #9
    Actually I do, but I don't believe that the leader of one branch of the government should anticipate how another branch may react to a decision and not proceed. The system works. To do otherwise encourages stagnation and indecision.
     
  10. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #10
    Funny guy.
     
  11. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #11
    Oh, you mean the ones that were sold to the Americans, just so we could show that we had someone to blame?

    How many years has it been now? How many have been charged with a crime? How many have been sent home?

    Looks like the system has failed pretty much everyone, ourselves included.
     
  12. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #12
    Even if they're innocent?
     
  13. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #13
    They were apprehended in Afghanistan, they can't possibly be innocent...:rolleyes:

    They lived in a country where terrorists hid out, therefore they must've known everything just like everyone in the US knew about McVeigh, or the Unibomber, or Columbine, or VA Tech, or...:rolleyes:
     
  14. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #14
    I've heard stories about innocent Canadians, cameraman's assistants, people visiting their families, all caught up in this mess. And some people don't even want to give them trials to prove they actually did something. It's shameful, and I'm amazed anyone can still defend it, especially given what we know.
     

Share This Page