answer....

"The majority of combatants held in Guantanamo are not POWs as defined by the 3rd Geneva Convention. I don’t feel that this group of terrorist deserve treatment equal to that afforded the German or Japanese soldier POWS captured in WWII."

Winer, many people, including the former President and Vice President, call the detainees at Gitmo "terrorists" and "killers" and "bad people."

If we know that these folks are "terrorists:"

1. Why have we not put forth the EVIDENCE which allows us to KNOW this?

2. Why have we released so many of these "terrorists" without charges under the previous president's guidance?

3. Why has the highest court in this nation of laws affirmed the detainees' rights of habeas corpus each time a case has come before The Supreme Court?

I personally don't think that holding people without charges until they die of natural or other causes is an option for a country trying to turn the tides against terrorism and those that wish us harm. Gitmo has done wonders for al-qaeda and anti-American recruitment. Those who have interviewed actual insurgents say these people often mention Gitmo and Abu Graib as reasons they took up arms against the USA.

I'm not confused - and I’ll respond to that assertion later. But: Jessica Lynch story as well as those captured in the ’91 war in Iraq.
Which story? Hers' or the Bush Administrations'?

While she was complementary of the doctors and hospital staff you can’t say her words confirm the Iraqi government/captors adhered to the Geneva Conventions.

I respectfully disagree on the issue of your confusion. I am firm in my belief that majority of those at Guantanamo do not deserve treatment designed for those of any uniformed serviceman. The 15 year old jihadist/Canadian who killed our medic should never step foot on US soil and does not deserve a US trial. If you muddy these waters now, there will be no going backwards. It will become precedent and we will have to live by those rules forever.

You're good. I haven't even articulated my confusion - and you're disagreeing already. LOL! You have information on who is there. I also know of one person who was sent there; relatives had influence with someone; it was determined that a 'mistake' had been made - and person was returned to the states. Are there more persons like that there? I think this year, proper steps will be taken to make sure that your 15 year old jihadist/Canadian will be properly dealt with. More later.

Winer one other issue here is also what happens when these terrorist enter our judicial system.. Under our system maranda must be given.. if it is not then cases are thrown out.. None of these were given maranda.. I can envision lawyers tying up the courts forever on that issue alone..

Do not apply to military tribunals.

They will if the terrorist are brought into our Judicial system..
They will all be given attorneys and the courts will be tied up for years,,

These people are HIGHLY unlikely to be tried in civilian courts in the US. They will be tried by military commissions which have successfully tried hundreds of cases in the US. The Military Commissions Act of 2006, written in response to the USSC throwing out Bush's kangaroo courts in Hamden vs. Rumsfeld is perfectly adequate and it was written specifically for this purpose.

There has been no suggestion anywhere that I could find (barring right wing blowhards like Rush and Sean engaging in fear mongering for the purpose of frightening people who do not have the knowledge to evaluate such statements) which even remotely suggest that Guantanamo detainees be turned over to civilian criminal courts.

You are correct that they will be given attorneys. As far as I'm concerned that's okay, rule of law and all that. However the military commissions can allow hearsay evidence (BTW so can international war crimes prosecutions at the Hague under ICC rules) and coerced testimony at the discretion and with the approval of the judge and with protections for classified information. Definitely not civilian criminal court stuff.

The point hardly ever mentioned is what you said at the end about coerced testimony and classified information.

A military court does give the (alleged) terrorist an attorney, but that attorney is military and will obey all the rules about classified information - meaning to keep it under wraps and not let it leak for political or other reasons - like writing a book.

That would not work in a civilian court with some appointed civilian wearing a pony tail.

The way we caught these war criminals varies, but it wasn't all simple and clean and I for one am glad we had the stones to do what we did to get these people off the street. No need for the methods we use to become unclassified. Look at the overreaction to a little innocent waterboarding to save American lives. The press can't be trusted with a story like that and it appears some of our politicians can't be trusted either.

How many lives have been saved because we were aggressive with the scum at Guantanamo and elsewhere? That's the only question that matters.

“Look at the overreaction to a little innocent waterboarding....”

I'm constantly amazed by the right's willingness to gloss over torture. Water boarding is and has been a war crime for almost a hundred years, well recognized and prosecuted nationally and internationally. Apparently all that “rule of law” stuff is a very shaky and subjective principle to some.

I fear the seriousness escapes you. Prosecution in the US is very unlikely. However, I am concerned that many members of the previous administration are in danger of arrest and prosecution if they travel overseas. Most people are unwilling to admit the possibility but Rumsfeld (for instance) has already had to flee France and has also been indicted in Germany:

Donald Rumsfeld Charged with Torture During Trip to France

What are we going to do if a high ranking former official is arrested and prosecuted? My advice to them would be not to use the just “a little innocent waterboarding” defense.

If waterboarding is allowed to be carried out at S.E.R.E. School and other government training facilities, under closely supervised conditions, why is it not acceptable to be used on terrorists in the same manner. The purpose is not to kill the prisoner, but to scare the living crap out of him. Hopefully, providing useful intel on their future activities.

Hey I didn't mind it too bad when it was done to me. But, then again, I have gills.

“Ignorance can be fixed. Stupidity is forever”

It is well established in national and international law that water boarding is torture. The US has prosecuted cases against Japan, North Korea, etc. and has joined other countries in their prosecutions. The US has even prosecuted US military personnel for water boarding in the Philippines. There is no question as to the law.

That special forces are trained to resist is irrelevant. It's a war crime and if someone did it to our troops we would be outraged and we would prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.

Is it your position that it would be legal for US military personnel to be water-boarded by a foreign national or government?

I would expect countries that have signed on to the Geneva Convention(s) to actually adhere to said principles and provisions therein. But then again, we are not at war with a country, or its people. We are at war with a principle...jihad. Now, our enemy doesn't seem to follw any "rules of war". Why should we? Moral high ground? As I recall, we have not beheaded any journalists on national TV. We're not shoving bamboo shoots up their fingernails, dislocating limbs, or making them sleep in their own feces. The later would be their choice of course. Waterboarding is lightweight compared to how our captors treat us.

Have the countries that you mentioned prosecuted the crimes, or have charges been filed against said countries? Was it the countries that are guilty, or the leadership that allowed the practice torture? (i.e. 1947 Nuremburg Trials)

BTW...Still interested in buying some good vino?
“Ignorance can be fixed. Stupidity is forever”

9/11 changed everything

I use to value freedom and liberty and the rule of law until that day when someone entered my backyard and killed my pet billy goat. Now, whenever I find someone on my property or even in front of my yard, I grab them, bind them, drive them up to a friend who lives in the country's house; eyes taped closed.

There far from earshot of those whom might hear their cries, we do some "innocent little waterboarding," sleep deprivation, and nude hosing while prone on a cold cement slab.

So far, the mailman, yard care guy, and that one DHL delivery guy have yet to tell me who killed my pet billy goat. But I'll keep looking, and rendering, and interrogating......

Because the day my billy goat was killed changed everything!

So this is your defense... Comparing the tragedy of 9/11 and how it DID change how we as a nation now view the terrorist countries to the change of your losting a billy goat.... typical satire/appeasement from the typical liberal mine set of the diva. Great job!! Free all the terrorist... and bring home all the troops. Get rid of all firearms/ammo/nuks.. etc. Boy... I feel better already just thinking about it. Maybe we should just let the terrorist decide if WE should live or die. Sorry diva... think we all know the answer to that one.

Diva you are dead to me! I will never address any stupid comment you ever make again. I can't begin to say how disgusting I find your comment. To even start to put a value of a goat to the lives lost both innocent civilians on 9/11 and those of our servicemen has rendered me speechless. I'm done.

I know what you mean.. Diva is whacked out beyond belief..
Humans are now equated to goats.. in divas world they may well be..

Because in your response you would have to tell me how I equated any human life ever lost to a goat.

Abstract thoughts can be tough to process.

Enjoy the kiddie pool, Winer.

I hope you are correct.. but it is not just the "right wingers" that have been fear mongering.. Several Dems have called for them to be brought into our system.. I guess we will have to wait this one out...

What can I say. They are both ignorant and stupid, two different but interrelated things.

As you say, we shall see.

police are only required to warn an individual whom they intend to subject to custodial interrogation at the police station, in a police vehicle, or when detained. Arrests can occur without questioning and without the Miranda warning—although if the police do change their mind and decide to interrogate the suspect, the warning must then be given.

I wonder if military interrogators gave Miranda warnings to those captives they were about to torture?

"You have the right to remain silent under torture...."
_________________________
Palin-Nugent 2012

How many of the people in the World Trade Center were given warnings?

How about the Pentagon?

How many Americans were given warnings before boarding a plane on 9-11??

How many firefighters/cops/emergency room doctors/ air traffic controllers / pilots were warned on 9-11-2001??

Oh, don't all start typing at once...

Stop sympathizing with rabid animals before we all get bit. I don't care if the liberals and their president get bit, but I do care when it involves the rest of us. Stop trying to save terrorists!!! They have made their choices. It is like trying to save a racoon with rabies,....IT CANT'T BE DONE! They are already a lost cause and they can't be saved.

You have to wonder????

I have to wonder how many of your kids would you allow to study abroad or serve in the military in the middle east?

The only thing the terrorists know is war. They are not civilized people. We are throwing good money after bad trying to educate or use educated reasoning with rabid animals. Being nice to them is a waste of our time, money, and resources.

From now on lets throw every terrorist we find into the ocean and feed the sharks. I care more about the sharks than terrorists, because at least the sharks only kill when they are hungry.

"Stop sympathizing with rabid animals before we all get bit. I don't care if the liberals and their president get bit, but I do care when it involves the rest of us. Stop trying to save terrorists!!! They have made their choices. It is like trying to save a racoon with rabies,....IT CANT'T BE DONE! They are already a lost cause and they can't be saved."

So, what do you know about these detainees' actions and choices that the rest of us don't? What did they do? Who did they kill? Why won't we charge them, try them, and then punish them once and for all, for their "choices?"

What Americans have they "killed" Ogre?

or did you forget about the blood on the flag that day? They are there for a reason. Not everyone has the potential of good inside them its nice to try and believe that but its not true.

According to our liberal news media they have been held because they were associated with terrorist groups.

I also think it is stupid that we held them without either charging them via international law or executing them. Most other countries that aren't paralyzed by political correctness would have executed them. If our country could grow a pair that is what we would have done.

We really shouldn't try to discuss this anymore. I don't think I will change your opinion and I don't think I will change mine. I want them dead. That's just me.

The people that were killed on 9-11 weren't give any second chances or chances to explain.

Take care and be safe around some of your crazy co-workers.

The left wingers in our politically correct nation do not torture people for associating with foreign or domestic terrorist.THEY ELECT THEM PRESIDENT!!! NO QUESTIONS ASKED OR ANSWERED.!!

Does The President of the United States associate with people who want to destroy the U.S.? Can you fog a mirror without assistance?

How many people people should we detain and / or torture to become the great nation you envision?

They are not all guilty. Most have been released due to not being guilty!
You are assuming that they are all known terrorists---they are not!

You and Nancy Grace would hang everyone if possible.

guess those "captives" should have thought about that before they started killing americans.

Are you now saying that all of the detainees at Gitmo have killed Americans, yet we won't prosecute them for it? Interesting....