[Vision2020] [Bulk] Re: GITMO Detainees Can Challenge Detention

[Chasuk]

On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 20:27, Donovan Arnold
<donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Again, I think you should start an "Adopt a Terrorist" program so that these
> terrorists have a place to go since nobody will take them and you believe
> that their continued stay in GTMO is a violation of their rights. You
> clearly are allowing them to be abused by not adopting one of them.

I wouldn't adopt a supposed terrorist any more than I would hire a
supposed rapist to babysit my daughters.  That still doesn't mean that
I think they should be denied a fair and speedy trial.

> And so you know, I am not for giving up any of my rights. I am just not for
> giving terrorists rights over that of our soldiers and their
> terrorist victims. Unlawful combatants are not entitled to civil trials,
> only military tribunals. If they wanted civilian rights, or the rights of a
> lawful soldier, they should not have violated the Laws of War.

Let's rephrase that:

> And so you know, I am not for giving up any of my rights. I am just not for
> giving rapists rights over that of their victims. Rapists are not entitled to publicly accountable trials,
> only secret, non-accountable ones. If they wanted the same rights as the rest of us, should not
> have been rapists.

Conspicuously missing from both your version and mine is the word
"alleged."  We are presumiing guilt instead of innocence here.

All presuming guilt instead of innocence on the word of whom?  In many
cases, bounty hunters?  Of military intelligence?  Our military
intelligence which is so infamously unreliable that it is frequently
used as an example of an oxymoron?

Chas