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

[Donovan Arnold]

Sunil,
 
The purpose of detaining combatants, is not to put them on trial. The point is to keep them from shooting at our troops.
 
This fact continues to elude you. Again, the purpose isn't to say they are criminals, and should be tried, but to keep them from doing something to you, me, Americans, and our troops. It isn't for any other reason. You cannot have a trial to convict someone of something they are going to do. But we should be able to detain them to keep them from killing us. It is called the right of self preservation. And it is just plain common sense to take the enemy off the field and keep them from killing you. 
 
The second fact that fails to elude you is that these terrorists, many of which plotted to kill thousands of Americans, have been given more rights than any other prisons of war in the History of the World. They can already have many trials. To give them more is a waste of taxpayer monies. 
 
The final fact, that seems to elude you, is that US Soldiers will no longer take hostages if they feel that they will not remain contained during the military conflict and may be given another opportunity to shoot at them again. 
 
There is something wrong with our court system when terrorists are given more rights than US citizens and the soldiers charged with the task of watching and containing them. Something is very wrong with this picture. 
 
Best Regards,
 
Donovan
 


--- On Sun, 6/15/08, Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [Bulk] Re: GITMO Detainees Can Challenge Detention
To: 
Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
Date: Sunday, June 15, 2008, 10:43 PM




#yiv745920124 .hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;padding:0px;}
#yiv745920124  .hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma;}

He has also not addressed his prior claim that they had already been tried, when no trials have taken place.  Kangaroo court hearings are not trials.

Sunil

> Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 20:26:53 -0700
> From: chasuk at gmail.com
> To: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
> CC: idahotom at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [Bulk] Re: GITMO Detainees Can Challenge Detention
> 
> On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 19:45, Donovan Arnold
> <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > You are incorrect on ALL Counts of your last email:
> 
> Am I? If I am wrong on ALL counts, then rebut all counts. I concede
> that I may be partially wrong on ONE count, but hardly ALL.
> 
> Importantly, I wrote that:
> 
> > So this isn't so much a matter of stripping the military of a right that it has historically
> > had, but of restoring legal rights to prisoners -- rights which were taken away with dubious
> > justification, and during a time of public hysteria.
> 
> Note the word "historically." History does predate the United States,
> at least for the rest of the world. Historically, enemy combatants
> were members of the enemy armed forces. Our Supreme Court redefined
> the historical meaning in 1942, and in this I erred when I stated:
> 
> > This power wasn't granted until post-9/11.
> 
> I was thinking of the later expansions, such as the Military
> Commissions Act of 2006. I apologize for my mistake.
> 
> As you didn't address any of my other alleged errors, I can't respond further.
> 
> Chas
> 
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet, 
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. 
> http://www.fsr.net 
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080616/dbf04e78/attachment-0001.html