[Vision2020] GITMO Detainees Can Challenge Detention

[lfalen]

Tom
Again. regardless of any declaration, those that were capured in batle, trying to kill our soldiers, should not be released to go bank and again kill our troops.The message is take no poisoners.
Roger
-----Original message-----
From: Tom Hansen thansen at moscow.com
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 15:18:47 -0700
To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com,  the_ivies3 at yahoo.com,  vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] GITMO Detainees Can Challenge Detention

> Roger -
> 
> They only way a person becomes a prisoner of war is being apprehended 
> during a declared war.  You cannot simply apply the POW tag at a whim when 
> it is to your liking.
> 
> I do not recall any declared war.  Unless you consider Bush's GWOT (Global 
> War On Terror) to be an official sanctioned, declared war, which (for 
> obvious reasons) fails the litmus test.
> 
> Another thing:  These detainees were never considered to be prisoners of 
> war.  If they are, in fact, POWs, President Bush, former Secretary of 
> Defense Rumsfeld, and a whole slew of "interrogators" should be brought 
> before a military tribunal for crimes against humanity; remember "water 
> boarding" among other applied forms of torture clearly delineated in Army 
> regulations as violations of the Geneva and Hague Conventions.
> 
> This isn't simply my opinion, Roger.  This is straight facts.  If you 
> would like, I will spend the next few days outlining these violations, 
> specification by specification, and how they clearly violate the 
> aforementioned conventions.
> 
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
> 
> > Tom and Liz
> > Regardless of the semantics on a declaration of war, If they were 
> captured during a
> battle, they should be considered prisoners of war. To release them and 
> sent them home,
> the take home message to our solders is- Take no prisoners.
> > Roger
> > -----Original message-----
> > From: Tom Ivie the_ivies3 at yahoo.com
> > Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 14:24:45 -0700
> > To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] GITMO Detainees�Can Challenge Detention
> > 
> > > This was the topic of a family discussion this weekend. One argument I 
> heard was that
> you have to define "war" in the Constitution.� The argument was that the 
> Constitution
> refers to war between the U.S. and another country, not individuals and 
> not groups. Though
> I haven't verified this by any means. The family member went on to say 
> that the U.S. never
> went to war with Afghanistan. Afghanistan is where many of the 
> detainees�were captured.
> If this is the case, are they really prisoners of war?� 
> > > 
> > > Tom & Liz Ivie
> > > 
> > > --- On Mon, 6/16/08, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
> > > From: lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] GITMO Detainees Can Challenge Detention
> > > To: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>, "Chasuk"
> <chasuk at gmail.com>
> > > Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > Date: Monday, June 16, 2008, 3:09 PM
> > > 
> > > Most of these people were captured on the battlefield and a more 
> appropriately
> > > should be treated as prisoners of war. This is entirety different from 
> criminal
> > > offenses that occur within the US. No nation that I know of has 
> released
> > > prisoners of war while the war is in progress. If any of theses 
> detainee are US
> > > citizens and were aressed within the US, they might legitimately be 
> subject to
> > > the US judical system.
> > > Roger
> > > -----Original message-----
> > > From: Donovan Arnold donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
> > > Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 22:02:36 -0700
> > > To: Chasuk chasuk at gmail.com
> > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] GITMO Detainees Can Challenge Detention
> > > 
> > > > Chas,
> > > >    
> > > >   They were not deprived of due process of law. They were tried, and 
> found
> > > guilty before they are sent and locked up in Gitmo. The reason they 
> are not
> > > tried in American Civilian Courts is because they are not US Citizens 
> and
> > > because if they were it would expose US classified information which 
> would put
> > > US soldiers and possibly civilians at risk. 
> > > >    
> > > >   Best Regards,
> > > >    
> > > >   Donovan
> > > > 
> > > > Chasuk <chasuk at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >   On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 18:59, Donovan Arnold
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Maybe we should create an "Adopt a Detainee" program. Those
> > > that think they
> > > > > are innocent detainees can line up and open their homes to people
> > > considered
> > > > > to be unfairly detained at Gitmo. If they really believe that these
> > > people
> > > > > are innocent, and they are released, it would be unfair to send 
> them
> > > back to
> > > > > their home country to be killed, right?
> > > > 
> > > > I don't have any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the Gitmo
> > > > detainees, so I won't be inviting them into my house, thank you.
> > > > However, that doesn't mean that I believe they should have been
> > > > deprived of the due process of law, which is the real subject here.
> > > > 
> > > > 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
> > =======================================================
> > 
> 
> 
> "We're a town of about 23,000 with 10,000 college students. The college 
> students are not very active in local elections (thank goodness!)."
> 
> - Dale Courtney (March 28, 2007)
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------
> This message was sent by First Step Internet.
>            http://www.fsr.com/
> 
>