Gitmo Terror Detainee Not Entitled To Due Process

[Rightguide]

In a demonstration of judicial sanity:

Guantanamo detainee not entitled to due process claims, appeals court rules

August 31, 2020 Ryan Morgan

A U.S. federal appeals court ruled on Friday against a Guantanamo Bay detainee who claimed President Donald Trump’s authority to detain him indefinitely posed a violation of due process.

Abdulsalam Ali Abdulrahman Al Hela, a Yemeni businessman who has been detained by the U.S. since 2004, had tried to win release with a habeas corpus petition to either proceed with a trial or let him go. On Friday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia denied Al Hela’s due process claim, upholding a lower court’s 2019 decision striking down his request.

In its 47-page opinion, the court ruled Al Hela did not have grounds to raise his trial demands. The court ruled Al Hela has been detained under a valid use of the Suspension Clause, suspending his right to demand a speedy trial. The Suspension Clause of the constitution, Article I, Section 9, Clause 2, states “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

“We affirm the district court because the President has authority to detain Al Hela and the proceedings below complied with the requirements of the Suspension Clause,” Judge Neomi Rao wrote in the court’s opinion Friday. “We reject Al Hela’s due process claims because the Due Process Clause may not be invoked by aliens without property or presence in the sovereign territory of the United States.”

More here:
https://americanmilitarynews.com/20...ed-to-due-process-claims-appeals-court-rules/

 

[oggbashan]

Which is why UK intelligence agencies face criticisms for supporting extraordinary rendition.

Detaining someone without trial or access to legal proceedings is a breach of international law.

The US should put up evidence in a court of law or release any detainees. Anything else equates them with China or Iran who has political detainees for years facing no charges.

 

[colddiesel]

The courts of the Peoples Republic of China require that a prisoner (including aliens) be either charged or released after six months.

 

[oggbashan]

The courts of the Peoples Republic of China require that a prisoner (including aliens) be either charged or released after six months.

If the court has knowledge of a person's detention. Many just 'disappear'.

 

[Rightguide]

Which is why UK intelligence agencies face criticisms for supporting extraordinary rendition.

Detaining someone without trial or access to legal proceedings is a breach of international law.

The US should put up evidence in a court of law or release any detainees. Anything else equates them with China or Iran who has political detainees for years facing no charges.

Your country housed thousands of German POWs and even used them as forced labor after the official end of WWII. We don't do that.

It is not a breach of international law recognized by the United states government.

 

[oggbashan]

Your country housed thousands of German POWs and even used them as forced labor after the official end of WWII. We don't do that.

It is not a breach of international law recognized by the United states government.

You did:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germa...oughout the United States during World War II.

What we did was in accordance with the Geneva conventions and the Germans, largely, adhered to them too. The Japanese were not signatories to the Geneva conventions which is why tens of thousands of their prisoners died.

"It is not a breach of international law recognized by the United states government."

Exactly. Everyone else thinks it is.

 

[Conager]

You don't get to institute law without the consent of the governed. Doesn't matter how many depots from around the world you can get to support the International community stamping their feet. The United States go is going to do whatever the fuck we want to do.

It isn't as if any American service men can count on being afforded the Geneva Convention protection with the various assholes that we have to go out and kill because the rest of the world doesn't have the resources to do so.

An analog:

Now that the world doesn't have a disloyal American president who's willing to violate the constitution by deciding by fiat to sign the Paris Climate Accords that he had no authority to bind the Untied States, the "World" could make such things "international law " Doesn't mean we have to ir should abide by such strictures imposed from without.

The US is not required to relinquish its sovereignty on sm issue. We bend to pressure of the so called international community far more than most. When others are bending to International pressure they do it because of what's in it for them. The United States does it for virtue signaling when it is against our interests.

Name another country that is spent more on defense and recovered less from the spoils of war at any time in history.

 

[Rightguide]

You did:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germa...oughout the United States during World War II.

What we did was in accordance with the Geneva conventions and the Germans, largely, adhered to them too. The Japanese were not signatories to the Geneva conventions which is why tens of thousands of their prisoners died.

"It is not a breach of international law recognized by the United states government."

Exactly. Everyone else thinks it is.

What we're doing doesn't violate the Geneva Conventions either. We did not use them as forced labor either.

You kept POWS until 1948.

 

[oggbashan]

What we're doing doesn't violate the Geneva Conventions either. We did not use them as forced labor either.

You kept POWS until 1948.

And you kept them after the war too.

The Geneva Convention's mandate of equal treatment for prisoners also meant they were paid American military wages.[20]:78 They could work on farms or elsewhere only if they were also paid for their labor, and officers could not be compelled to work. As the United States sent millions of soldiers overseas, the resulting shortage of labor eventually meant that German POWs worked toward the Allied war effort by helping out in canneries, mills, farms, and other places deemed a minimal security risk

Although they expected to go home immediately after the end of the war in 1945, the majority of German prisoners continued working in the United States until 1946—arguably violating the Geneva Convention's requirement of rapid repatriation

 

[Rainblow]

In all fairness, as unconscionable as it may seem to al-Alwi, the US is more than willing to detain their own citizens indefinitely and without charge.

In a filing with the Supreme Court this April, lawyers for the Justice Department argued that the United States can continue to hold al-Alwi indefinitely without charging him. They also embraced the power to detain a U.S. citizen as an “enemy combatant”, an assertion they haven’t advanced openly since the era of President George W. Bush. Notably, the lawyers seemed to indicate, for the first time in a filing with the Supreme Court, that the government could even detain a U.S. citizen for as long as it has held al-Alwi, 17 years and counting, without charge.”

https://theintercept.com/2019/06/21/guantanamo-bay-indefinite-detention/

 

[oggbashan]

In all fairness, as unconscionable as it may seem to al-Alwi, the US is more than willing to detain their own citizens indefinitely and without charge.

In a filing with the Supreme Court this April, lawyers for the Justice Department argued that the United States can continue to hold al-Alwi indefinitely without charging him. They also embraced the power to detain a U.S. citizen as an “enemy combatant”, an assertion they haven’t advanced openly since the era of President George W. Bush. Notably, the lawyers seemed to indicate, for the first time in a filing with the Supreme Court, that the government could even detain a U.S. citizen for as long as it has held al-Alwi, 17 years and counting, without charge.”

https://theintercept.com/2019/06/21/guantanamo-bay-indefinite-detention/

The land of the free?

 

[Rainblow]

The land of the free?

"Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth." Goebbels

How does that saying go again? Those who cannot learn from history...something something

 

[Rightguide]

And you kept them after the war too.

The Geneva Convention's mandate of equal treatment for prisoners also meant they were paid American military wages.[20]:78 They could work on farms or elsewhere only if they were also paid for their labor, and officers could not be compelled to work. As the United States sent millions of soldiers overseas, the resulting shortage of labor eventually meant that German POWs worked toward the Allied war effort by helping out in canneries, mills, farms, and other places deemed a minimal security risk

Although they expected to go home immediately after the end of the war in 1945, the majority of German prisoners continued working in the United States until 1946—arguably violating the Geneva Convention's requirement of rapid repatriation

Many wanted to remain in the United States as opposed to going back to Germany, but we didn't keep them as a labor force for three years after the end of the war, as you did.

 

[oggbashan]

Many wanted to remain in the United States as opposed to going back to Germany, but we didn't keep them as a labor force for three years after the end of the war, as you did.

We couldn't send them back to Germany as soon as we wanted to because for some reason Germany was wrecked. Many Italians and some Germans decided to stay.

We let them stay. You didn't.

 

[RobDownSouth]

You don't get to institute law without the consent of the governed. Doesn't matter how many depots from around the world you can get to support the International community stamping their feet. The United States go is going to do whatever the fuck we want to do.

The OP is about a Yemeni businessman who to my knowledge has never been in the USA, was captured by the CIA in Egypt in 2004 and held for 16 year in Gitmo.

Did the Yemeni government authorize this?
Did the Egyptian government authorize another country to come in and capture someone?

Your "consent of the governed" sounds a tad specious, little fella.

Your reasoning is more along the lines of RightGuide's "might make right".

 

[colddiesel]

We did not use them as forced labor either.

You kept POWS until 1948.

The main reason you used or did not use German prisoners was because you lot studiously avoided fighting them at all for three years. therefore no prisoners.

 

[Bad_Egg]

Terrorist, their allies, those who turn a blind eye deserve only death. /thread.

https://media.giphy.com/media/StKjvSiOJXHOnREwnb/giphy.gif

 

[Tigersman]

Which is why UK intelligence agencies face criticisms for supporting extraordinary rendition.

Detaining someone without trial or access to legal proceedings is a breach of international law.

The US should put up evidence in a court of law or release any detainees. Anything else equates them with China or Iran who has political detainees for years facing no charges.

He's a prisoner of war, therefore he can be held indefinitely. If he was being held for war crimes then he would be entitled to a trial.

 

[Tigersman]

The courts of the Peoples Republic of China require that a prisoner (including aliens) be either charged or released after six months.

Their prisoners are prisoners of war. There's a big difference.

 

[colddiesel]

He's a prisoner of war, therefore he can be held indefinitely. If he was being held for war crimes then he would be entitled to a trial.

Legal pedantry is a piss poor excuse for barbarity.

 

[oggbashan]

He's a prisoner of war, therefore he can be held indefinitely. If he was being held for war crimes then he would be entitled to a trial.

He has to be proven to be an enemy combatant. Where is that proof?

 

[oggbashan]

Their prisoners are prisoners of war. There's a big difference.

Their own citizens? Who have done nothing except be different?

 

[FescueFan]

Detaining someone without trial or access to legal proceedings is a breach of international law.

"It is not a breach of international law recognized by the United states government."

Exactly. Everyone else thinks it is.

Then EVERYONE ELSE can come enforce it......

https://media1.giphy.com/media/ztujni1w6RR96/giphy.gif

The land of the free?

Is not for our enemies who take up arms against us.....Democrats are about to be in a world of shit for that one.

The OP is about a Yemeni businessman who to my knowledge has never been in the USA, was captured by the CIA in Egypt in 2004 and held for 16 year in Gitmo.

Did the Yemeni government authorize this?
Did the Egyptian government authorize another country to come in and capture someone?

Maybe, maybe not.

Your "consent of the governed" sounds a tad specious, little fella.

That's why it's called black ops....not a law or governance. LOL fucking retard.

He has to be proven to be an enemy combatant. Where is that proof?

According to who?

Prove to who??

 

[oggbashan]

According to who?

Prove to who??

To any US court. People should be entitled to have their alleged actions adjudged by a fair and impartial tribunal. What has happened is that someone has decided he is guilty but haven't given him a chance to prove his innocence.

According to the US Supreme court, anyone, anywhere, could be kidnapped from anywhere and sent to Gitmo for nothing proven - including you. That is the action of a lawless state.

 

[FescueFan]

To any US court.

I'm pretty sure the PATRIOT act already went through.

People should be entitled to have their alleged actions adjudged by a fair and impartial tribunal.

The USA disagrees.

What has happened is that someone has decided he is guilty but haven't given him a chance to prove his innocence.

Life as an anti-American terrorist is rough....best not to engage in terrorism against the USA.

On that note AntiFa/BLM are about to find the fuck out just how horrifying their being labeled "terrorist" is about to get. SoyBoys and hipsters come to gitmo LOL

They want to be victims? They got it!!

According to the US Supreme court, anyone, anywhere, could be kidnapped from anywhere and sent to Gitmo for nothing proven - including you. That is the action of a lawless state.

Yup all they have to do is point and say "Terrorist" and you lose all your rights.....they can drone strike your ass in downtown Manhattan if they want.

That was all part of expanding the powers of the PATRIOT act.
https://media.newyorker.com/photos/590958c76552fa0be682d2b8/master/pass/obamasotu_opt.jpg