Subject:
|
Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 19 Mar 2003 13:12:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
372 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli writes:
>
> > Since abrogating the Clinton administration's signature last year, the Bush
> > administration has persuaded 24 countries to sign bilateral agreements with
> > the United States, pledging not to surrender to the court U.S. nationals or
> > foreigners working under U.S. contract. The U.S. Congress has passed
> > legislation authorizing the president to take "all means necessary" to free
> > Americans taken into custody by the court.
>
> Does anyone know why? Lets see; no right to fair jury, no right to language
> translator, no right to legal counsel, and you can be imprisoned in
> any country
> the court chooses. This applies to civilians as well as military personel. I
> don't know, maybe in other countries it is normal to be tried in a court
> without knowing or understanding why, shipped to China or something, and never
> be seen again. Here in the USA civilians don't tolerate that kind of crap.
Ya, you're right. What the US is doing to the terrorism detainees, as you
describe above, is shocking and disgusting. Thanks for reminding us.
Oh wait, you're talking about the ICC, aren't you? I got confused for a minute
> For
> crying out loud a US military court gives someone more rights than the current
> International Court does
It does? Not if you're an "enemy combatant".
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
164 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
