red states rule
12-12-2007, 06:12 AM
This is insane. Since when do terrorists have US Constitutional rights?
A Gitmo trial beats judgment at Nuremberg
By Audrey Hudson
Nearly 100 foreign enemy combatants to be tried at Guantanamo Bay will have more rights than Nazi war criminals who faced the Nuremberg tribunal, a Senate panel was told yesterday.
Detainees in the war on terror will have the presumption of innocence and an automatic appeal, the latter not even afforded to U.S. citizens, said Brig. Gen. Thomas W. Hartmann, legal adviser to the Convening Authority for the Office of Military Commissions.
"No such presumption existed," said Gen. Hartmann in reference to Nuremberg while speaking to the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on terrorism, technology and homeland security. "There were no rules of evidence, and virtually any evidence was freely admitted.
"That was painfully apparent to those who were found guilty and received the death penalty — they were hung within hours and days of the completion of the sentence announcement," he said.
Steven A. Engel, Justice Department deputy assistant attorney general, said that extending the peacetime notion of habeas corpus to military prisoners would be "unprecedented."
"In the nearly 800 years of the writ's existence, no English or American court has ever granted habeas relief to alien enemy soldiers captured and detained during wartime," Mr. Engel said.
Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin, Maryland Democrat, disagreed with the federal officials and said "these individuals are basically criminals" and that criminals have the right to habeas corpus.
Last week, the Supreme Court heard arguments as to whether enemy combatants who are captured overseas are entitled to the same constitutional rights as U.S. citizens.
for the complete article
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071212/NATION/112120069/1001
A Gitmo trial beats judgment at Nuremberg
By Audrey Hudson
Nearly 100 foreign enemy combatants to be tried at Guantanamo Bay will have more rights than Nazi war criminals who faced the Nuremberg tribunal, a Senate panel was told yesterday.
Detainees in the war on terror will have the presumption of innocence and an automatic appeal, the latter not even afforded to U.S. citizens, said Brig. Gen. Thomas W. Hartmann, legal adviser to the Convening Authority for the Office of Military Commissions.
"No such presumption existed," said Gen. Hartmann in reference to Nuremberg while speaking to the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on terrorism, technology and homeland security. "There were no rules of evidence, and virtually any evidence was freely admitted.
"That was painfully apparent to those who were found guilty and received the death penalty — they were hung within hours and days of the completion of the sentence announcement," he said.
Steven A. Engel, Justice Department deputy assistant attorney general, said that extending the peacetime notion of habeas corpus to military prisoners would be "unprecedented."
"In the nearly 800 years of the writ's existence, no English or American court has ever granted habeas relief to alien enemy soldiers captured and detained during wartime," Mr. Engel said.
Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin, Maryland Democrat, disagreed with the federal officials and said "these individuals are basically criminals" and that criminals have the right to habeas corpus.
Last week, the Supreme Court heard arguments as to whether enemy combatants who are captured overseas are entitled to the same constitutional rights as U.S. citizens.
for the complete article
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071212/NATION/112120069/1001