Al Odah v. United States - Guantanamo detainees fate

[jaqeboy]

Center for Constitutional Rights   
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/383/t/4089/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=822

4 December 2007

Tomorrow, December 5, the Center for Constitutional Rights will return to the Supreme Court for the most important case of this decade. This historic case - Al Odah v. United States - will in all likelihood determine once and for all whether the men detained at Guantánamo have the right to a fair trial before a real court.
Read more about Al Odah v. United States here <http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=lI1H681SDbXd4T2%2Fm5YLHaWG7bl%2Feeti> .

All of us need to take action <http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=ba2fXi4zhrbWidVQUAZz56WG7bl%2Feeti>  to make sure that our rights - and our Constitution - are rescued from the hands of the Bush administration, where they have been systematically shredded for the past seven years:

    * Send President Bush a copy of the Constitution <http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=0oDVZnXDBXZS3Noua4MgF6WG7bl%2Feeti>  (something he seems to have forgotten about);
    * Watch CCR's hard-hitting ad <http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=qlacavENqj9YHcJ3iZDl1KWG7bl%2Feeti>  featuring Danny Glover on D.C. television and in Bush's bedroom; or
    * Watch our videos <http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=ZzG%2BgB6cHsQrBkTJF8qyVKWG7bl%2Feeti>  of Eve Ensler and Vanessa Redgrave speaking out against Guantánamo and forward them to your friends and family.

In 2004, CCR won the first Guantánamo Supreme Court case - Rasul v. Bush - when the Supreme Court sided with us and said the men at Guantánamo have basic rights, including the right to challenge their detention.

This new case, three years later, goes Beyond Guantánamo - in it, we are directly challenging President Bush's unprecedented power grab, his use of torture in violation of domestic and international law, and his assertion that he can hold anyone indefinitely anywhere in the world on his say-so alone.

CCR's "Beyond Guantánamo: Rescue the Constitution" campaign has been working to raise awareness about this historic case and the erosion of our constitutional freedoms.

To do this, we've:

    * created short videos featuring well-known actors and activists such as Danny Glover, Eve Ensler, and Vanessa Redgrave talking about the importance of moving Beyond Guantánamo;
    * placed opinion pieces by our attorneys in prominent publications such as The Washington Post and conducted countless in-depth interviews with radio shows, magazines, and newspapers around the country;
    * and started an online campaign which resulted in almost 40,000 people sending copies of the Constitution to President Bush (we figured he needed a gentle reminder that he swore an oath to uphold it).

But we need your help <http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=oVYuvWZXWLqa6TCBuN66i6WG7bl%2Feeti> : join us today and take action to Restore the Constitution. Let's move Beyond Guantánamo.

[coffeeseven]

Destroyed video tapes of torturing hostages...Murat Kurnaz who was found completely innocent of all charges but not released because he'll tell all about being tortured. Never thought I'd live to see crap like this where torture is the norm.

[jaqeboy]

I know. We used to read about the horrors that happened at the hands of the goons of those other horrible governments. 

[John Edward Mercier]

I don't believe they're covered under the US Constitution. Maybe some international aggreement?

[coffeeseven]

I don't believe they're covered under the US Constitution. Maybe some international aggreement?

What a shame. If you're not covered under the Constitution our government will torture you and that's ok. Sad sad sad.

Under the new set of rules our government has penned for themselves all they have to do is declare you an enemy combatant and the Constitution is out the window. That's why we should be watching the Homegrown Terrorist Act. We could all be tortured for our dissent. It's 1984; the sequel.

[John Edward Mercier]

I might be wrong, but if I remember correctly... they were trying to avoid labeling them as POWs.
POWs of course would not have constitutional rights.

[jaqeboy]

POWs would be covered by the Geneva Convention, right?

[John Edward Mercier]

My understanding is the POWs would be covered by the Geneva Treaty that we signed.

[jaqeboy]

I think the admin. was trying to avoid having detainees labelled as POWs for that reason and arguing for the "enemy combatant" status. Granted, I'm not an expert on this, but I believe the point was to not have to abide by the U.S. Constitution or the Geneva Convention.

I believe the point of libertarians is one of equity and a drive towards creation of a state of fairness in the world where torture is not a mode of operation that is acceptable, since it would also be used on our neighbors, family and US, should the occasion arise. A kind of Golden Rule thing.

There are probably legal distinctions between prisononer and detainee, too. What I think we struggle against is the world fascist drive to allow torture and punishment without trials, renditions, assassinations, etc. Ya know?