The Great Don Quijote of RBM!

"still me" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 08:25:43 -0500, "Keats" wrote:

By far most of the Gutmo Bay (great name still me) enemy combatant
detainees
have been released or sent back to their countries of origin. What's left
is about 200 of the worst of the worst.

Then try the other 200. They've been ther long enough.

Two hundred Moussaoui like farce trials would be a real hoot, but we
hardly
have the time, money, or patience for it.

Different circumstances, different trial. But, the fact remains. They
are entitled to due process. If their guilty, hang 'em, if not, send
them home.


If anything, each of the 200 unlawful enemy combatant trials would be more
difficult than Moussaoui's trail, which, by the way, took over four years to
get started with a cost of tens of millions dollars. How do the unlawful
enemy combatants get due process in our domestic courts when they were
caputured on foreign soil, weren't read their rights, or properly arrested,
or served with search or arrest warrents, and aren't citizens. Your idea to
try them, hang them if guilty, or send them home if not quilty seems naive.

The legal status of unlawful enemy combatants and their treatment needs to
be resolved so that everyone will have a clear understanding in as much as
were are going to be dealing with Islamic jihad for years to come. Let's
set the ground rules and stop the whining.


So it seems to me the best
course would be to keep the detainee community together and resettle them
in
the USA to start their new lives. We need to identify a nice liberal
community where the diversity the detainees bring to the community would
be
celebrated by the residents. Where did you say you lived?


I take it you didn't really go for my suggestion to resettle these unlawful
enemy jihadists in your community.


Sorry my friend, but you've read me wrong. The fact that I don't like
the recent Republican party, and that I believe in a strong
Constitution and a stronger Bill of Rights, doesn't make me a liberal.
It makes me a conservative. But, you're too neo-con to know that.
Unless you want to brand the Founding Fathers as liberals. Then I will
proudly stand beside them.



I trust the founding fathers would have some ideas about the differences
between domestic criminals and non-citizens who are unlawful Islamic enemy
jihad combatants captured on foreign soil.

(not Tom) Keats

"A Muzi" wrote
No expert, but I keep a copy on my desk. Where's that section on
out-of-uniform enemy combatants overseas and their 'rights' under the
American Constitution again??
hint: Why does Geneva require uniforms, chain of command etc for
definition of POWs?

Clive George wrote:
Ok, so they aren't POWs. Which means they must be normal prisoners, and
should be treated as such - with the normal trial, etc. And this should
be done by somebody with juristiction in the area.

If they're not covered by the American Constitution, why are the
Americans holding them?

Some might say it's an ad hoc and still-evolving solution to vicious and
feral attacks based on an asymmetry which exploits the freedoms of an
advanced civilization against itself. Not citizens. Not soldiers. No
clear prior examples to follow.

Others feel the power, wealth and blood of the nation are being spent to
unfairly exploit a couple hundred innocent 'just walking by' victims at
Guantanamo.

I'm reminded of Norman Mailer, who 'discovered' a violent felon with
supposed writing skills. After Mailer got him out from under the jury's
sentence, the 'poor soul' sliced a waiter to death with a knife in NYC.
I think the taxpaying waiter's rights were abridged but, hey, people's
viewpoints differ.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

"A Muzi" wrote in message
...
"A Muzi" wrote
No expert, but I keep a copy on my desk. Where's that section on
out-of-uniform enemy combatants overseas and their 'rights' under the
American Constitution again??
hint: Why does Geneva require uniforms, chain of command etc for
definition of POWs?

Clive George wrote:
Ok, so they aren't POWs. Which means they must be normal prisoners, and
should be treated as such - with the normal trial, etc. And this should
be done by somebody with juristiction in the area.

If they're not covered by the American Constitution, why are the
Americans holding them?

Some might say it's an ad hoc and still-evolving solution to vicious and
feral attacks based on an asymmetry which exploits the freedoms of an
advanced civilization against itself. Not citizens. Not soldiers. No clear
prior examples to follow.

No clear example being set either - no shining beacon for people to be proud
of and for the world to follow. Sure, it's only a couple of hundred people.
But it's a couple of hundred examples for the folk who are going to see the
US as an evil country, and who do rather more than write tetchy emails about
it.

I'm reminded of Norman Mailer, who 'discovered' a violent felon with
supposed writing skills. After Mailer got him out from under the jury's
sentence, the 'poor soul' sliced a waiter to death with a knife in NYC. I
think the taxpaying waiter's rights were abridged but, hey, people's
viewpoints differ.

"Courts release felon shock". It's not exactly an isolated case, is it?
People reoffend when they get out of prison, people get let off on
technicalities, people don't get charged in the first case. (Income tax
evasion the best they could come up with for a certain famous person?)

There is one important difference : said violent felon didn't have many more
people being inspired to attack the US because of his treatment.

And I'm prepared to put up with the problems that arise from eg assumption
of innocence, trial by jury, due process, as the alternatives are far
worse - police state, etc.

(Did you know that your fine country won't give people a visa waiver if
they've ever been arrested? Not charged, not found guilty, but arrested -
which can legitimately happen on the uncorroborated word of one person.)

clive

It's my contention here that a very modern trend is rooted in a very
primitive behavior: MONKEY SEE MONKEY DO. Yeap, those who got money
and power (the top monkeys) ride big shiny SUVs, so the rest of the
troop quickly learns the trick. IF YOU WANT TO STAND OUT AND SURVIVE
IN THE JUNGLE YOU BETTER HAVE AN SUV. The hope, however, is that we
can turn around that bad behavior by changing those monkeys at the top
--or simply changing their behavior-- so the other monkeys would
follow...


(THE HUNDREDTH MONKEY BY KEN KEYES, JR.)

This book does not deal with petty matters.

It tells how to operate our lives - and our world.

It tells us how to stay alive!

The mess we've brought upon ourselves is a most perilous and
challenging one.

The broad picture pieced together here will show you the immensity of
the nuclear dangers, the futility of any defense or protection, the
power of the new awareness and your role in the unfolding drama.

There is a phenomenon I'd like to tell you about.

In it may lie our only hope of a future for our species.

Here is the story of the Hundredth Monkey:

The Japanese monkey, Macaca fuscata, has been observed in the wild for
a period of over 30 years.

In 1952, on the island of Koshima scientists were providing monkeys
with sweet potatoes dropped in the sand. The monkeys liked the taste
of the raw sweet potatoes, but they found the dirt unpleasant.

An 18-month-old female named Imo found she could solve the problem in
a nearby stream. She taught this trick to her mother. Her playmates
also learned this new way and they taught their mothers, too.

This cultural innovation was gradually picked up by various monkeys
before the eyes of the scientists.

Between 1952 and 1958, all the young monkeys learned to wash the sandy
sweet potatoes to make them more palatable.

Only the adults who imitated their children learned this social
improvement. Other adults kept eating the dirty sweet potatoes.

Then something startling took place. In the autumn of 1958, a certain
number of Koshima monkeys were washing sweet potatoes - the exact
number is not known.

Let us suppose that when the sun rose one morning there were 99
monkeys on Koshima Island who had learned to wash their sweet
potatoes.

Let's further suppose that later that morning, the hundredth monkey
learned to wash potatoes.

THEN IT HAPPENED!

By that evening almost everyone in the tribe was washing sweet
potatoes before eating them.

The added energy of this hundredth monkey somehow created an
ideological breakthrough!

But notice.

A most surprising thing observed by these scientists was that the
habit of washing sweet potatoes then jumped over the sea -

Colonies of monkeys on other islands and the mainland troop of monkeys
at Takasakiyama began washing their sweet potatoes!*

(*Lifetide by Lyall Watson, pp. 147-148. Bantam Books 1980. This book
gives other fascinating details.)

Thus, when a certain critical number achieves an awareness, this new
awareness may be communicated from mind to mind.

Although the exact number may very, the Hundredth Monkey Phenomenon
means that when only a limited number of people know of a new way, it
may remain the consciousness property of these people.

But there is a point at which if only one more person tunes-in to a
new awareness, a field is strengthened so that this awareness is
picked up by almost everyone!

Your awareness is needed in saving the world from nuclear war.

You may be the "Hundredth Monkey" . . . .

http://secretthink.blog-city.com/fro...eir_lesson.htm

Response to donquijote1954:
A most surprising thing observed by these scientists was that the
habit of washing sweet potatoes then jumped over the sea -

Colonies of monkeys on other islands and the mainland troop of monkeys
at Takasakiyama began washing their sweet potatoes!*

(*Lifetide by Lyall Watson, pp. 147-148. Bantam Books 1980. This book
gives other fascinating details.)


Erm, but it's a myth: Lyall Watson made it up.

Google for it, if you can be bothered.


--
Mark, UK
"Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open
sewer and die."

"Mark McNeill" wrote in message
...
Response to donquijote1954:
A most surprising thing observed by these scientists was that the
habit of washing sweet potatoes then jumped over the sea -

Colonies of monkeys on other islands and the mainland troop of monkeys
at Takasakiyama began washing their sweet potatoes!*

(*Lifetide by Lyall Watson, pp. 147-148. Bantam Books 1980. This book
gives other fascinating details.)


Erm, but it's a myth: Lyall Watson made it up.

Google for it, if you can be bothered.


--

Whew! That's a relief. I was getting all concerned about Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad being the 100th Hitler.

(not Tom) Keats

On Aug 5, 1:03 pm, Ken the Troll wrote:
Unfortunately we have a President who rides a bicycle, but its a
mountain bike, which are ridden by people with a "macho" complex who
are more interested in tearing up the environment than protecting it.
He seems to prefer being hauled up to the top of a big hill and then
coasts his way down, much as he seems to have done in college and in
the university, and then calls that getting his exercise.

If you want a better President next time you have to 1) contribute to
those candidates that hold the same values as you do, 2) volunteer to
work on their local campaign staff and then try to influence you
neighbors, 3) vote in the primary or attend your caucus, 4) become a
delegate to the national convention of your party [I hope the hell it
isn't Republican - after 16 years of living under a Rethug government
in Michigan], 5) continue to campaign and contribute to the candidate
who is closest to your point of view, 6) vote early and then work with
your candidate's committee to get out the vote. If you don't do this
then don't complain about the people who get elected.

I only vote for candidates who have a record of supporting cycling
friendly bills and programs while they had office. We can bitch all we
want of newsgroups like this, but unless we get active and elect
people who support our causes we will continue to get "Bike Route"
signs instead of designated bike lanes, paths, etc. and we will
continue to see our brothers and sisters killed by "distracted" ( -
"sun blinded" or what ever other excuse used to excuse the drivers who
use their two to six ton gas pigs to kill us) drivers.

As Pogo used to say "We have met the enemy and it is us!"

Ken the Troll (living below - South - of the Mighty Mackinaw Bridge)

If the president's riding skills are the same as his speaking skills,
I certainly don't want to ride near him.

(Not Tom) Keats wrote:
...
If anything, each of the 200 unlawful enemy combatant trials would be more
difficult than Moussaoui's trail, which, by the way, took over four years to
get started with a cost of tens of millions dollars....

What is that, a couple days profit on no-bid Iraqi "rebuilding" contracts?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Tim McNamara wrote:

And that is exactly the point. The Bush Administration has overturned
the principle of rule of law and is in violation of its oath to uphold
and defend the Constitution.

butbutbut, George W. DID NOT [1] get a blow job from an intern!

[1] To the best available knowledge.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Andrew Muzi wrote:
On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 07:07:05 -0500, "Keats" wrote:

Yes I know. *Most* imprisoned terrorists are turned in by their
brother-in-laws who never liked them to begin with or were forced on
into the field of battle by *others* just like *most* inmates in any
prison are *innocent* of all charges. What we are doing to them is
just plain *mean*. They've been humiliated enough.

We should free them all, don't you think?

still me wrote:
If they are guilty, then they need to be tried and convicted. I don't
have any problem with that. But, holding people indefinitely without
charging them is against everything this country was founded on. If
you don't know that, you should go back and review the Constitution.

Tim McNamara wrote:
And that is exactly the point. The Bush Administration has overturned
the principle of rule of law and is in violation of its oath to uphold
and defend the Constitution.

No expert, but I keep a copy on my desk. Where's that section on
out-of-uniform enemy combatants overseas and their 'rights' under the
American Constitution again??

I did see the 'oath' part, "I will support and defend the Constitution
of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". Sounds
good to me, glad he was sincere in it.

hint: Why does Geneva require uniforms, chain of command etc for
definition of POWs?

To quote from the "Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12
August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International
Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977":

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Art 44. Combatants and prisoners of war

1. Any combatant, as defined in Article 43, who falls into the power of
an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.

2. While all combatants are obliged to comply with the rules of
international law applicable in armed conflict, violations of these
rules shall not deprive a combatant of his right to be a combatant or,
if he falls into the power of an adverse Party, of his right to be a
prisoner of war, except as provided in paragraphs 3 and 4.

3. In order to promote the protection of the civilian population from
the effects of hostilities, combatants are obliged to distinguish
themselves from the civilian population while they are engaged in an
attack or in a military operation preparatory to an attack. Recognizing,
however, that there are situations in armed conflicts where, owing to
the nature of the hostilities an armed combatant cannot so distinguish
himself, he shall retain his status as a combatant, provided that, in
such situations, he
carries his arms openly:

(a) during each military engagement, and
(b) during such time as he is visible to the adversary while he is
engaged in a military deployment preceding the launching of an attack in
which he is to participate.

Acts which comply with the requirements of this paragraph shall not be
considered as perfidious within the meaning of Article 37, paragraph 1 (c).

4. A combatant who falls into the power of an adverse Party while
failing to meet the requirements set forth in the second sentence of
paragraph 3 shall forfeit his right to be a prisoner of war, but he
shall, nevertheless, be given protections equivalent in all respects to
those accorded to prisoners of war by the Third Convention and by this
Protocol. This protection includes protections equivalent to those
accorded to prisoners of war by the Third Convention in the case where
such a person is tried and punished for any offences he has committed.

5. Any combatant who falls into the power of an adverse Party while not
engaged in an attack or in a military operation preparatory to an attack
shall not forfeit his rights to be a combatant and a prisoner of war by
virtue of his prior activities .

6. This Article is without prejudice to the right of any person to be a
prisoner of war pursuant to Article 4 of the Third Convention.

7. This Article is not intended to change the generally accepted
practice of States with respect to the wearing of the uniform by
combatants assigned to the regular, uniformed armed units of a Party to
the conflict.

8. In addition to the categories of persons mentioned in Article 13 of
the First and Second Conventions, all members of the armed forces of a
Party to the conflict, as defined in Article 43 of this Protocol, shall
be entitled to protection under those Conventions if they are wounded or
sick or, in the case of the Second Convention, shipwrecked at sea or in
other waters.


Art 45. Protection of persons who have taken part in hostilities

1. A person who takes part in hostilities and falls into the power of an
adverse Party shall be presumed to be a prisoner of war, and therefore
shall be protected by the Third Convention, if he claims the status of
prisoner of war, or if he appears to be entitled to such status, or if
the Party on which he depends claims such status on his behalf by
notification to the detaining Power or to the Protecting Power. Should
any doubt arise as to whether any such person is entitled to the status
of prisoner of war, he shall continue to have such status and,
therefore, to be protected by the Third Convention and this Protocol
until such time as his status has been determined by a competent tribunal.

2. If a person who has fallen into the power of an adverse Party is not
held as a prisoner of war and is to be tried by that Party for an
offence arising out of the hostilities, he shall have the right to
assert his entitlement to prisoner-of-war status before a judicial
tribunal and to have that question adjudicated. Whenever possible under
the applicable procedure, this adjudication shall occur before the trial
for the offence. The representatives of the Protecting Power shall be
entitled to attend the proceedings in which that question is
adjudicated, unless, exceptionally, the proceedings are held in camera
in the interest of State security. In such a case the detaining Power
shall advise the Protecting Power accordingly.

3. Any person who has taken part in hostilities, who is not entitled to
prisoner-of-war status and who does not benefit from more favourable
treatment in accordance with the Fourth Convention shall have the right
at all times to the protection of Article 75 of this Protocol. In
occupied territory, any such person, unless he is held as a spy, shall
also be entitled, notwithstanding Article 5 of the Fourth Convention, to
his rights of communication under that Convention.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note what No. 4 says - it doesn't make any difference if the prisoner
qualifies as a POW or not for how the are to be treated!

Maybe call pilots of airplanes-into-buildings 'freedom fighters'??

"Freedom fighters" is what Ronald Reagan called Usama bin Laden and company.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com