PDA

View Full Version : Why Guantanamo?


ArtKramr
December 26th 03, 05:32 PM
To understand the Constitutional issues involved in holding prisoners in Cuba
go to Google and download the Supreme Court case " Ex Parte Milligan 1866".
That will make everything clear.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Simon Robbins
December 28th 03, 12:21 PM
"ArtKramr" > wrote in message
...
> To understand the Constitutional issues involved in holding prisoners in
Cuba
> go to Google and download the Supreme Court case " Ex Parte Milligan
1866".
> That will make everything clear.

I thought the whole situation was to set international precedent now
allowing foreign powers to hold US citizens on a whim for years on end
without access to legal representation. :^)

Si

ArtKramr
December 28th 03, 12:45 PM
>Subject: Re: Why Guantanamo?
>From: "Simon Robbins"
>Date: 12/28/03 4:21 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>"ArtKramr" > wrote in message
...
>> To understand the Constitutional issues involved in holding prisoners in
>Cuba
>> go to Google and download the Supreme Court case " Ex Parte Milligan
>1866".
>> That will make everything clear.
>
>I thought the whole situation was to set international precedent now
>allowing foreign powers to hold US citizens on a whim for years on end
>without access to legal representation. :^)
>
>Si
>
>

Yes. And the Ex Parte Milligan decision doesn't allow that on US soil. Ergo
Guantanamo where one is out of reach of the Milligan decision..


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Peter Stickney
December 28th 03, 11:07 PM
In article >,
"Simon Robbins" > writes:
> "ArtKramr" > wrote in message
> ...
>> To understand the Constitutional issues involved in holding prisoners in
> Cuba
>> go to Google and download the Supreme Court case " Ex Parte Milligan
> 1866".
>> That will make everything clear.
>
> I thought the whole situation was to set international precedent now
> allowing foreign powers to hold US citizens on a whim for years on end
> without access to legal representation. :^)

You mean as already happens in various parts of South & Central
America, Southeast and Southwest Asia, various spots in the Middle
East, and a fair chunk of Sub-Saharan Africa?

I wouldn't sweat that precedent so much.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

Google