(no subject)

[thedarkproject]

Isn't it nice that America has such high quality judges as Antonin Scalia, who said, "War is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts. [...] If he was captured by my army on a battlefield, that is where he belongs. I had a son on that battlefield and they were shooting at my son, and I'm not about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial. I mean it's crazy." (link) Does that sound impartial to any of you?

Of course, it also continues to recite this "battlefield" lie, which is a handy way to convince the public that the situation is acceptable. It doesn't make it true, however. Two UK residents currently enjoying the hospitality of Guantanamo Bay were arrested in Gambia, of all places. (link) According to indo.com's distance measurer, it is around 5,400 miles from Gambia to Afghanistan. This is something like 5398 miles beyond the effective range of most rifles, so suffice to say that regardless of what else these men might have done, they were probably not shooting at Mr Scalia's son.

Comments

[bedlamborn.livejournal.com]

There are rules for people in war both civilians and military but the USA don't like them so the did the enemy combatant. If they continue like this they will become morally bankrupt as Israel has become.

[psych0squirrel.livejournal.com]

It is mostly the particular administration but everyone takes their tone from the top. I'm not entirely impressed with what they are trying to do with professional institutions, such as courts and even how they treat scientists and career bureaucrats. Those were typically the balance to the government that kept things honest and they have a lot of power still but are definately under attack. Of course it is mostly just other professionals who get all in a tat about things like how the rules are laid out or who picks the people in charge of certain functions.