US ruling won't affect Guantanamo camp-commander

[sabra]

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N29175313.htm

US ruling won't affect Guantanamo camp-commander


GUANTANAMO BAY U.S. NAVAL BASE, June 29 (Reuters) - A U.S. Supreme Court ruling on war crimes tribunals being held at Guantanamo navy base will have little effect on the detention camp that holds 450 foreign captives, the camp commander said.

"I don't think there's any direct outcome on our detention operation," Rear Adm. Harry Harris, the prison commander, said in an interview this week before the ruling.

The high court upheld on Thursday a Guantanamo defendant's challenge to President George W. Bush's power to create the military tribunals to try suspected al Qaeda conspirators and Taliban supporters after the Sept. 11 attacks.

The court said the military tribunals violated the Geneva Conventions.

Harris said he would have built a second courtroom if the tribunals had been allowed to proceed but little else would change because the court was not asked to rule on Guantanamo itself, a prison camp that human rights groups, the United Nations and foreign governments have sharply criticized.

[dipsydoodle]

1. Here's the BBC link to the subject

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5129904.stm

[kurth]

2. This rear admiral is a jack ass

typical of the Bush fascist regime.

[saigon68]

4. He is a Pathetic "BOOT LICK"

[Zensea]

3. He's right, but the ruling wasn't about the Camp

It was about the procedures for trying the detainees like it says in the article.

[DoYouEverWonder]

11. Indirectly it is

because the Supreme Court confirmed that we are bound by the Geneva Convention.

[MaineDem]

5. I see many lawsuits, however.

THis is going to go on for years.

[WyLoochka]

8. Meanwhile, at least some of

those people are probably totally innocent.

[The Stranger]

6. Have him arrested and held in contempt.

Let's get moving.

[Freddie Stubbs]

7. Contempt of what?

The ruling was about holding trials, not about keeping them at Gitmo.

[The Stranger]

9. You appear to support holding someone without trying them.

Fortunately, that is not the law. If they still hold them, and refuse to try them, they need to be held in contempt.

[Freddie Stubbs]

10. I'm simply pointing out what the courts have already ruled on

The Supreme Court has already held that the government can detain unlawful combatants. Only those who are U. S. citizens have the ability to challenge their detention before an impartial judge.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-6696.ZS.html

Again, I ask what should the commander of the base be arrested for and held in contempt of?

[The Stranger]

12. The Court also held that those incarcerated are under federal court

jurisdiction, and that they cannot be held indefinitely without being charged.

If the Camp Commander continues to hold them despite the courts' orders that they be released, he should be held in contempt.

Your posts indicate support for status quo at the Guantanamo concentration camp.