It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Donald Trump ‘Fine’ With Prosecuting U.S. Citizens at Guantánamo

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Aazadan

Should Constitutional rights be extended to individuals not US citizens?


They already have been, and the case was specific to enemy combatants. Guantanamo and a few other prisons get around this due to jurisdiction issues. The prison's are placed beyond the jurisdictional boundaries of the Constitution, and therefore it isn't applied.

The case was decided in 2004.

The government simply hasn't fully complied with the court ruling since then. That's a big part of all the commotion regarding Guantanamo, according to the Supreme Court it's operating illegally, but the legislative/executive state the Constitution doesn't apply there so it's not acting illegally.




posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

On the issues is a good place to look for stuff like this.

Clintons voting record.
Voted YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees. (Sep 2006)
Voted YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods. (Sep 2006)
Voted YES on reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act. (Mar 2006)
Voted NO on extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision. (Dec 2005)
Close Guantanamo detention center. (Feb 2016)
edit on 13-8-2016 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

I'll rescind my previous statement then and beg to reconsider after reading the ruling.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
[“Would you try to get the military commissions, the trial court there, to try U.S. citizens?” the reporter asked.

Mr. Trump responded: “Well, I know that they want to try them in our regular court systems, and I don’t like that at all. I don’t like that at all. I would say they could be tried there, that would be fine.”]
www.nytimes.com...


It sounds like he's responding to the concept of trying people like Moussoui there instead of on US Soil.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 07:21 PM
link   
I'm fine with punishment that fits the crime.
Why would jailing an American for legitimate reasons in Guantanamo be bad?
From my research American's private prisons are about the closest thing to hell on earth. The real rape culture in America. I would probably prefer to spend my jail term in isolation rather than as general population rape bait in a super max somewhere. Yet again we have the media and the OP sensationalizing something that came out of Trumps mouth to make it look worse than it actually is.

Do please continue with the charade it is rather entertaining. Especially every attempt simply garners him more votes. The anti-Trump community especially on ATS actually turned me into a Trump supporter by forcing me to vet their insane character assassinations of him only to find they were lies and I actually agree with him on many things. So does a lot of Americans.

Love Trump-Haters hate.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 07:26 PM
link   
originally posted by: [post=21127618]Aazadan

That has nothing to do with the location of where it is carried out at. It has to do with the laws in place.
edit on 13-8-2016 by Zerodoublehero because: Not good on mobile

edit on 13-8-2016 by Zerodoublehero because: Edit



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 07:27 PM
link   
First off, the Guantanamo facility is reserved for terrorists. As such, the terrorists are not privy to even the Geneva convention rights. Furthermore, since they are not citizens, they have NO rights under the US Constitution, so there should not even be a question of due process much less 'fair trials' in America. Most detainees released from Guantanamo were later either recaptured, linked to, or died while committing further acts of terrorism. Last point, a US citizen does not currently lose their citizenship (although bills have been put forth) for terrorism, and therefore could not be sent to Guantanamo.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 07:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: JDeLattre89
First off, the Guantanamo facility is reserved for terrorists. As such, the terrorists are not privy to even the Geneva convention rights. Furthermore, since they are not citizens, they have NO rights under the US Constitution, so there should not even be a question of due process much less 'fair trials' in America. Most detainees released from Guantanamo were later either recaptured, linked to, or died while committing further acts of terrorism. Last point, a US citizen does not currently lose their citizenship (although bills have been put forth) for terrorism, and therefore could not be sent to Guantanamo.


I agree with you on all points, but I 'm concerned with the ability of the government to arbitrarily label someone a terrorist (citizen or non-citizen) at their whim.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Why should Guantanamo close?



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: JDeLattre89

Actually, most of them haven't returned to terrorism. About 20% have with another 10% being suspected of doing so.




According to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), as of January 2016, 676 detainees have been transferred from Guantanamo Bay. Of these, 118 (17.5%) have been 'Confirmed' as returning to terrorist or militant activities, while 86 (12.7%) are suspected of the same.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Just remember, Trump has already said that he'd bring back waterboarding and more. You really shouldn't be surprised that he'd want this, too.

And of course, this would also be major civil rights and human rights violations. Some of the people held in Gitmo were held for 13+ years without ever being convicted of anything. Some were still detained there even after being cleared for release years earlier. And now that Trump's ok with doing this to US citizens, all of that fake "pro-constitution" talk is nowhere to be found.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: JDeLattre89

Correction. It's reserved for suspected terrorists.

As of this April, roughly 86% of the people imprisoned there were turned in to claim bounties, which means that rivals, neighbors, and even social outcasts could've been handed in for a nice profit. And only 8 of the nearly 800 people imprisoned there were ever convicted in those Gitmo military commissions. In fact, 92% of the people imprisoned there weren't even Al Qaeda fighters (including 21 kids).

You can find a lot more Gitmo stats here:

Guantánamo by the Numbers



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 08:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blueracer
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Trump is not even in office. Obama is and it is still open.



Don't make it so easy next time.
www.nytimes.com...

www.washingtonpost.com...

www.cnn.com...



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Southern Guardian

I have always thought that GITMO should stay open. We could prosecute any and all terrorists there.

But that's just my opinion.


So what happens if the government determines that you are a "terrorist"?

You are fine with your own rights being stripped and hauled off to GITMO?



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 08:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blueracer
a reply to: Southern Guardian

The way I see it, actions speak louder than words. You should be more outraged with Obama because he actually could have done something about it but hasn't.



Then you guys would be complaining about his use of executive order again. Damned if you do damned if you don't. Nice...
edit on 8132016 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Watching this discussion is honestly disturbing to me. What Trump is suggesting is absolutely and entirely antithetical to the US Constitution. Non military American citizens are guaranteed due process by law - no matter what their crime. Everyone gets their day in court.

COURT. Not in front of a military commissions board that has ignores things like Habeas Corpus, discovery, etc. People in GITMO don't even always have the luxury of knowing what they are even charged with.

Under this proposed nonsense, anyone, citizen or otherwise, could objectively be deemed a terrorist and deprived of their Constitutional rights - simply as a consequence of accusation, black bagged, taken out of country, extrajudicially detained, tried without due process and possibly found guilty without cause or justification.

Worse of all these ideas and words are coming from a thin skinned wanna-be tyrant.

I find it sad that if I say the word "guns" - suddenly the Constitution is all anyone wants to talk about... But when Daddy Trump suggests gutting our legal protections cuz "terrorism", suddenly the Constitution isn't important at all.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 08:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tardacus
I wonder how hillary feels about gitmo? I guess we could look and see how she voted on extending the patriot act.
what trump is proposing is already legal under the patriot act.

you can`t try terrorist in a civilian court for the simply reason that the means for gathering the evidence against them is classified and would never be divulged in a civilian court trial,resulting in the evidence being inadmissible.
She voted yes under Bush in 2001. In the period following 911.
In 2011 she wasn't in a position to vote .

I believe military courts are different. How is any case based on top secret information tried? That's a good question. I don't know.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

But the thread is about trump wanting to send U.S. citizens there.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

The extension was approved in 2011. She was SOS then and did not vote on congressional issues any more.
May 26 2011.







 
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join