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.
Originally posted by Maverickhunter
I saw an article in the washington post at section A3, and it got me wondering.
If a US Citizen can be tried in an Iraq court and kept ransom and be charged for murder for no apparent reason... does that mean that all of our country can be tried for a crime that they did not commit and be in front of a judge, that completely ignores the U.S constitution?
Shouldn't they be having this court in the U.S?
OR should this be considered an act of war, for holding one of the members of our army hostage. Even though we voted the leader of the iraqi government into office, they say that they are our allies yet they pledge allegiance to Al-quaeda.
The article was called "US citizen gets sentanced to death and loses appeal in Iraq" I think.
But the article was in the first few pages in the post... the guy asked for haebous corpous even and they didn't give it to him!
I wonder why!
So does this mean that we do not need to guarantee other people from foreign countries their rights in a court of law as their constitution does not apply to them here?
Originally posted by Maverickhunter
No... link, it was an article from that day that I posted on section A3 I will have to do the best with that. Just trust me on this. The person pleaded haebeous corpeous even though he was in another country.
"American citizenship cannot displace the fact of a criminal conviction in a non-United States court and permit the district court to exercise jurisdiction over Munaf's habeas petition," Judge David B. Sentelle wrote for the panel, concluding that U.S. courts have "no power or authority to hear this case."