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.

 

Frmr Sec'y of State Baker: US Citizens Can Be Held Without Trial

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Frmr Sec'y of State Baker: US Citizens Can Be Held Without Trial


www.azstarnet.com

[Former Secretary of State] James Baker said he has struggled with Guantanamo's legal implications.

"It gives us a very, very bad name, not just internationally," he said. "I have a great deal of difficulty understanding how we can hold someone, pick someone up, particularly someone who might be an American citizen — even if they were caught somewhere abroad, acting against American interests — and hold them without ever giving them an opportunity to appear before a magistrate."
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:21 AM
link   
The actual title of this AP article is "5 ex-secretaries of state: Close Guantanamo, open Iran dialogue" but far more important than its title is the admission by James Baker, former Secretary of State under GHW Bush, that the fundamental Constitutional right to trial--known as habeus corpus--has indeed been suspended in the name of fighting terror.

(Given this staggering admission was left to the body of the article, I hope the mods will make allowances for the change in title.)

Here are further excerpts from the article, concerning the obvious necessity of closing Gitmo and its continuing degredation of the US's international reputation:


Five former U.S. secretaries of state on Thursday urged the next presidential administration to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp and open a dialogue with Iran.

The former chiefs of American diplomacy, who served in Democratic and Republican administrations, reached a consensus on the two issues at a conference in Athens aimed at giving the next president some bipartisan foreign-policy advice. Each of them said shuttering the prison camp in Cuba would bolster America's image abroad.


www.azstarnet.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   
Wow, even Baker is calling out this administration. There may be some hope for us yet. It's nice to see something positive in the news today. I hope this isn't small talk the doesn't result in more exposure. Good post



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by gottago
 


Wow, if habeus corpus is truly suspended, none of us is safe from fascism
now. Martial Law soon to follow? Yes, after some kind of terror attack or
major catastrophe...

The deciders probably figure we got used to gitmo detainment, and now
want to use the same tactics against us!



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Good to see an administrator who understands the very simple concept of Habeas Corpus.

Though isnt the thread title somewhat misleading?



posted on Mar, 29 2008 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by 44soulslayer

Though isnt the thread title somewhat misleading?


In what way? I specifically mentioned it was changed in the OP, and for good reason, as the loss of habeus corpus is a monumental shift in our fundamental Constitutional rights, and this is exactly what Baker says has happened.

It is much more important than even the fact that these former Secretaries of State have come out againts Gitmo and an attack on Iran (both no-brainers to sane diplomats).

[edit on 29-3-2008 by gottago]



posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 07:02 AM
link   
I interpreted that the fmr secretary of state agreed with the concept of holding without trial.



posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
I interpreted that the fmr secretary of state agreed with the concept of holding without trial.


I see how you interpreted that, but the title of the post reflects the reality that Baker acknowledges, since he is bringing it up and disagreeing with it--that habeus corpus has been suspended for US citizens.

This is an important statement for him to make; no one at his level has ever acknowledged this--and frankly I'm amazed this post hasn't gotten more attention. This is a fundamental Constitutional right--the right to a speedy trial--that he states has been lost.

Though he disputes that this is a good idea--"I have a great deal of difficulty understanding, etc."--he is not actually challenging that it has happened. He is challenging its wiseness as policy, but ultimately he acquieses to it.

The important point here is the simple fact that he acknowledges this as a given.



posted on Mar, 30 2008 @ 09:30 AM
link   
Well this is pretty astounding news. Baker has been the right-hand man of the Bush family for at least 30 years, if not longer. It's amazing that he would break his silence and criticize any Bush family member. And Kissinger joining in, well that should tell us all something; that some key political types have had it with this administration and are very much afraid for their country.

This is not aimed at anyone in particular, but...I'm not sure which I'm more shocked at: Baker and Kissinger saying what they did, or that so many people didn't know that we no longer have Habeus Corpus, perhaps the most fundamental of all rights to freedom and equality.
There were a number of threads on ATS at the time when it was suspended, but most people went to sleep and responded with ridicule to those who said that we no longer had Habeas Corpus.
Habeas Corpus goes back to 1215, at Runnymede, when the Magna Carta was signed by King John the Jerk.
This sets human rights back 1,000 YEARS and is draconian and insanity.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join