Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Man labeled 'enemy combatant' wins US court case

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 11:45 AM
Original message
Man labeled 'enemy combatant' wins US court case
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/WAT007708.htm

Man labeled 'enemy combatant' wins US court case
11 Jun 2007 16:20:54 GMT
Source: Reuters
Alert Me | Printable view | Email this article | RSS XML <-> Text <+>

WASHINGTON, June 11 (Reuters) - President George W. Bush lacks the power to order the military to seize and indefinitely detain a Qatari national and suspected al Qaeda operative who is the only person being held in the United States as an "enemy combatant," a U.S. appeals court ruled on Monday.

In a major setback for the Bush's policies in the war on terrorism adopted after the Sept. 11 attacks, the appellate panel ruled the government's evidence afforded no basis to treat Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri as an "enemy combatant" and ordered his release from military custody.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
november3rd Donating Member (653 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
1. This is good
1. If al-Marri were really guilty, why couldn't the government provide evidence to demonstrate that?

2. This might help swing a few Republicans into the YES column on the no confidence vote on Gonzo.

3. If people can see that the threat from BushCo of not only stealing our rights and shredding the Constitution, but also flubbing the anti-terrorist procedures of the government, is the worst threat we face, then they will be able to move toward impeachment/restructuring.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. What are the odds they'll just pack him off to Guantanamo?
These guys don't allow themselves to be "set back." They just do whatever the fuck they want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. They ordered his release, so he might just walk. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. this is good, now if they only will do it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
5. The judiciary to the rescue....again
How much longer can American democracy balance on one leg?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosemary2205 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. The judiciary got us in this shithole to begin with.
we ain't go no legs at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. How so? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosemary2205 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Select Bush 2000. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
8. Is this case from before Habeas suspension?
Interesting it got into court.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. It was breaking news today, but I get your drift. Maybe sane courts
are ignoring insane rulings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-11-07 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. I wasn't referring to precedent, I was referring to the law.
The Military Tribunals Act eliminated Habeas rights for "Enemy Combatants." I'm wondering how this ended up in the courts.

Only 2 recs people? This should be on the greatest page.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC