You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer
supported by the Administrators.
Visit
The New DU.
Reply #56: That would not be the precedent here
[View All]
worldgonekrazy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-03-06 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
56. That would not be the precedent here |
|
The precedent here would be that U.S. law does not apply to foreign people on foreign soil. Human rights law ought to apply, but the United States is purposefully not a part of any international human rights court that actually has any power to enforce binding decisions. I believe the only law that the U.S. is subject to in this area is the Geneva Conventions, which is why the administration came out right off the bat and argued that the Conventions don't apply to these prisoners. They are wrong, but who can do anything about it?
|
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.