Skip to main content

Regarding the Controversy Over Guantanamo Bay

   The U.S. has faced criticism from abroad over detaining inmates at Guantanamo (foreign nationals usually) for lengthy periods of time without a trial or fair hearing. I already fully understand the original reasoning for these practices. The U.S. has been fighting a war on terrorism, so the prisoners could fall under the definition of "prisoners of war." Also, the prisoners don't really have the protection of the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution, because they are typically not U.S. citizens. I disagree with the practice, though, and I will explain why.
   The ethical distinction that should be employed comes from the fact that, by all appearances, the U.S. now seems to be using Guantanamo as a "detention center." The prisoners have human rights, therefore they do have the right to a speedy and public hearing/trial before an "impartial tribunal," as stated, for example, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Even in a time of war, it is questionable how far our country could go in depriving war prisoners of rights. The problem with the war on terror is that it has continued seemingly indefinitely, allowing for seemingly indefinite stays for some inmates without any kind of fair hearing.
   The U.S. should be allowing prisoners in Guantanamo fair and speedy hearing and trial proceedings- due process, essentially. It is bad enough that in U.S. jails and prisons where the inmates are supposed to be afforded Constitutional rights, inmates often wait very long for their case proceedings to make any progress while they stay behind bars. It is not that hard to say that the rights could be granted to Guantanamo inmates.
   President Obama promised to close Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp during his first campaign, but it remains open, some prisoners having been transferred. http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/15/politics/guantanamo-bay-house-bill-terrorism/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Link to my new book- "The Semantolkino'hara and Its Applications"

  The book has a been long time in the works, and you can get it now on magcloud. Thanks to the many who helped.    This book is what The Glorious Scenario magazine was supposed to be. It makes a more concise statement than a multi-issue journal, though. The raw creative materials involved in the discussion have many applications and tie-ins across subject areas. The template of the semantolkino'hara will give its user acumen. The Semantolkino'hara and Its Applications: The Eschaton, Musicology, and The Name of God By David Black 122 pages, published 10/10/2014 A practical music theory and composition system became a template for understanding a union between disciplines- music history, musicology, eschatology, social science, and more. The whole effort started with a simple serial analysis of Trish Phan's "A Letter" and became a huge undertaking once the implications...
Post a Comment
Read more

Personality Types and the Fall of Man Argument

   There will be some who will want to say that I was being illogical or unbiblical when I wrote the post about how personality differences get misunderstood.  Their argument is basically that differing personalities are a consequence of the Fall of Man- a consequence of the DNA getting disordered.  Therefore, they will say, that people who don't fit the "perfect personality" are sinful. God created one man, they will say, with a perfect personality (Adam).  In truth, they can cite Adam, Eve, and Jesus.  That argument is not correct, and I will stand my ground on this.    The reason why they are not correct is because they are making the unwarranted assumption all of Adam's descendants would have had the same personality had the Fall never happened. I can say with a fair degree of certainty that had the Fall never happened, there would have been different kinds of people with different personalities, it just would have been a more perfect world. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nice Dissenting Opinion on the Fairness of the Criminal Justice System

   I was recently having a conversation with someone about the possibility for unreliability and/or unfairness in the criminal justice system. I was reminded of this quote from a Supreme Court case which is from Justice Harry Blackmun's dissenting opinion. The case was Darden v. Wainwright 477 U.S. 168 (1986). Obviously he's talking about the Supreme Court level, but if this could be said about their accuracy, then how shall we communicate about fairness at the trial court level? "JUSTICE BLACKMUN, with whom JUSTICE BRENNAN, JUSTICE MARSHALL, and JUSTICE STEVENS join, dissenting. Although the Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant only "a fair trial [and] not a perfect one,"  Lutwak v. United States,   344 U. S. 604 ,  344 U. S. 619  (1953);  Bruton v. United States,   391 U. S. 123 ,  391 U. S. 135  (1968), this Court has stressed repeatedly in the decade since  Gregg v. Georgia,   428 U. S. 153  (1976), that ...
Post a Comment
Read more