home

Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainees

By TChris, Section Terror Detainees
Posted on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 05:47:55 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

Senator Lindsey Graham wants to use the military court-martial model to try detainees, but other Republicans "say it could cripple the government's ability to protect the nation by giving detainees too many rights." Too many rights? Which ones are superfluous? The right to know what you're accused of doing? The right to see the evidence? The right to attend the trial and to confront the accuser?

While "some other Republicans argue that terrorists do not deserve legal or human rights," those Republicans apparently lack an understanding of the difference between a terrorist and an accused terrorist. Putting aside the rights that may apply to someone convicted of an act of terrorism in a fair and meaningful trial, can these Republicans explain why the presumption of innocence shouldn't apply to alleged terrorists? Even if the administration were competent, why would we trust the government to make error-free accusations without insisting that those accusations be proved?

As Graham points out, fair trials benefit the country, not just alleged terrorists.

"What I'm trying to do with my time in the Senate during this whole debate we're having is to remind the Senate that the rules we set up speak more about us than it does the enemy," Mr. Graham said in an interview. "The enemy has no rules. They don't give people trials, they summarily execute them and they're brutal, inhuman creatures. But when we capture one of them, what we do is about us, not about them.

"Do they deserve, the bad ones, all the rights that are afforded? No. But are we required to do it because of what we believe? Yes."

< Tuesday Open Thread | Tom DeLay's Cash Flow Problems >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainees | 30 comments (30 topical)
    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#1)
    by scribe on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 06:31:03 AM EST
    While I agree (and had predicted, somewhere else) that ultimately the Congress would punt on creating a UCMJ-lite for the PWs in Gitmo and elsewhere, I still cannot agree with Graham. Not because he engaged in fraudulent conduct, cooking up a bogus piece of post-hoc legislative history and then filing amicus briefs based on it. Not because he introduced the Detainee Treatment Act in the first place, so as to sabotage an attempt to end torture of PWs. Not because he's been a sl*t for the Admin on this issue. Not because he's a lawyer, judge and should know better. Because he proceeds from a false premise. The premise from which he argues is that the PWs the US gov't holds gain their "rights", in trial and elsewhere, as a matter of the gov't's grace. Not that the rights they hold (and are being denied or thwarted from exercising) are a birthright, inalienable, and granted by a power beyond the reach of human hands. In so many words, "endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights". Graham is just another authoritarian, a wannabe fascist, trying (like so many fascists 60 or 70 years ago did, more successfully) to cloak the poison of their intent and doctrine in the sugar-coating of fine, reasonable-sounding words. I could only take him seriously if he started opposing the Admin in all things.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#2)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 07:39:50 AM EST
    Beautifully said scribe. He is not to be trusted. Some of these guys have learned that they the stuff that they actually do and the stuff they say do not have to bear any relation to one another because most voters are only focus on their lips, at best.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 07:43:06 AM EST
    This debate is really symbolic of the whole Bush revolution. For over two hundred years this country lived by the principles of its founding fathers as set forth in the Constitution - especially the principles of due process. Eliminating due process for the so-called "war on terror" edges us away from our core principles and closer to the Soviet Union - doomed to collapse. One can only hope that we get some bold, new leadership in the spirit of our founding fathers, before the Bush revolution becomes too much to bear.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 07:51:13 AM EST
    They don't deserve the same rights as other accused because they're filthy, heathen, murderous Arabs/Muslims. They want to come over here and rape our daughters, kill our pets and seriously damage the value of our 401K's. That's all a Senator or Congressman needs to tell his constituents (couched in other terms, or course) to have their backing for rendering the Constitution null & void. Except for a few enclaves in Blue State cities and Detroit ignoring the rights of Middle Eastern peoples is not a loser come election time. Winning elections is more important than the Bill of Rights. There's your explanation.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#5)
    by oldtree on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 08:07:22 AM EST
    the rules don't fit, let's change em' the prisoners aren't in our military, let's change that if they are in our forces, we can do court martial if they are ferriners, we can't court martial this senator is openly mad and corrupt he is always amusing, but for the insanity he seems to behold in everyday life

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#6)
    by roxtar on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 10:11:35 AM EST
    We don't guarantee the right to a fair trial because of who the defendants are....we guarantee the right to a fair trial because of who we are. Why do so many Republicans hate American values?

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#7)
    by jen on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 10:32:50 AM EST
    What was that funny word? "unalienable"?

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#9)
    by jen on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 01:05:25 PM EST
    Narius: so values are only a matter of convenience then

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#11)
    by jen on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 01:13:44 PM EST
    So you have no values?

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#12)
    by scribe on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 01:20:01 PM EST
    narius: In a word, "yes". It isn't like you, me or anyone else will live forever. Every one of us will pass from this scene one day. Recognizing the truth of that fact eliminates the innuendo contained in your comment, which is to the effect of "if they don't kill us, no one will. So, if we get rid of them first, we get to stay on." Any justification for treating these PWs less gently or with less circumspection for their inalienable rights than you might treat any of your own children necessarily disappears. Recognizing the impermanence of human life then leaves the only legitimate question which remains to be asked: "how do you want to live?" (This necessarily contains within it "what sort of world do you want to leave your kids?" and similar.) Do you want to live in a world where brutality, stupidity, mass hysteria, and oligarchic locust-capitalism are the rule, where Hobbesean is a good day and where the government does what it pleases with anyone, regardless of what the written laws say? Or not? I'd rather not.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#13)
    by jen on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 01:44:15 PM EST
    You would live in a world where if you are scared of the guy you ditch your values in a microsecond and forget everything your civics teacher and preacher taught you all your life. This administration thinks it is above the law. It thinks rights are a priviledge. They think they can just ignore US law and toss aside the geneva convention at will. Because they are SCARED poor babies. A few days after 9/11 my mother and I discussed if she should make the trip up to DC to visit me as she had planned. We decided then and there, for both of us, our lives belong to us, not some damned terrorist living G*d knows where. She flew in and we walked the empty mall and had a great time with others who felt the same. I and all my fellow workers kept going to work after the anthrax was found in our building. (although, I have to confess, I work in the only place where the reaction was fascination) Nor did I stop shopping or gasing up my car during the sniper days - which ocurred all around me. Cowards ditch laws and values for fear. Cowards.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 02:37:47 PM EST
    "Too many rights? Which ones are superfluous? The right to know what you're accused of doing? The right to see the evidence? The right to attend the trial and to confront the accuser?" These are illegal combatants - they took up arms cloaked as civilians. Which means that they gave up their Geneva Convention rights. Yes, I know that SCOTUS thinks differently, but they are fools in this case. The Convention is supposed to be reciprocal - combatants have rights when captured, but also responsibilities while they fight. These people did not play by the rules. Giving them Geneva Rights merely encourages more bad actions.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#16)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 02:49:44 PM EST
    JR
    These are illegal combatants - they took up arms cloaked as civilians.
    What country are you from? Here a charge has to be proven, yes even people taken off the streets of other countries by bounty hunters are allowed due process. Guilt isn't decided by decree. What do you think, we are living in Israel, or some mid east dictatorship? If you have personal knowledge that these people have committed a crime you can apply to be witness. If you don't like the American system move to Saudi Arabia, it may be more your style.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#17)
    by jen on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 03:01:50 PM EST
    ah, squeaky, they don't care, they sell their values *and* their rights away for cheaper gas.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#19)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 03:13:20 PM EST
    funny, jen...do you think anyone has told them that it isn't working? Gas prices have gone up.... Unless their RNC card automatically gives a 50% discount at Exxon-Mobil...... yes, maybe that's it.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#20)
    by glanton on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 03:16:47 PM EST
    Not where I live but I do not particularly care if it happens somewhere else. Or at least I don't care enough to do anything about it.
    I love narius's honesty. And agree with him tghat most Uhmerrikahns share his views. I wish more people who gie aid and comfort to the GOp would just come clean and speak it as narius does. Then there would at least be a true representation of where it stands, for all to see. Instead too many take the PPJ path of attempting to couch their support in moral or principled terms, they place all this emphasis on caring about who's the good guy when they could save themselves a lot of time and energy just saying: (clears throat): "Uhmerrikah can take what it wants. Who cares if it hurts others over there. It makes things better over here (or at least I think it does). Now, if you raise my taxes then I'll be really, really mad. Or, if you use legal means to take down a gun compound run by a freak I'll get upset too. That is, if the freak is white, like in Waco." Hugs and kisses, narius. Stay alert and stay with Fox.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#21)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 03:17:29 PM EST
    We, americans, will never treat middle east terrorists the same as Americans.
    Gee narius, I thought that you were Chinese.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#23)
    by glanton on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 03:28:28 PM EST
    don't particularly care if some white freaks got taken down by the FBI. May be because I am NOT white.
    My fault, narius. Well played, well played indeed.
    Now the women & kids were a shame though.
    Well, that's pushing it a little, isn't it? I mean, let's not backslide here. Or did you personally know some of them? Everyone else: Tell me you don't find this cat refreshing after listening to, say, Cliff May or Brit Hume or Rush or PPJ. It's the GOP unplugged, right up there with Alice in Chains' great album if you ask me.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#24)
    by jen on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 03:35:32 PM EST
    When were you in, Narius, what branch? Where did you do your basic. And you don't have a clue what I do or don't do. And you never will.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#25)
    by Sailor on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 04:20:58 PM EST
    Narius: so values are only a matter of convenience then
    Of course.
    'nuff said.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#27)
    by Nowonmai on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 05:56:57 PM EST
    Calling people names won't change a thing. I don't see you brave enough to do anything about this. Anyone can be an armchair quarterback hiding behind a screen name.
    Oh Narius... you have no idea how far off the mark this comment of your was. And saying someone who is behaving cowardly a coward isn't name calling. It's called being truthful. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck.. Get the point yet? Oh, before you get all high and mighty with me, my DD214 says Honorably Discharged. How about yours?

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#29)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 06:41:00 PM EST
    narius-We, americans, will never treat middle east terrorists the same as Americans.
    How pretensious of you to thinks you speak for americans. Do you also think you speak for the chinese? I am at least as american as you are, and you don't speak for me.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#31)
    by Sailor on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 07:44:40 PM EST
    Most Americans would want Bin Laden dead. No question asked.
    Except, where is OBL and why doesn't bush care where he is? Back on topic, narius speaks for very few Americans. The Constitution and Declaration of Independence and Geneva Conventions are not just words, and my personal opinion is that if you don't think they are words to live by you shouldn't be in this country.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#32)
    by squeaky on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 07:56:34 PM EST
    narius- Maybe in China there is no due process but here there is. By your rules, people anywhere in the world could simply be swept off the street and deemed terrorist. They could be held indefinitely, tortured, and/or executed. All without any due process. Does that sound American to you? Not to me. It is a right wing radical idea that hearkens back to slave trading and slave ownership, a devaluation of a human being. It is also order of the day in totalitarian regimes and fascist fantasies like yours.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#34)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 05:27:34 AM EST
    Squeaky writes:
    narius- Maybe in China there is no due process but here there is.
    But you kep on telling us that Bush has destroyed all our rights. Where you correct then, or now?

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#35)
    by scribe on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 06:24:59 AM EST
    narius
    I don't see you brave enough to do anything about this. Anyone can be an armchair quarterback hiding behind a screen name.
    We don't see you running off to enlist. If you really believe your "We want it, we'll take it" pronouncements, you could at least have the decency (spelled "integrity") to put the rest of your body where your mouth is. In the unlikely event you can't find a recruiter in your town, there's a station in the middle of Times Square, NYC. They'll welcome you with open arms. Sam needs unquestioning, already-indoctrinated grunts. Just remember, ask for light infantry. Like all the Aryan Nations types....

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 06:47:36 AM EST
    I care more about low gas price and cheap consumer goods than whether some terrorist is going to be tried by a tribunal or a military court. And I am just being honest. Ask anyone on the street and you will find they are more likely to protest if the gas price go to $4 than if the congress is going to set up a tribunal. In fact, most people won't care enough to find out the different between a tribunal and a military court.
    Priceless... What is ironic about your post is that you called someone naive earlier in this thread. It's blatantly obvious that you have no idea how precedent set in present times can have unintended consequences in the future. You, and people like you, are more of a threat to this country than any terrorist.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 08:04:47 AM EST
    Tchris.... can these Republicans explain why the presumption of innocence shouldn't apply to alleged terrorists? Yes... because we are at war! You don't give people detained in a conflict access to your country's legal system! Jesus...that's what we call in the industry a "no brainer"! Can you imagine the cluster F we would have had if we did that in any war? Nazi soldiers with ACLU lawyers??? littleleg.. For over two hundred years this country lived by the principles of its founding fathers as set forth in the Constitution Not during times of war! Squeaky.... Here a charge has to be proven Yes..here in the good ol US of A. But on the streets of a war torn country... were people (besides what you chose to believe) were picked up while firing on US troops, this does not apply. Where do all you get off even thinking this is logical...much less factual??? Sailor... Except, where is OBL and why doesn't bush care where he is? He did.. until lib papers like the NYT blew the way we were tracking him. Back on topic, narius speaks for very few Americans. Oh contraire... I think you'll find (in the next election) MOST Americans are sick and tired of terrorists holding the world hostage...of their taxes going to support illegal aliens... of the tree hugging Islamo fascist left ruining this country... by supporting our enemies, while tying the hands of the government who's job it is to protect "American citizens" first, and jumping for joy each time the communist leaning news media publishes info that was never meant for our enemies! Mark my words! macromaniac... You, and people like you, are more of a threat to this country than any terrorist. And I hope you remember those words when we are attacked next. I hope it's close to where you live. Maybe that would change your mind.....but I doubt it

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 08:31:46 AM EST
    We could give every one of them full scale O.J. trials and build them a mosque and then release the innocent to new homes in the Hollywood Hills and the Islamofascists would STILL hate us. What do you think would EVER make them happy? Would you agree to put burqas on our women? They sure as hell won't like you smoking dope.

    Re: Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainee (none / 0) (#39)
    by soccerdad on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 08:35:20 AM EST
    I have an idea, just follow the military justice guidelines and GC's. But thanks for the strawmen.

    Graham Argues For Military Trials For Detainees | 30 comments (30 topical)