Bin Laden's driver is not POW, U.S. judge says

[Eugene]

Source: Reuters

Bin Laden's driver is not POW, U.S. judge says
20 Dec 2007 19:47:25 GMT

MIAMI, Dec 20 (Reuters) - Osama bin Laden's driver is not
a prisoner of war as defined by the Geneva Conventions and
can be tried by a Guantanamo war crimes tribunal, a U.S.
military judge ruled in a decision made public on Thursday.

The judge said Yemeni prisoner Salim Ahmed Hamdan is an
"unlawful enemy combatant" under the law passed by
Congress last year to provide a legal basis to try non-
Americans on terrorism charges in a special war crimes
court at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Lawyers for Hamdan, who acknowledge he earned $200 a
month driving and guarding the al Qaeda leader in
Afghanistan, said he was a civilian support worker who
should be considered a prisoner of war deserving of the
safeguards outlined in the Geneva Conventions that govern
the treatment of war captives.

-snip-

The ruling by the military judge, Navy Capt. Keith Allred,
clears the way for Hamdan's trial in the Guantanamo war
court, where he faces life in prison if convicted of
conspiracy and providing material support for terrorism.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N20205631.htm

---

Earlier LBN thread: Judge grants Guantanamo detainee hearing on POW status

[Xipe Totec]

1. Next!

[sinkingfeeling]

2. And who would have guessed a military judge would rule in favor of the military.

[Parche]

3. Wait A Minute

I thought all the Right wing Republicans said we are at WAR?
Doesnt that make him a 'POW then?
Or did they change the rules again?
Maybe we should ask Rep Marsha Blabberburn about this......cuz she thinks we are at WAR
(with whom i havnt figured that out yet)
:sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[ngant17]

4. this is a mentally-retarded judge

who can't understand that a "combatant" requires a 'combat' or war to exist. And if you have a war, and a prisoner or captured enemy in that war, well, the definition of a prisoner of war or POW is pretty simple and straight-forward.

I guess such people, the so-called experts at law, will never understand simple facts, such as "cruel and unusual punishment" can be interpreted as "torture" and this is prohibited by the US Constitution.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

5. Guantanamo war crimes tribunal

War Crimes?

Isn't this stuff supposed to be done at the ICC?
Oh, I forgot - we are not a signator for That Court.

[HuffleClaw]

6. a law passed long after the guy was captured?

that alone is questionable.