Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

6th detainee refuses a military hearing (Guantanamo)

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 » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-07-04 11:55 PM
Original message
6th detainee refuses a military hearing (Guantanamo)
GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba -- An Iranian detainee refused to appear at a U.S. military review hearing Friday, the sixth prisoner in a week to boycott a process to determine whether hundreds of Guantánamo Bay prisoners are being properly held or should be set free.

The 25-year-old man, who according to the U.S. military was a Taliban fighter in Afghanistan, relayed his decision through an officer assigned as his ``personal representative.''

''He dropped out,'' said the officer, an Air Force lieutenant colonel whose identity was barred from being made public. 'He said, `I don't want to participate anymore.' ''

The officer said the Iranian did not give a reason.

The detainee has told the military he was a cook and driver and wasn't involved in combat. In his absence, the open tribunal hearing lasted only 13 minutes, followed by a closed session to discuss classified information.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/9341759.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
teryang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-08-04 07:51 AM
Response to Original message
1. they still can't even get the terminology straight
The proper term is "illegal enemy combatant." An "enemy combatant" is a POW by definition. An "illegal enemy combatant" is a criminal. One who is neither is merely a detainee, who can be returned to his mother country at the discretion of the detaining power while hostilities are pending. If the mother country is an ally or non belligerent power, there is no reason to hold the detainee.

The tribunal screening process is a joke with secret evidence undisclosed to the party evaluated who has no legal representation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
psychopomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-08-04 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
2. No access to a lawyer
They may have not opted out at all. We will not know as long as the Pentagon has them.
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 Wed May 01st 2024, 06:14 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News 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