Latest
» RT @AdamBienkov: Iain Dale has no idea what he's talking about shock http://bit.ly/YqvnK 11 hrs ago

» RT @mjrobbins: Wtf - Bernie Ecclestone comes out as a Hitler fan?!! RT @biggerpills: Uh-oh: http://tinyurl.com/nyyt7y 12 hrs ago

» This - 'The Karl Rove school of politics' - is spot on. Labour is terrible at communication strategy http://tr.im/qOSI 12 hrs ago

» Incoming IAEA chief: No evidence Iran seeking nuclear weapons http://tr.im/qOxD 13 hrs ago

» Hey ,at least Sarah Palin now knows that Kosovo is overseas. Her foreign policy experience has expanded enormously. 14 hrs ago

More updates...


  • Family

  • Comrades

  • In-laws




  • Technorati: graph / links

    Progress, of sorts


    by Rumbold on 17th July, 2008 at 9:41 pm    

    “A US judge has ruled that the first war crimes trial at the Guantanamo Bay detention centre, involving Osama Bin Laden’s former driver, can go ahead. Judge James Robertson dismissed a claim from lawyers for Salim Hamdan, a Yemeni, that it should be stopped while he challenged the process’s legality.

    The ruling came after a military judge at Guantanamo denied a postponement. Last month, the US Supreme Court ruled detainees had to be able to challenge their detention in civilian courts. It said the 270 men currently being detained at Guantanamo had “the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus” – the right for suspects to be heard by an independent judge on the legality of their detention.”

    The situation is far from perfect, but at least some of the inmates are actually having trials, rather than being stuck in limbo. Hopefully whoever wins the Presidency will speed things up.



      |     |   Add to del.icio.us   |   Share on Facebook   |   Filed in: Current affairs, United States




    2 Comments below   |  

    1. Desi Italiana — on 21st July, 2008 at 8:43 pm  

      ““A US judge has ruled that the first war crimes trial at the Guantanamo Bay detention centre, involving Osama Bin Laden’s former driver, can go ahead. Judge James Robertson dismissed a claim from lawyers for Salim Hamdan, a Yemeni, that it should be stopped while he challenged the process’s legality.”

      I don’t understand how this is deemed as a ‘progress of sorts’ when the request for challenging the process’s legality was dismissed…?

    2. Desi Italiana — on 21st July, 2008 at 8:45 pm  

      I mean, I know it is essential to have trials, but what if you can’t even question the legality of the trial in the first place? Doesn’t that seem like a rigged system?

      I think that maybe I am not understanding this situation all that well…?

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2009. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.