Marines in Shackles! Where's the ACLU?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by carpro, Jun 17, 2006.

  1. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,949
    Likes Received:
    299
    http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=15553

    American Troops in Shackles
    by Michelle Malkin

    Posted Jun 14, 2006

    Did you know there are seven young Marines and a Navy corpsman sitting in a military brig right now in leg and wrist shackles -- despite the fact that they've not been charged with any crime?

    The men are in solitary confinement, locked in 8'x8' cells at San Diego's Camp Pendleton, as investigators probe an April 26 incident involving the 3rd Battalion, 5th Regiment, 1st Marine Division. They are behind bars 23 hours a day; family members can only see them through inch-thick Plexiglas. Military blabbermouths have told the press that the service members are suspected of kidnapping and shooting a man in the Iraqi town of Hamdaniya. The Iraqi man's family reportedly came forward seeking payment for his death as media hysteria set in over the separate alleged atrocity in Haditha.

    SNIP

    Not a peep heard yet from the American Civil Liberties Union. The website of the self-anointed crusaders for individual rights contains hundreds of articles on the rights of al Qaeda suspects and an indignant press release on the suicides of Guantanamo Bay detainees. But no mention of the Camp Pendleton Eight. For their part, human rights groups were too busy shedding tears for the Gitmo terrorist suicide squad and lionizing them as "heroes" in the words of William Goodman of the Center for Constitutional Rights. Editorial cartoonists have been preoccupied desecrating the Marine Corps logo and tarring troops as baby-killers.

    Innocent until proven guilty? Justice for all? Benefit of the doubt? These are apparently foreign concepts when it comes to Americans in uniform being held on American soil. Perhaps if our troops proclaimed themselves "conscientious objectors" and converted to Islam, they might start getting some sympathy.
     
  2. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    The military has rules of its own that service people agree to upon enlistment. Which civil rights is Malkin claiming the military is violating? Do any of those Marines agree? Have they or their families or representative requested intervention by the ACLU?

    This looks like another bogus ACLU bashing rant.
     
  3. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Doesn't the military have a different system outside of the normal constitutional parameters for civilians?
     
  4. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    So if I understand you guys correctly, the constitution of our country applies to people who fight against it (i.e., Gitmo) but not to people who fight for it (i.e., Marines)? If these guys are dangerous, I have no problem with them being held. I also have no problem with Gitmo because I think is a necessary part of what is going on. People who are not legally in our country do not have a right to the rights of our constitution.

    I would like to think I have misunderstood you, but that is sure what it sounds like.

    I don't know much about this story so I am responding only to your responses.
     
  5. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Considering Gitom: "In the U.S., the Constitution is the law of the land, for citizens and non-citizens alike. But where does the reach of that law end?" I don't know as I have not gotten involved in discussing the issues of Gitmo. It looks like this will be an ongoing discussion in a globalized world:

    http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20030409_raustiala.html

    Considering military service: "Sort of, but not exactly the way it does in civilian life.":

    http://law.freeadvice.com/government_law/military_law/military_us_constitution.htm
     
  6. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,949
    Likes Received:
    299
    That seems to be the way liberals look at it.
     
  7. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Question

    ==So you argue against putting terrorists (who you claim are innocent people picked up on the streets, Gitmo thread post #40, dated 6/15/06) in prison because they have not been charged with anything. Do you have a problem with American soilders being chained up like dogs when they have not been charged with anything? In fact I am not sure they did anything wrong. No crime has been proven, no crime has even been charged.

    After all it was you who said,

    "Since the prisoners at Gitmo haven't been charged with any crime, let alone found guilty and sentenced, they should be treated with decency. In fact, all prisoners should be treated decently" (post #25, Gitmo suicides 'a PR stunt' thread, dated 6/15/06).

    I am not saying these soilders should be let off the hook. There should be a conclusive investigation into the events of that day. And if there was a crime the guilty party should be punished. The same for the men who remain at Gitmo. They should be tried before a military tribunal and if no crime can be proven they should be released to their home nation, if a crime can be proven they should be punished.

    Now I agree with you that the military has rules that men and women agree to when they sign up. They should be held to the highest of standards since they represent our country on foreign soil. However NO American soilder should be chained up for something they have not been charged for and NO American soilder should be charged for anything unless it can be proven that a war crime had been committed. No political prosecutions are acceptable. Not from this administration, nor any administration. Shame on Bush for allowing this to happen to American troops on his watch.
     
  8. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    Do you consider the USMC to be a liberal organization? After all, they are the ones who have put these men in shackles.

    BTW, I don't like the thought of these men being treated this way, especially since they have not been charged or convicted of a crime.
     
  9. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    soldiers don't have no rights like civvies do, especially if the civilian is simply blowing himself up to kill others, or marching out in the streets to give above ground support for the underground, or farmers by day, killers by night.
    least that's the way those in the left regard government troops, I think.

    Heck, nuthin' new to me, folks, no bragging intended.

    In the Philippines, if a farmer dies in the hands of the military, or if the police use batons and water cannons against demonstrator, the human rights groups are in the streets in a flash.

    But I haven't heard a peep from them when the muslims started setting off bombs in civilian airports and in shopping centers, and not a whimper when the commies send out hit squads known as Sparrows to assasinate cops and soldiers in plain view of civilians.
     
    #9 pinoybaptist, Jun 17, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 17, 2006
  10. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you know what "poisoning the well" means in a debate (linkie)?

    That is what you've done when you state that "terrorists...who you claim are innocent" - because that is deceitful. I am NOT claiming that terrorists are innocent or that terrorists should not be in prison. Either you know that and said it anyway or your comprehension is not all that it could be....you know which.

    Of course, I'm not in favor of chaining them up like dogs. I don't know really what their circumstances are. How many hours a day are they shackled? Are they shackled naked, wrists to ankles to the floor of their holding cells for eighteen hours at a time in near freezing temperatures while being doused with cold water periodically or are they fully clothed and shackled only when they are escorted out of their cells? Is it unusual or standard procedure in the Marines?

    I don't know the much of the story yet - I wouldn't go by anything Malkin says without double-checking. She may be accurate on the salient points or she may be winging it - I simply don't know at this point.

    The article mentioned that they are allowed to see their families once a week, so they are not being held incommunicado, which is good. Their families know where they are and that they're alive, which is also good. How long have they been held without charges? It hasn't been years yet, so that's better than if it had been.

    What is the usual procedure for the Marines in cases like these?

    So is that not clear that I think all prisoners should be treated decently? And that by "all prisoners" I mean "all prisoners"? I'm missing the point of your argument here.

    Agreed.

    There's a couple of problems. First, is it appropriate to try non-military foreign citizens in a military tribunal? Would they have access to lawyers of their own choosing and would they be allowed to call witnesses in their own defense? Then there is the Uighur separatists problem - the likelihood that they will be summarily executed if returned to their home country.

    Are you accusing the Marines of mistreating one of their own?
     
    #10 Daisy, Jun 17, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 17, 2006
  11. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==In my view that would be the only place to try them. Since they are not American citizens, and since they are "suspected terrorists", they should not be tried in American courts. Not only that, but considering that it could take years for each person the American courts option is too expensive and complicated. The mililtary tribunals would be the best route. I am not sure what the "normal" procedure would be.


    ==The first question I would say that depends upon how military tribunals are done. Since I am not in the military I am not sure. These tribunals should be done the normal way. As far as the execution issue, that is out of our control. At the end of the day we can't control how other countries treat prisoners (etc), no matter how hard we try. Those who are in Gitmo, yet are found not guilty, should be sent back to their home country. If their home country prosecutes them for other crimes (etc) then that is just the way it is.

    ==If the stories are true I would say that I am deeply troubled. If I were president that would never happen to an American troop on my watch. Period. Then again alot of things (war in Iraq, weak border control, out of control spending, etc) that are happening under this administration would not happen under a Martin administration (and let's thank God there will never be one...at least not this Martin!).
     
  12. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==Excuse me, that should be "suspected terrorists" not "terrorists".
     
  13. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,949
    Likes Received:
    299
    Where is the liberal outrage over this type of treatment?

    Where is the ACLU when "real" Americans need them?

    Maybe they have Gitmo case overload.



    http://marinetimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1875786.php


    Shackles removed from confined Marines, sailor
    By Gidget Fuentes
    Times staff writer

    OCEANSIDE, Calif. — Military officials on Friday said they have decided to remove shackles put on seven confined Marines and one sailor whenever they’re outside their individual cells at the Camp Pendleton brig, a Marine Corps spokesman said.

    The eight men, confined at the brig since May 24, were being held with “maximum” restraints based on their battalion commander’s decision following an initial investigation into the shooting. As of Friday, they were shifted into what’s called “medium-in” restraint in pre-trial custody, which does not require shackles to be worn, although they remain escorted anytime they are outside their cell, according to 2nd Lt. Lawton King, a base spokesman.

    Under “medium-in,” they won’t have any personal restraint while inside the brig, but once outside – such as to go to a court hearing – each “is restrained with handcuffs attached to a leather belt … and their respective escorts carry along leg cuffs in the event they are needed,” King said.

    The decision to lower the restraint level came after a June 15 review by the brig commander, he said.



    http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/16/D8I9KJA80.html
    Lawyers: Threats Used Against Marines
    Jun 16 8:14 PM US/Eastern
    By THOMAS WATKINS
    Associated Press Writer

    SAN DIEGO

    Pentagon investigators threatened the death penalty and used other coercive techniques to obtain statements from some of the seven Marines and a Navy corpsman jailed for the shooting death of an Iraqi civilian, two defense lawyers say.

    Attorney Jane Siegel, who represents Marine Pfc. John Jodka, 20, said Naval Criminal Investigative Service officials spoke to her client three times after he was taken into custody May 12. Jodka was questioned for up to eight hours at a time and was not offered water or toilet breaks, Siegel said.

    "They used some really heavy-handed tactics to extract the information," Siegel said, adding that her client was not read his rights prior to questioning _ a fundamental right to which all accused troops are entitled _ and was threatened with the death penalty.
    Jeremiah Sullivan III, the attorney representing the unidentified Navy medic, said his client.
     
  14. StraightAndNarrow

    StraightAndNarrow
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2003
    Messages:
    2,508
    Likes Received:
    3
    So you're saying that there isn't a difference between military justice and justice for civilians? I'm not an expert on military law but I think there is. The question has nothing to do with liberals versus conservatives. It has to do with the law.
     
  15. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    I believe you are correct. I am getting used to seeing liberals blamed for every injustice in the world.

    It is almost funny that the same people who say that our military is behind Bush's war on terror and that it is the liberals who are standing in the way, now blame the liberals for things the Marine Corp is doing.
     
  16. Bob Farnaby

    Bob Farnaby
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Messages:
    1,052
    Likes Received:
    0
    <snip>
    <snip>

    If they are not legally in the US how can the US claim to have the right to detain them? Maybe the Cuban government should take responsibility for them.....

    Regards
    Bob
     
  17. emeraldctyangel

    emeraldctyangel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    737
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes we do its called the Manual for Courts Martial and the United States Code of Military Justice. We still have our constitutional rights.

    However legal representation of the accused is always done by private attorney. To have a military lawyer plead your case is crazy. I wouldnt do it.

    I agree, where is the ACLU on this? They have a voice in this matter as does each and every taxpayer.

    Standy by for presentation of commendation cookies to both Daisy and KenH for being predictable. :applause:

    Your flag underpants are showing.
     
    #17 emeraldctyangel, Jun 18, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 18, 2006
  18. emeraldctyangel

    emeraldctyangel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    737
    Likes Received:
    0
    People in this country and any US territory, regardless of their citizenship are allowed the same freedoms as any citizen. Its called the laws of the land. There is no special laws for outsiders.
     
  19. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not sure why you think consistency is to be sniggered at but help yourself to one of those cookies, eac, and one for gratuitous nastiness.

    Have any of the servicemen asked the ACLU to step in or would they object if it did? Phoney baloney issue and you know it.

    The shackles seem to have been overkill in these cases.
     
    #19 Daisy, Jun 19, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 19, 2006
  20. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,949
    Likes Received:
    299
    The aclu is constantly trolling for clients. They don't have to be asked, but...

    How many of the non-American citizens imprisoned at Gitmo asked for the help of the ACLU?
     

Share This Page

Loading...