We are at war, government can hold you forever
Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri is a US Resident who was arrested for plotting an attack against the United States. What makes his case interesting is that he is not going through our court system, but is instead being held indefinitely without a trial and may get a military tribunal. I know most people are thinking, who cares, its just one guy and he probably is a terrorist, but their is a bigger issue here. An issue about our rights and what makes us different from the terrorists. If we start eroding our beliefs, values, and freedoms, then are the terrorists not winning?
This man should have the evidence against him presented in court, if the government feels the punishment would not be harsh enough, they should make the charges for terrorism harsher instead of trying to hold people indefinitely without presenting the case against them. He was not captured on the fields of Afghanistan like other terrorists, he was a legal resident of the United States. Another reason I have a problem with this is our government has a record of people abusing their powers, I believe the government does need expanded powers in war time, but the Bush administration has continued to push for powers without any checks and balances. For ex., they tried to bypass the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) courts which approved warrant requests while keeping information classified, the Bush administration said they were not fast enough, but out of over 22,000 requests only 5 were denied and the courts allow surveillance to be carried out for 72 hours before they are notified in cases of urgency. They resist every attempt to make sure ordinary Americans have their constitutional rights protected.
Unless al-Marri is eventually granted a trial by the Supreme Court, other US residents could be rounded up and put in military prisons for whatever the government deems is a threat. What if an innocent man is locked up with no access to a lawyer or trial? I am not saying this man should be freed, but he should be put up for trial, even Saddam Hussein got a trial in Iraq.
Reference 1
Reference 2
Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri is a US Resident who was arrested for plotting an attack against the United States. What makes his case interesting is that he is not going through our court system, but is instead being held indefinitely without a trial and may get a military tribunal. I know most people are thinking, who cares, its just one guy and he probably is a terrorist, but their is a bigger issue here. An issue about our rights and what makes us different from the terrorists. If we start eroding our beliefs, values, and freedoms, then are the terrorists not winning?
This man should have the evidence against him presented in court, if the government feels the punishment would not be harsh enough, they should make the charges for terrorism harsher instead of trying to hold people indefinitely without presenting the case against them. He was not captured on the fields of Afghanistan like other terrorists, he was a legal resident of the United States. Another reason I have a problem with this is our government has a record of people abusing their powers, I believe the government does need expanded powers in war time, but the Bush administration has continued to push for powers without any checks and balances. For ex., they tried to bypass the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) courts which approved warrant requests while keeping information classified, the Bush administration said they were not fast enough, but out of over 22,000 requests only 5 were denied and the courts allow surveillance to be carried out for 72 hours before they are notified in cases of urgency. They resist every attempt to make sure ordinary Americans have their constitutional rights protected.
Unless al-Marri is eventually granted a trial by the Supreme Court, other US residents could be rounded up and put in military prisons for whatever the government deems is a threat. What if an innocent man is locked up with no access to a lawyer or trial? I am not saying this man should be freed, but he should be put up for trial, even Saddam Hussein got a trial in Iraq.
Reference 1
Reference 2
This man should have the evidence against him presented in court, if the government feels the punishment would not be harsh enough, they should make the charges for terrorism harsher instead of trying to hold people indefinitely without presenting the case against them. He was not captured on the fields of Afghanistan like other terrorists, he was a legal resident of the United States. Another reason I have a problem with this is our government has a record of people abusing their powers, I believe the government does need expanded powers in war time, but the Bush administration has continued to push for powers without any checks and balances. For ex., they tried to bypass the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) courts which approved warrant requests while keeping information classified, the Bush administration said they were not fast enough, but out of over 22,000 requests only 5 were denied and the courts allow surveillance to be carried out for 72 hours before they are notified in cases of urgency. They resist every attempt to make sure ordinary Americans have their constitutional rights protected.
Unless al-Marri is eventually granted a trial by the Supreme Court, other US residents could be rounded up and put in military prisons for whatever the government deems is a threat. What if an innocent man is locked up with no access to a lawyer or trial? I am not saying this man should be freed, but he should be put up for trial, even Saddam Hussein got a trial in Iraq.
Reference 1
Reference 2
posted by Amar Shah at 2:38 PM
Site Feed
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home