Guantanamo Bay

My friend and I are in disagreement. He's racist and hate Obama*, while I'm liberal. My history teacher said there's a law, Habeas corpus I think, which states you cannot be detained by law enforcement people for more than 48 hours without evidence that you did something. ie, There's a school shooting, you're a wittness, they hold you for 36 hours to question you/see if you did it. While there's been people in Guantanamo Bay for around 7 years with no such evidence. My Friend says Bush passed some kind of law that lets him do that with terrorist. Iunno, Google showed nothing.
Anyone here know more about this?


*No, he's not racist. Just a joke. D;

My friend and I are in disagreement. He's racist and hate Obama*, while I'm liberal. My history teacher said there's a law, Habeas corpus I think, which states you cannot be detained by law enforcement people for more than 48 hours without evidence that you did something. ie, There's a school shooting, you're a wittness, they hold you for 36 hours to question you/see if you did it. While there's been people in Guantamano(sp?) Bay for around 7 years with no such evidence. My Friend says Bush passed some kind of law that lets him do that with terrorist. Iunno, Google showed nothing.
Anyone here know more about this?


*No, he's not racist. Just a joke. D;

Because they aren't American citizens, and are arrested by military personnel in non-American territory, they aren't necessarily subject to American law. As far as law, they are regarded more as POWs. That aside, there may be more evidence than you know, a lot of what the people may be detained for may be highly classified information that even the president may not have access to. The military is in a bind a lot of times because they can't exactly prove they legitly did something without revealing information they aren't supposed to have (if that is the case, not saying it always is). Doesn't matter anyway, as Obama is shutting it down (which pissed off a friend who had orders to Gitmo as an interrogator. He is now going to Bahrain).

-Edit-
Please pardon the obscure verbage, I have to be really careful how I word things due to the nature of my job.

The left says that we are violating their civil rights by holding them in prison "without a good reason".

Luckily, Obama realized that if he releases those guys and they attack America, it is his fault. That's why he tried to send as many as he could to other prisons, but ended up releasing a few (Including one who got elected to the number 2 spot in Al Queda the day he was released)

I forget exactly what it's called, but there is some war clause that states we can take prisoners that are seen as a threat to America, and then give them a fair trial after the war has ended.

They're people carrying guns and killing American soldiers. Mind you, they're not wearing uniforms. That's extremely unfair to the soldiers. But many on the left (not all of them, but many) believe that these people shouldn't be detained under any reason. I do agree that they shouldn't be tortured, but IMHO we should be allowed to hold them.

Then again, why are we afraid to give them a trial?

Good luck closing a place filled with a bunch of people that no one in the entire world wants. I don't see any countries raising their hands to take a portion of the gitmo prisoners.

Good luck closing a place filled with a bunch of people that no one in the entire world wants. I don't see any countries raising their hands to take a portion of the gitmo prisoners.

Yeah, I find it quite funny that a lot of the EU has been pressuring the US to close Gitmo, and now that the US is about to do it, they're trying to back out of accepting any more than a few (single digit) of the prisoners.