Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Five years after 9/11: What does liberty mean?

We hear a lot of rhetoric connecting the War on Terror to the battle for America's freedom, but what exactly does that concept mean? In another post from The Rutherford Institute, Rachel King, a professor at Harvard University School of Law, asks the same question. To read her article, click here.

PS: I do not support the International Criminal Court, a creation of the United Nations, which is referenced in the article.

2 Comments:

Blogger CrimsonLine said...

Ms. King writes:
"Deciding whether to categorize the 9/11 attacks as a crime or an act of war is a difficult determination to make, but as a society we must make it. Accused criminals have certain rights under American law ... war prisoners also have certain rights under the Geneva Convention and International Law. ... Typically, prisoners of war are detained until the war is over or until the detaining party decides to let them go. In the case of the “war on terrorism,” however, there is no end date in sight, which gives the Bush administration the justification to hold them indefinitely.

If prisoners of war are to be tried as “war criminals,” then they are also entitled to certain rights."

Criminals who are citizens of the US have certain rights under law. Prisoners of war have other rights, and war criminals yet a third. My understanding is that the Bush administration is systematically going through the Gitmo detainees and those in other prisons to determine the status of each one and provide them with the rights they are privvy to. Ms. King kind of slides over "POW" status to get to "war criminal," but POW is a legitimate category, regardless of when the end of the war is projected for.

September 13, 2006 12:12 PM  
Blogger Julie said...

Good point, Crimsonline. And when we consider that some of our own POWs from the Vietnam War are still believed to be incarcerated, it becomes an especially important category.

September 14, 2006 4:46 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home