Source: https://www.paperdue.com/topic/guantanamo-bay-essays
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 12:10:07+00:00

Document:
Why Do the U.S. Hold Guantanamo ay?
In the last two years the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo ay in Cuba has regularly been seen in the news due to the imprisonment of hundreds of Muslims held there by the United States without trial (CSC, 2003).
AI (2004). Amnesty International Report, entitled Guantanamo Bay: A Human Rights Scandal. Available at http://web.amnesty.org/pages/guantanamobay-index-engAccessed on 13th May 2004.
Bennathan, J. (2003). A Nation Above the Law: Guantanamo Bay. New Statesman, July 21st 2003. Accessible from www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0FQP/4647_132/106058987/p1/article.jhtml Accessed on 11th May 2004.
Byers, M. (2002). Ignore the Geneva Convention and put our own citizens at risk. (Civil Liberties Watch). Article in Humanist, accessible at http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m1374/2_62/83794489/p1/article.jhtml. Accessed on 10th May 2004.
CSC (2003). How the U.S. stole Guantanamo Bay. Available at http://www.cuba-solidarity.org.uk/cubasi_article.asp?ArticleID=27Accessed on 10th May 2004.
De Zayas, Alfred. (2003.) www.law.ubc.caThe Status of Guantanamo Bay and the Status of the Detainees.
" 28 U.S.C. [section] 2241-(3). Cf. United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259, 277-78 (1990) (Kennedy, J., concurring), and cases cited therein (Katyal, p. 1365)."
The Bush Administration says that the detainees pose a threat to the United States, and the detainees are complicit either in the September 11, 2001 attack against the United States; or that they took part in separate but no less equally threatening plots to commit acts of terrorism and make war on the United States. Early in 2002 when the detainees were being transported to Guantanamo Bay, the Bush Administration did not suffer a lot of negative feedback. As time passed, however, and when it became apparent that the status of the detainees could remain undefined indefinitely, criticism began being fired at the administration.
of foreign nationals are being held in prison camps at the Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base since January 2002 without access to any court, legal counsel or family visits. Despite repeated appeals by international organizations such as Amnesty International and Human ights Watch as well as several governments around the world, the U.S. administration refuses to grant the detainees prisoners of war (POW) status or bring charges against them under the due process of law. In this essay, I shall explain why the continued detention of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners without trial is a violation of international and U.S. law and how their human rights are being violated.
The exact numbers are not disclosed by the U.S. authorities; the numbers also keep changing as some prisoners are periodically released and others added. Most estimates place the number between 500 and 600.
Guantanamo Bay was obtained on perpetual lease by the U.S. from Cuba after the Spanish-American War of 1898; sovereignty over the territory, however, lies with Cuba -- although the Cuban government under Fidel Castro considers the U.S. control of Guantanamo as illegal.
"U.S. Constitution: Fourteenth Amendment." FindLaw.com. .
The United States has leased 45 square miles of land and water at Guantanamo Bay from Cuba for more than a century. Commonly known as “Gitmo,” the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay has been the source of increasing calls for its closure as no longer necessary or appropriate in the 21st century. To determine the facts, this paper reviews the relevant literature concerning Guantanamo Bay to provide the background of the issue and an analysis of this issue to determine whether the U.S. interests in Guantanamo Bay justify its continued operations. A summary of the research and important findings concerning this issue are provided in the conclusion.
hen an imbalance of representible matter exists, the basis of the rule of law is jeopardized.
Byers, Michael. War Law: Understanding International Law and Armed Conflict. Grove Press: New York, 2005. Print.
The Oyez Project. "Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)." Accessed Monday, November 15, 2010.
Criminal justice is an inherently ethical profession. The judiciary ostensibly crafts laws that reflect the ethical sensibilities and social norms of the society, which are often embedded in the American Constitution. The role of the criminal justice system is to ensure that local, state, and federal laws are applied and enforced in a manner consistent with constitutional and regional codes. Issues like the equal protection clause are also ethical matters. The core objective of the criminal justice system is built on ethical responsibility: the ethical responsibility of the system to its main stakeholders, which is the American people.
Banks, C. (2012). Criminal Justice Ethics. Sage.
Block, W.E. & Obioha, V. (2012). War on black men: Arguments for the legalization of drugs. Criminal Justice Ethics 31(2): 106-120.
By connecting the awarding of a peace prize with the concerns of a world in which terrorism has become a constant threat, Obama makes clear the exigency of his message when he says: "I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war."
Nobel laureates are given few formal constraints in terms of their responses but Obama faced the more general constraints of trying to meet very high expectations and the conflicting expectations of the peoples of different nations. I believe that he did a good -- though not perfect -- job in meeting these differing expectations, and so crafted a speech that served as a fitting response to the occasion.
Niday, I.A. (2008). "The War against Terror as War against the Constitution." Canadian Review of American Studies, 38(1), 101-117.
One of the fundamental questions I have after thoroughly reading this article is a point that was made in the abstract and was not quite sufficiently explained in the rest of the body of the paper. Specifically, it has to do with the legal philosophy known as pragmatism. I do not understand what this concept is and could not find a sufficient explanation in the remainder of the paper. I would like to know why the author claims that pragmatism was forsaken for "judicial and constitutional coherency" (Niday, 2008, p. 101).
An examination of a number of sources regarding various facets of the domestic and foreign policy propagated by the U.S. government unequivocally reveals that there is a definite incongruence with the values of liberty and justice that is reserved for conventional U.S. citizens, and that which is reserved for people from other parts of the globe. Quite simply, many of the notions that the U.S. contends to champion and preserve for its own people, it directly violates for the citizens in other parts of the world.
From what I can tell Guantanamo Bay served no real purpose it its entire existence. It was a defensive move made by the Government after September 11th because they felt as though they had to do something, even though they truly did not know what that was.
Marguiles, Joseph. (2004). A Prison Beyond the Law. Virginia Quarterly eview. 80(4), p37-55.
At the same time, they would go to social networking sites (such as: Face ook and Twitter), to reach out to similar individuals that have the same kind of views on religion. This will improve collaboration among a number of individuals around the world, who share similar kinds of views. Over the course to time, this would help to increase the outreach of the blog and it will become an alternative voice, for those individuals who share similar opinions.
blanket media coverage of U.S.-Iraq war has forced many other important national and international issues in the background. One of these is the controversial policy of the U.S. government regarding the prisoners kept in the Guantanamo Bay camps without trial. In this paper about the Guantanamo bay prisoners we shall explore the conditions under which they are kept, their rights under international and U.S. law, the possibility that some of them may be innocent, the U.S. administration's view point about the issue, and what options are being considered for their future.
The counter-terrorism speech given by president Obama came with a couple of messages. His first address touched on the restrictive policy strikes using drones; of course this was not new or restrictive according to prior experience. His second focus was directed at the need to close down Guantanamo Bay detention center. The latter was also not a new stand taken by the president but it surely opposed a long standing position by the powers that be. Here are the major highlights of President Obama's speech.
Effective response to terrorism needs a lot more than just military response and law enforcement. There is need for a concerted effort to be directed towards winning the war of ideology and the battle of will. The first item should be to complete the task of defeating the Al Qaeda forces.
The upreme Court found that the habeas corpus petition was filed improperly, and therefore the case was dismissed and all previous decisions in other courts overruled. The central issue regarding the power of the president was never decided.
Justice tevens presented a dissent stating that the government failed to give proper notice for Padilla's transfer to military custody I outh Carolina. The contention is that the habeas petition would have been filed properly if counsel had been informed in a timely manner. Justice tevens' conclusion is that the habeas corpus should be treated as one filed two days earlier, because government has not followed the correct procedures in providing information to Padilla's counsel.
(last visited Friday, February 8, 2008).
Balance between Emergency Powers, Abuse of Law by the State and Civil Liberties of People within and Beyond the U.S.
A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department  UKHL 56 .
Feingold, Russell. "On Opposing the U.S.A. Patriot Act." 14 April 2002. 8 December 2012 .
Gearty, Conor. Terror. London: Faber & Faber, 1991.
Greenhouse, Linda. "A Nation Challanged: The Supreme Court." The New York Times 29 September 2001.
The Court reversed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and remanded the case for dismissal with no prejudice; it overruled the Court of Appeals verdict and prepared the dismissal of the case, allowing Padilla to refile the petition.
The Boumediene v. Bush case was a writ of habeas corpus submission made in a civilian court of the United States. Lakhdar Boumediene was a naturalized citizen of Bosnia and Herzegovina. He was held in military imprisonment by the United States at the Guantanamo Bay detention camps (http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2007/02/why-boumediene-was-wrongly-decided.php).The case disputed the validity of Boumediene's custody at the Guantanamo Bay military base as well as the constitutionality of the Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006.
FISA -- The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act dictates the way the United States government carries out communication surveillance (e.g., telefaxes, emails, telephone calls, Internet websites, etc.) that passes through the United States physically and both the recipient and the sender or either of the two are/is a foreign power, according to FISA definition. FISA's initial purpose, as far back as in 1978, was to make use of the FISA Court to try abuses from governmental agencies, which spied on citizens of the United States in the 70s (Standler, 2007).
ARC. (2011). Summary of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Their Additional Protocols. International Humanitarian Law, 1.
Bazan, E. B. (2007). The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act: An Overview of the Statutory Framework and U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review Decisions. CRS Report for Congress.
Bradley, C. A. (2008). The Story of Ex-parte Milligan: Military Trials, Enemy Combatants, and Congressional Authorization. PRESIDENTIAL POWER STORIES.
t seems there is very little we have done in raq that is in any way honorable. t is common knowledge, now, that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction, and therefore precious little excuse for the war. However, it is true, also beyond question, that Saddam Hussein was a vicious and brutal dictator who kept his nation in line by virtue of excesses of every sort. One of his sons is reputed to have shredded foes in paper shredders. So perhaps the global community is better off rid of him.
If we are ever to see the abuses carried out by our military stopped and amends made, if we are ever to regain our reputation as a moral nation with high ideals, one of which is the humane and ethical treatment of all people (repeat ALL PEOPLE), then we must not confirm another Attorney General who is committed to destroying the foundation of American ideals, the U.S. Constitution, nor who ignores the demands of international law among nations of good will.
A November 11, 2004, report in The Washington Post by Dan Eggen noted the ways Gonzales, currently White House counsel, disregards and disrespects the American Way as it was once known, and the Geneva Conventions' requirements as recognized by all civilized nations. Eggen quoted Gonzales' January 2002 memo in which he "argued that the war on terrorism made the Geneva Conventions' limitations on treatment of enemy prisoners 'obsolete' and 'renders quaint some of its provisions'." He also noted that Gonzales' office "played a role in an August 2002 memo from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel" that rendered the opinion "that torturing alleged al Qaeda terrorists in captivity abroad 'may be justified' and that international laws against torture 'may be unconstitutional if applied to interrogations' conducted in the U.S. war on terrorism."
Powell Assertion Number Two: In his Feb. 5, 2003 speech to the U.N., Powell said: "We have no indication that Saddam Hussein has ever abandoned his nuclear weapons program." But in October, 2002, in his memo to the White House, CIA Director George Tenet voiced "strong doubts about a claim President Bush" was about to make in the State of the Union address "that Iraq was trying to buy nuclear materials" from Africa. And on July 24, 2003, Spain's Foreign Minister, Ana Palacio, an ally of the U.S., said their was "no evidence" prior to the U.S. attack on Iraq of a nuclear bomb program by Saddam, according to the Hanley article in Editor & Publisher.
Barry, John; Hirsh, Michael & Isikoff, Michael. (2004). "The road to Abu Ghraib began after 9/11, when Washington wrote new rules to fight a new kind of war," Newsweek International.
Dodds, Paisley. (2005). "Gitmo Soldier Details Sexual Tactics," Associated Press, Yahoo News, 27 January.
The second signing statement put forth the Bush view that "the new legislation is not enforceable in U.S. courts and that it terminates all pending habeas corpus actions by Guantanamo Bay detainees."
Freedom rather than censorship." Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 51.3 (1995): 4-5.
The fact that industrial control systems may be vulnerable to infiltration by other citizens, or international parties puts laws pertaining to intersection of systems transmission at the forefront of priorities for us all.
At present, telecommunications interference of private citizens holds an up to a five-year prison sentence by U.S. federal law. How cyberterrorism is addressed, when the stakes are heightened, leaves a whole host of opportunities for citizens, and legislators to voice their opinion as new technologies for privacy invasion come on the market.
Amendments to Section 225 Cyber Security Enhancement Act, 2002 (2003). Washington, D.C.: Department of Homeland Security.
Antal, J. Counter-terrorism multipliers needed (2010). Military Technology, 34(4), 4.
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 409 F.2d 718, (U.S.App. LEXIS 12867 2d Cir. N.Y., 1969).
(ipley 2002) There is also an increasing presence of Middle Eastern expats within the metropolitan Detroit and its suburbs. Bush genuinely, believed, according to his supporters that ideologically driven Islamic youth might perform terrorist's acts from within despite any efforts by the Transportation Safety Authorities to ensure that no terrorists came into the country from without.
Apuzzo, Mark. "Secretive Spy Court Refuses to Reveal Wiretap Rules,." Neward Star Ledger 2007.
Constitution. "Article 2, Section 1, Clause 1." 2009. April 3, 2009. .
Greenburg, Jan Crawford, Howard L. Rosenberg, and Ariane de Vogue. "Sources: Top Bush Advisors Approved 'Enhanced Interrogation'." ABC News, 2008.
Johnsen, Dawn E. "What's a President to Do? Interpreting the Constitution in the Wake of Bush Administration Abuses." Boston Law Review 88 (2008): 395.
Supreme Court decision in U.S. v. Alvarez-Machain (1992) that "forcible abduction of a foreign national does not prohibit his trial in a U.S. Court" dealt a body blow to international law, the implications of which are still being felt. Small wonder, therefore, that the Court's majority (6-3) decision was considered unjust by international human rights organizations and even by three of Supreme Court's own judges, led by Justice Stevens, who dissented strongly. I agree with Judge Steven's dissenting opinion for the reasons explained in this essay.
Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices White, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, and Thomas, joined. Justice Stevens filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Blackmun and O'connor, joined.
human rights are negotiable when it comes to fighting terrorism. Different nations at different times have espoused varying policies regarding what rights are accorded to parties accused of criminal activity, typically within the boundaries of their undisputed geographical and legal jurisdictions. With the increasing levels of global cross-border travel and residency over the past century, certain international bodies have evolved to help establish protocols, guidelines and a body of law for detention and treatment of suspects in the international arena. These measures are designed to ensure consistent, appropriate treatment of persons accused of criminal activity that may span national and to help ensure the basic rights of all human beings regardless of their origin or the location of the activity in question.
The court pointed out that the reason next friend status is observed to occur almost exclusively among prisoner's relatives is because a family member typically decides to step in when the competence of the prisoner is in question. The Court also argued that this case was easily distinguished from Hamdi (2002) because Newman already had a preexisting relationship with Padilla.
ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union). (2012). Padilla v. Rumsfeld -- Legal Documents. ACLU.org. Retrieved 20 May 2013 from http://www.aclu.org/national-security/padilla-v-rumsfeld-legal-documents.
Beattie, Michael and Stevens, Lisa Y. (2003). An open debate on United States citizens designated as enemy combatants: Where do we go from here? Maryland Law Review, 62, 975-1027.
CCR (Center for Constitutional Rights). (n.d.). Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (Amicus): Synopsis. CCRJustice.org. Retrieved 18 May 2013 from http://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/past-cases/hamdi-v.-rumsfeld-%28amicus%29.
Callaghan, K., & Schnell, F. (2013). Framing American Politics. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh.
Ferraris, J.P. (2012). Obama 2012: For a Compassionate America. New York: Author House.
S., become attracted to the U.S. And flee the country. Cuba certainly needs to prevent a brain drain at all costs. It could do so by encouraging the U.S. To invest in its infrastructure and for U.S. doctors to train and learn at Cuban facilities, which, by all accounts, have some of the highest standards of excellence in the world (Schoultz, 2010, 8). By helping to build up the Cuban infrastructure, further economic trade could be encouraged. This could also help both the U.S. And Cuba exploit its other natural resources by providing the necessary framework for extraction and export of its huge nickel and sugar stockpiles.
Coll, Alberto R. (2007). "Harming Human Rights in the Name of Promoting Them: The Case of the Cuban Embargo." Foreign Affairs. Vol. 3, No. 88. Pp. 199-209.
Institute Homepage. Published 12 October, 2005 .
Hanson, Stephanie. (2009). "U.S.-Cuba Relations." Council on Foreign Relations. Report delivered 14 April, 2009.
Kant was no exception to the paradigmatic priorities (i.e. objectivity as knowledge) of the era, and brief reference to the episteme is serves accuracy in discursive analysis of this heritage within American politics and policy thought. For instance, Kant's Critique of Judgment is enormously influential in establishing a connection between judgment and political and moral precepts to conduct in communities. Intellectual lineage to Kant's model of Enlightenment 'reason" combines ritish Empiricism with Continental Rationalism; and partly explains why his philosophical proposition that the existence of persistent war against non-liberal states is a requirement to perpetual peace is reiterated in scholarly expiation since the Enlightenment period, making Perpetual Theory of War as lasting as seminal reference (ehnke, 2009, Caranti, 2006 and Murray, 2003). Discourse Analysis toward the study's cause-and-effect analysis is derived from speeches and interviews taken from the ush administration in Table 1.
Behnke, a. (2009). Eternal Peace, Perpetual War? A Critical Investigation into Kant's Conceptualisation of War. Conference Papers -- International Studies Association, 1-18.
Bolton, J. (2010). Obama's Next Three Years. Commentary, 129(1), 24-28.
Brose, C. (2009). The Making of George W. Obama. Foreign Policy, (170), 52-55.
Caranti, L. (2006). Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace? Reflections on the Realist Critique of Kant's Project. Journal of Human Rights, 5(3), 341-353. doi:10.1080/14754830600812357.
Social security is not perfect by any means, but as a program, it has good intentions, and that is one reason to trust our government to do what is right and proper for senior citizens. Many of them have served our country in many ways, and social security means they can be comfortable as they grow older.
Terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 [...] whether the government needs to do all it can in order to protect its citizens, even if that means they have to surrender some of their civil liberties. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 changed America forever. The people understood they were vulnerable for the first time in decades, and they understood that security measures would have to increase -- that was clearly understood. However, Americans have surrendered many of their civil liberties since the terrorist attacks, and that is simply not acceptable in our society. I am not willing to surrender some of the most important civil liberties for greater security, because I believe that many of the civil liberties we surrendered were not necessary, and the Patriot Act gave the government far more power than necessary.
Baker, Nancy V. "National Security vs. Civil Liberties." Presidential Studies Quarterly 33.3 (2003): 547+.
Cassel, Elaine. The War on Civil Liberties: How Bush and Ashcroft Have Dismantled the Bill of Rights. Chicago: Lawrence Hill Books, 2004.
Pena, Aisha. "American Muslims' Civil Liberties and the Challenge to Effectively Avert Xenophobia." The Muslim World 99.1 (2009): 202+.
So far, it has been nothing short of corporate welfare free-for-all mentality with billions of taxpayer dollars being around. Today, on the news, President Obama was instructing Congress that he wanted to see budget cuts (CNN, February, 2009). He has not even implemented one of the costly campaign pledges that he ran on, assuring Americans there would be a national healthcare program, that American would close the terrorist prison in Guantanamo Bay, bring home the soldiers from Iraq, and, at the same time, increase the American troop presence in Afghanistan. These are all campaign promises that have big ticket price tags attached, and at the same time that the president is asking for budget cuts. The fear that this president is in over his head is beginning to take hold.
Geisst, Charles R. Wall Street: A History: from Its Beginnings to the Fall of Enron. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Questia. 23 Feb. 2009 http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=104746636.
Hopper, Anna. "Squashing the Skull and Bones: Reforming the International Anti-Piracy Regime." Harvard International Review 29.4 (2008): 28+. Questia. 23 Feb. 2009 http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5026435726.
Professor Dershowitz (among others) have suggested that the ethical arguments against torture may be outweighed where: (1) the magnitude of harm at issue is great enough, (2) the suspect is known to be in possession of the information necessary to neutralize that harm, and (3) the use of torture is absolutely restricted to those cases. The ethical justification is that in the modern age of, biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons of mass destruction (WMD), the safety of millions of civilians threatened by the use of WMDs outweighs any moral obligation to a single individual involved in such attacks (Dershowitz, 2002).
Dershowitz, a.M. (2002). Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age. New York: Little Brown & Co.
Author Negr n notes, "Hundreds of FBI agents sealed off the town of Hormigueros, Puerto ico, where Ojeda lived with his wife. The FBI surrounded his house and opened fire, killing him. He was 72 years old" (Negr n, 2005). Ojeda had been a fugitive since he jumped bond after the Wells Fargo obbery, and he had still been active in independence organizations, including the Macheteros, and his death helped bring some of the former members closer together in a more cohesive unit, as their continued existence even today indicates.
Atkins, S.E. (2002). Encyclopedia of modern American extremists and extremist groups. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Editors. (2008). Puerto Rican Macheteros warn of FBI onslaught. Retrieved 13 Sept. 2008 from the New York City Independent Media Center Web site: http://nyc.indymedia.org/en/2008/05/97509.html.
Hewitt, C. (2002). Understanding terrorism in America: From the Klan to Al Qaeda. New York: Routledge.
Negr n, a.C. (2005). The Macheteros and the Puerto Rican independence struggle. Retrieved 13 Sept. 2008 from the Socialism and liberation Web site: http://socialismandliberation.org/mag/index.php?aid=503.
The fundamental human rights were in fact the man's rights as covered in these acts.
However, we should consider the fact that, at least in many of the Western countries, the legislative framework, as well as the societal implementation of this, enlarged to include women, often around the end of the 19th century or the beginning of the 20th century. In this sense, although the acts and bills covering fundamental human rights do not de jure include women's rights, de facto the reality has changed so as to adapt to the inclusion of women rights.
This is not a new development -- international law had long recognised universal jurisdiction for piracy and slavery, for example -- but it marks an extension of the principle, in a modified form, into a new subject area' (emphasis added).
Yusuf Aksar, Implementing International Humanitarian Law: From the AD Hoc Tribunals to a Permanent International Criminal Court, London: F. Cass (2004).
Black's Law Dictionary, St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co. (1990).
James R. Crawford, 'The Internationalisation of Criminal Law' (1995), ASIL Proceedings at. 301 in Aksar at 50.
Caroline Davidson, 'Tort Au Canadien: A Proposal for Canadian Tort Legislation on Gross Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (2005) 38 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 5 at 1403.

References: v. 
 v. 
 V. 
 UKHL 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 V.