A few things have been overstated and others haven't been mentioned at all-
First- Regardless of your opinion of US foreign policy, do you really believe this individual was just an innocent bystander randomly selected for interogation? Perhaps was he vacationing with his family when he was suddenly detained by the military? Even the most left slanted people on this website can't be serious when they proclaim this prisoner is some innocent teenager.
Secondly To Tu Holmes- Without getting into a silly argument with you, what you just posted from the "US Department of State" clearly disproves rather than proves your point. Due Process was not intended, nor should it be designated for non- enemy combatants. It was not until very recently where the Supreme Court by some miracle decided that by proxy Guantanamo Bay is considered part of US soil ( even though there is nothing there but a military base) and therefore via that loophole the court trampled more than half a century of precedent and gave non enemy combatants the right to file for habeas corpus. This old video was shot years before the courts mind numbing decision was handed down, so there is absolutely nothing illegal about the interogation. Also, what exactly do you think we should do in interogations? Ask nicely? Share some fallafel with them? Beat up some women for driving? Perhaps that would make them feel more comfortable.
The conditions most of these enemy combtants come from make Guanatanamo look like Wynn Hotel in Las Vegas which is why in order to extract information, certain brutal methods need to be employed. Although, it should also be mentioned even though its obvious, our forms of "torture" are a joke to these people. They are bootsstrapping to the anti american leftists in this country to wiggle their way out of detention, plain and simple.
In addition, regardless of where you recieved that information the Judiciary is responsible for enforcing the laws of the land and the legislature ( IE Congress and the Senate) is responsible for passing the laws of the land. The President with his power as commander and Chief has clashed with Congress over the Patriot Act, Guantanamo and numerous other post 911 policies where his responsibility as commander and chief has come into direct conflict with Congresses power to legislate. We are at war. The President is commander and chief. Congress hasn't authorized military action since WW2. Whether or not you agree with Bush is immaterial. One thing is certain. I feel much safer with a government being PROactive as opposed to REactive when it comes to national security.
Lastly, for all of you whining about due process, let me ask you this- Do you think an enemy combatant detained in Afghanistan who kills, maims, or beheads a US soldier and is brought to Guantanamo for interogation deserves to fall within the US constitutions due process protections that say, you should be entitled to? If your answer is yes, please explain the logic behind such a ridiculous idea.
