Personal tools
 
Views

Argument: There is sufficient review process for detainees at Guantanamo

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 02:11, 10 January 2008 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)

← Previous diff
Current revision (15:43, 14 June 2010) (edit)
Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs)
(Parent debate)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
==Parent debate== ==Parent debate==
-*[[Debate:Guantanamo Bay]]+*[[Debate: Guantanamo Bay detention center]]
- +
==Supporting evidence== ==Supporting evidence==
*[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/21/AR2006062101519.html Washington Post. "Close Guantanamo?". June 22, 2006] - "[Detainees'] continued detention is reviewed once a year by military boards, and prisoners are assigned advocates to help argue their cases. Pending a decision by the Supreme Court, they are also able to appeal their detentions to U.S. federal courts, and many have U.S. civilian lawyers." *[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/21/AR2006062101519.html Washington Post. "Close Guantanamo?". June 22, 2006] - "[Detainees'] continued detention is reviewed once a year by military boards, and prisoners are assigned advocates to help argue their cases. Pending a decision by the Supreme Court, they are also able to appeal their detentions to U.S. federal courts, and many have U.S. civilian lawyers."

Current revision

Parent debate

Supporting evidence

  • Washington Post. "Close Guantanamo?". June 22, 2006 - "[Detainees'] continued detention is reviewed once a year by military boards, and prisoners are assigned advocates to help argue their cases. Pending a decision by the Supreme Court, they are also able to appeal their detentions to U.S. federal courts, and many have U.S. civilian lawyers."

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.