In the case of US asylum seekers, who are coming to find a land of freedom, it's certainly not. Over the past few years thousands of people who have come as asylum seekers and immigrants from Arab countries have been unfairly detained and forced into detention centres because they may be linked to "terrorism". Take the Hamoui family for example, who moved to USA as political asylum seekers, and in the middle of the night were taken away by the FBI, because they 'may' have links with Al'Qaeda, being Muslim and all...
These people are detained unfairly for months in solitary cells, with no communication with the outside world. There are no newspapers, no telephones, no TV, no nothing. They have no chance to come out of their rooms, and they certainly have no access to an impartial hearing. And they are your everyday American residents. What ever happened to 'freedom of religion', or civil rights?
Now we move on to the famous case of Guantanamo Bay. Everyone's heard of it, and yet USA is only doing it's bare minimum. The people there are suffering disgustingly. Not only do they have no rights, as they are neither protected by the American judicial system, nor the Geneva Convention, but they also have no access to any form of media, or communication. It's been two years since the War on Iraq, but yet only a few have had any form of hearing. Nobody but the US government knows how many people are there, what sort of treatment they are receiving, and whether they actually are "bad" or not.
There are children from the age of 12 to old men to the age of 80 and above. No evidence has been supplied as to whether they are innocent or not. Yes, some of them have been given trials, but it is important to remember that these are military trials, which means they are not impartial. Also they are judged on they basis that they are assumed guilty. As Bush put it himself, "I can assure you that these are bad people."
But if they are, why is he so scared to give them a fair trial? What allows him to judge the difference between 'good' and 'bad'?
The American Law has always been to judge someone on a fair basis, no matter their background, their colour, or their religion. Why is this not supplied to all those who the Government withhold? The Constitution clearly states that: "No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
That does not say "no citizen", it says "no person".
The length of detainment is forever. Rumsfeld claimed it was until every global Terrorist organisation was shut down, which basically means forever-because we all know that there will always be political terrorism. This means some people will be without a father, a grandfather, a son, a brother, a nephew, etc, for a lifetime. And they may be innocent, just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
So I ask you, do you believe the treatment of these people, is fair? Is it right to treat any human like this? Whatever happened to "America: Land of the Free"?