Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (8001)	11/30/2001 9:53:23 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

Ahhhh, the military tribunal bugaboo..... Do you find fault with the Administration's plan to kill Osama or drop a bomb on his cave???? JLA

To: jttmab who wrote (8001)	11/30/2001 3:02:06 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93284

Give us a couple more terrorist events with great loss of life and you'll have the people beating their way down to the poll booths to repeal the 4th amendment or whatever amendment is said to be standing in the way of national security. I think there's an argument (in addition to those offered elsewhere) in favor of military tribunals which can be developed from your comments. Wouldn't it be better to have military tribunals, as long as they are temporary and constrained as terrorism-related, and preserve the 4th amendment?

To: jttmab who wrote (8001)	12/1/2001 1:22:00 AM
From: Angler	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

jt: I am reminded of Shakespeare's words: "There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." I'm still not worried about our ship of State floundering on the rocks because our own pirates may board it in the form of extremists from all directions. The charter and course of the ship will not be changed. Thinking about it, notice how the two houses of Congress react to all critical issues. The Congress people with only two years of tenure seem to erupt in all kinds of debate and ballywhooing over any issue of national interest. Words fly about like a swarm of bees seeking voter approval. The Senate, on the other hand, seems a more deliberative body viewing the same issues, choosing to move slowly and cautiously in line with their lack of apprehension supported by 6 years in office. It's a great system with constitutional laws to interpret it. Usually citizenry only awakens where and when their pocket book seems most affected. Right now, however, we think terrorists are out to get us and maybe we're right, but we'll have to wait and see how Congress finally deals with it even with a President being in a warlike mode. There are degrees of crime and terrorism. Shouldn't these terrorists be looked on as combatants out of uniform declaring their intent to kill all and any Americans? Where the atrocity or activity takes place and under what circumstances will certainly have some bearing on whether the military or the civil courts take over. The Bataan Death March was a horrible breach of the international rules of war but both sides were combatants. A military court would have been the one to settle it. There's a vast difference between a planned atrocity committed by alien enemies out of uniform upon civilians or our military and criminal attacks deliberately committed upon individuals for monetary gain, impulsive passion, etc. The military court, therefore, will not sit against American citizens IMO. Look what has happened with Ames and Pollard - American born spies accused and proven agents of foreign governments. Undoubtedly their activities resulted in the death of our own agents in remote places. Trust the people even the independent and critical ones. But I don't like the Government offering bribes either but maybe it's a sad means to an end IMO. I think it will all turn out okay. Angler