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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: NightOwl who wrote (125381)	3/1/2004 3:03:49 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

re: Clydesdales and consequences and Padilla: It is quite possible, even probable, that Padilla is guilty of: 1. spying 2. treason 3. conspiracy to commit mass murder 4. enlisting in the armed forces of a hostile foreign power. These are all crimes, each with harsh punishments. So prove it. By transfering Padilla from the civilian to the military justice system, by re-labelling him (from "criminal" to "illegal combatant"), the suspicion is aroused, that the government doesn't think they can prove anything, using the Constitutional methods. <If everyone being held for terrorist related reasons was hauled out tomorrow and shot at high noon it would present less "injustice" than has resulted from allegations of rape in this country.> That's equivalent to saying: "My neighbor beats his wife every night, and I am following the Lesser Evil Path, what I do should not be criticized, because I only beat my wife every other night." One completely unrelated crime cannot be used to justify any other crime. <The only way you get justice from any "criminal justice system" is to stay far away from it. Mr. Padilla clearly never appreciated that lesson. But the life and liberty of a "suspected" revolutionary/terrorist - or yours for that matter - has whatever meaning it has, whether I recognize, accept or appreciate it or not. Lord help them ...and you... if this should cease to be the case. <vbg> > Maybe I don't understand you, here. Are you saying that anybody who comes to the attention of the criminal justice system, if the President says they have done something sufficiently heineous, then you presume they are guilty until proven innocent? And, if that's true, then how can Padilla ever prove his innocence? Do you see any path, any mechanism, anything he can do, to counter this presumption of guilt? <As far as I'm concerned he can stew in his juices.> So, you are satisfied as to his guilt. No courtroom, no judge, no jury, no trial. Because the nation is at war, because of your fear, you are willing to sweep aside every protection. If the President can seize anyone by labelling them an "illegal combatant", and if the President has sole power to attach that label to anyone, then we are not a Republic any more. The Roman Republic, for the duration of hostilities, would elect Dictators, who had life-and-death power. That's exactly the power Bush claims, and he seems to be getting away with it.