SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ilaine who wrote (121591)6/22/2005 10:32:17 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793897
 
Without an indictment and an evidentiary trial according to the principles of due process, including representation by counsel and the right to confront witnesses and all that legalistic mumbo-jumbo, yes

You are trying to "criminalize" the war against militant islamists. These people are illegal combatants, and getting more than they are entitled to now.



To: Ilaine who wrote (121591)6/22/2005 11:26:46 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793897
 
Those who are taken on American soil must be dealt with according to American law. Those who are taken in the field are combatants, and get a military tribunal to determine their status.

In WWII eight Nazi saboteurs were caught in America and tried by military tribunal. The Supreme Court, in Ex parte Quirin (1942), upheld the authority of the tribunal, and six of the men were executed.



To: Ilaine who wrote (121591)6/23/2005 7:36:45 AM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793897
 
Hell, even the old time Kings of England had Star Chambers, which is more of a trial than these guys have gotten so far.

I don't think you need any more "evidence" than that they were captured on a battlefield. If they had a hearing where it was determined that they were, and we're told that they did, I don't see what else it is that you'd want done.