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: Elroy who wrote (190600)	7/1/2006 7:30:14 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Why do you accept the designation of them as "illegal combatants"? Look it up for yourself. The definitions of what constitutes a legal combatant have been made pretty clear. It wouldn't matter if he'd even possessed an ID card designating him as an Al Qai'da member because Al Qai'da is illegitimate as an organization since it does not represent a legitimate government or soveriegn state. Isn't one of the guys in question a Yememni that is allegedly Osams's driver? If he never wore a military uniform because he's a driver, why does he get stuck in this nebulous limbo of "illegal combatant" land? The fact that he held such a position of responsibility and was trusted by the head of Al Qai'da should be sufficient evidence to provide "beyond a reasonable doubt" proof of his complicity in the Al Qai'da organization. I'd feel the same way if he were driving Adolf Hitler (who at least was the head of a legitimate, if not equally terrible, government. Bin Laden is an illegal combatant and head of a terrorist organization. Those associating with him can only be held as being associated with the same illegal organization (with the consequence of being denied the rights and protections afforded legitimate combatants). Hawk