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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Travis_Bickle who wrote (72170)	6/14/2008 1:04:22 PM
From: KonKilo	Respond to of 542052

The question imo isn't whether he is an ordinary criminal, it is whether he is a criminal at all. That cannot be decided because the U.S. will not charge him with a crime, will not allow him a trial, will not allow him a lawyer, will not allow him to even appear before a federal judge and ask "Why the heck have I been imprisoned for so many years?" And the term for this is Kafkaesque, which used to imply something horribly implausible.

To: Travis_Bickle who wrote (72170)	6/14/2008 3:27:32 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542052

The question imo isn't whether he is an ordinary criminal, it is whether he is a criminal at all. Well, of course Boumediene isn't a criminal. We know of no crime he has committed. Planning to commit a crime isn't a crime. That's the way our criminal justice system works. He should be let free to blow up the embassy. If he accomplishes that and the crime can be traced to him, then and only then is he a criminal. With regard to my example, who was in a skirmish with US troops in Afghanistan, not so clear, IMO. Shooting someone is a criminal act, unless it's in war, of course. If it's not a war, then it's a criminal act, although the act could be forgiven as self defense.