Email address obfuscation in effect -- please
click here to turn it off.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
Mike Miller wrote:
On Mon, 2 Oct 2006, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Mike Miller wrote:
Here's the part that I don't think you are thinking through
carefully: Who are "these people?" You say "they engaged in
terrorism," but that is not how the government will define "these
people" -- they are defined as having been *accused* of engaging in
terrorism. The difference is not all that subtle and it is the key
to understanding most objections to the proposed policy. An
accusation of terrorism cannot provide a reasonable basis for taking
someone's rights away. We need to review such claims against a person
in a hearing.
Even in WWII, captured enemy soldiers who did not get Geneva
convention rights were tried by a military tribunal. Is this wrong?
Are you saying that the new legislation will provide a military tribunal
to every accused enemy combatant?
No. I actually have no idea about this.
--
Stephen Montgomery-Smith
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://www.math.missouri.edu/~stephen
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Home | FAQ | Server | Presentations | Mailing Lists/Archives | Member Tools | Links | Sponsors | Contact