Time for crow pie!

[Rags]

The Quality of the evidence does NOT have to the standard required for a court... that was the point of the second quote....

No, they are different standards, and in some cases the standards are higher.

I never said it was on man.

Yes you did. You infered it was GWB who was that man.

Sorry, it wasnt section 8, I mis-pasted......
What I meant to post was:-
The only appeal/review is to the president:

"b) With respect to any individual subject to this order --

(1) military tribunals shall have exclusive jurisdiction with respect to offenses by the individual; and

(2) the individual shall not be privileged to seek any remedy or maintain any proceeding, directly or indirectly, or to have any such remedy or proceeding sought on the individual's behalf, in (i) any court of the United States, or any State thereof, (ii) any court of any foreign nation, or (iii) any international tribunal. "

1) says that no other court can pull jurisdiction privelage (except of course a court whose job it is to check the executive power---supreme court) with the proceding, including foreign courts.
2) says that the accused cannot sue or seek separate remedies from outside courts. This is placed to put a reign on the potential frivelous paperwork. Of course the US Supreme court CAN and HAS override of this part

The Order was last acted upon during WWII, as far as I am aware... It was not acted upon during either the Korean nor Veitnam war, It HAS already been enacted this time round.... Also the Order do NOT make provision for the length of time a suspect may be held...

No, the specific Tribunal as this has not been enacted since WWII, but executive orders for military trials have occured since, but not a general declaration using the tribunal.
The order doesn't make a provision for time held, because it's assumed a writ of habeus corpus is nullified, but the Supreme Court can and has overruled this part.

So this action was taken to keep it simple for civil courts?

That's one reason.

I dont think so... Earlier you said "The executive order that is issued is allowing for expedience in the gathering of those that fall under this order rather than having infinite detention until the military action is complete". It was done to protect information gathered, sources etc... It is to allow evidence which would be inadmissible in a civil cout. It was done to throw a veil of secrecy over the govenments actions with regards to suspects.... How many have been 'lifted' so far?

These are other reasons.

I have admitted I am wrong before....?

Lets kill this though.... I am getting a headache seraching through execuative orders!

Fair enough, I can see you are struggling with reading/understanding written law documents.

Rags

[RedRed]

Here is a couple of questions for ya'all.....

What is the difference between a Terrorist and a freedom Fighter?

can an organisation move from one to the other?

Rags... You got ICQ?

OR IRC?

RedRed

[Rags]

Originally posted by RedRed
[B]Here is a couple of questions for ya'all.....

What is the difference between a Terrorist and a freedom Fighter?

They can be one in the same.

can an organisation move from one to the other?

I am sure they can, and at times they are one in the same.

Rags... You got ICQ?

Yep

OR IRC?

RedRed

Yep

Rags

[RedRed]

Fair enough, I can see you are struggling with reading/understanding written law documents.

just 2 points
1
These are law documents from a different country..... I am sure that you would have some difficulty with some of ours....

2
If you check the time here, Rags.... its 2AM... I am a bit drunk, and I frankly, I cant be arsed!


RedRed

[Rags]

Originally posted by RedRed


just 2 points
1
These are law documents from a different country..... I am sure that you would have some difficulty with some of ours....

I understand, I was just prodding you.

2
If you check the time here, Rags.... its 2AM... I am a bit drunk, and I frankly, I cant be arsed!


RedRed

An Irishman who drinks? Never.

Rags

[RedRed]

Rags.. you can be a right smartarse when ya want to be.....


I was referring to an organisation which one could follow, even though they might be operating without the approval of a particular govenment. The Mujahadeen.... for some (NOT ME), the IRA or UDA... on the ANC for example.

The British MP, Peter Mandelson went on air yesterday saying that he believed that there were different degrees of Terrorist... and that those who were willing to engage in dialogue, which he refferred to as freedom fighters.....

RedRed

[Rags]

Rags.. you can be a right smartarse when ya want to be....

I've been told that

I was referring to an organisation which one could follow, even though they might be operating without the approval of a particular govenment. The Mujahadeen.... for some (NOT ME), the IRA or UDA... on the ANC for example.

The British MP, Peter Mandelson went on air yesterday saying that he believed that there were different degrees of Terrorist... and that those who were willing to engage in dialogue, which he refferred to as freedom fighters.....

I don't think that targeting civilians is ever acceptable IMO, but I suppose there are some who are worse than others....

Rags

[Joel]

I don't think that targeting civilians is ever acceptable IMO,

The direct and deliberate targeting of innocent civilians, in other words those who have no immediate way to defend themselves, to get a government to change it's actions defines a terrorist for me.

Joel