Padilla NOT an enemy combatant?

[Redleg]

You have confused yourself
Read through the 1942 case ruling , or seven cases thrown into one

After you have the conservation with George Bush - or provide the link for the document.

However for the real answer see the responses above what you quoted.

[Redleg]

And before you try your normal sarcasm - remember the earlier statement by myself - to highlight just for you.

Again criticism of the Bush Adminstration's use of the term and how they are going about the process is valid. However to think that Bush just made up the term is incorrect.

So again criticize it all you like - since in a lot of ways it is valid criticism - but historically Bush did not coin the phrase.

[Tribesman]

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/proj...aw/quirin.html

however one must indeed look at the declared citizenship of the person in question
That quote Red ?
Who has Padilla declared himself citizen or subject of ????Uncle Osama ?
But seriously have you read the indictment and the "links" they are putting forward against him and his co-accused
You would think that after 3 years they would have a bit more, or even something really concrete, half of it seems to contradict the other half , and whatever hapened to the allegations of the "dirty bomb" that they have been scaring the public with all this time .
Is it going to turnout like the British Chemical attack case that turned out to be complete bollox ending up with most suspects walking free and one convicted of trying to be a nuicance(sp?) ?

Edit to add And before you try your normal sarcasm
Who me ??? never . Anyhow where have I said Bush invented it? but he is certainly milking it .

[Redleg]

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/proj...aw/quirin.html

however one must indeed look at the declared citizenship of the person in question
That quote Red ?

Nope beat you to it - see the above.

Who has Padilla declared himself citizen or subject of ????Uncle Osama ?
But seriously have you read the indictment and the "links" they are putting forward against him and his co-accused

Not really because I figured the Supreme Court would eventually halt the attempt concerning Padilla, since he is a citizen of the United States.

You would think that after 3 years they would have a bit more, or even something really concrete, half of it seems to contradict the other half , and whatever hapened to the allegations of the "dirty bomb" that they have been scaring the public with all this time .

You would think - but it seems that is all the evidence they might have to attempt a trail - hince you see the government backing off before their hand is called by the court.

Is it going to turnout like the British Chemical attack case that turned out to be complete bollox ending up with most suspects walking free and one convicted of trying to be a nuicance(sp?) ?

Oh I image Padilla will be charged, put on trail, convicted, and then released with time served.

[Tribesman]

Not really because I figured the Supreme Court would eventually discard the ruling since Padilla is a citizen of the United States.

So was one of the Germans

[Redleg]

Not really because I figured the Supreme Court would eventually discard the ruling since Padilla is a citizen of the United States.

So was one of the Germans

From the link you provided - the court ruled something - because of his actions. So your attempt here falls on deaf ears.

Citizenship in the United States of an enemy belligerent does not relieve him from the consequences of a belligerency which is unlawful because in violation of the law of war. Citizens who associate themselves with the military arm of the enemy government, and with its aid, guidance and direction enter this country bent on hostile acts are enemy belligerents within the meaning of the Hague Convention and the law of war. It is as an enemy belligerent that petitioner Haupt is charged with entering the United States, and unlawful belligerency is the gravamen of the offense of which he is accused.

...........

The Court's opinion is inapplicable to the case presented by the present record. We have no occasion now to define with meticulous care the ultimate boundaries of the jurisdiction of military tribunals to try persons according to the law of war. It is enough that petitioners here, upon the conceded facts, were plainly within those boundaries, and were held in good faith for trial by military commission, charged with being enemies who, with the purpose of destroying war materials and utilities, entered or after entry remained in our territory without uniform-an offense against the law of war. We hold only that those particular acts constitute an offense against the law of war which the Constitution authorizes to be tried by military commission....

Now the American citizen of German parents born in Germany but naturalized - seems to have foresworn his status of being a citizen of the United States by training in Germany to conduct an act of sabatoge. In short he could of also be tried for Treason in the same military tribunal since they were caught.

Padilla's charges chould have been done in a military tribunal for the charge of treason if you want to get to the spefics - or even a regular criminal court for that matter - But like stated once already - I was never worried about the spefics of Padilla's charges because I figured the Supreme Court would eventually step in and tell the Government charge him as a citizen or set him loose.

[Redleg]

Here is a side note for you Tribesman, unlike many, I do understand how the Government in the United States works. There are three seperate branches each that are suppose to provide checks and balances on the others. In this instance one branch has abused their authority, one branch has abdicated there authority, and one branch has not yet come into play.

Short term abuses do and will continue to happen in the American system of government - but eventually the government either self-corrects with the three branches providing the checks and balances - or we end up voting the controlling party out of the other two branches. This is what happened to the Democratic Party - and most likely will happen to the Republican Party - unless of course in the next 12 monthes they get their act together and begin to regain the authority which the Congress has abdicated to the President.

The downstream effects of this particular case will be interesting to see. I believe that the Supreme Court will be making additional rulings concerning some of the cases in Gitmo in the near future.

Are we seeing the beginning of the lame duck session of President Bush's presidency 3 year years before it should occur - or will he pull his adminstration together and overcome theseself-imposed hurrdles.

Now back to playing the devil's advocate when the need arises.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

[QUOTE=Redleg]Here is a side note for you Tribesman, unlike many, I do understand how the Government in the United States works. There are three seperate branches each that are suppose to provide checks and balances on the others. In this instance one branch has abused their authority, one branch has abdicated there authority, and one branch has not yet come into play.

Short term abuses do and will continue to happen in the American system of government - but eventually the government either self-corrects with the three branches providing the checks and balances - or we end up voting the controlling party out of the other two branches. This is what happened to the Democratic Party - and most likely will happen to the Republican Party - unless of course in the next 12 monthes they get their act together and begin to regain the authority which the Congress has abdicated to the President.QUOTE]

Well spoken.

By-the-by, "precedence" and "hence" not presedence or hince.

[Redleg]

Well spoken.

By-the-by, "precedence" and "hence" not presedence or hince.

Naw I rather mis-spell the words - its more fun that way.