Profile
Elf Sternberg
Active Entries
- 1: Surge Pricing for Grocery Stores is a Disaster Only Psychopath MBAs Could Love
- 2: Antarctica Day 7: Swimming In the Antaractic Seas
- 3: Restarted my yoga classes, and I discovered I'm a total wreck
- 4: Antarctica: Getting To the Boat and the Disaster That Awaited
- 5: The Enshittification of All That Lives
- 6: How the green energy discourse resembles queer theory
- 7: Tori's Sake & Grill (restaurant, review)
- 8: I'm Not Always Sure I Trust My ADHD Diagonosis
- 9: You can't call it "Moral Injury" when your "morals" are monstrous
- 10: Ebay vs Newmark: You're all just cogs. Accept it. There is no joy in it, but you have no choice.
Style Credit
- Base style: ColorSide by
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot - Theme: NNWM 2010 Fresh by timeasmymeasure
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
Re: What do you mean, "no"?
Date: 2007-01-20 12:34 pm (UTC)One very obvious possibility, which so far the "evil fascist" Administration has failed to attempt, would be to take the word of the civil libertarians on this issue and let accused enemy combatants have their day in court ...
... as criminals. Please note that it is perfectly legal to impose capital punishment on a captured enemy combatant not recognized as a soldier, by court-martial, for resisting a military occupation, even if this resistance takes a form that would be legal if the prisoner WERE a soldier.
Now, this would mean that the accused enemy combatant in question could be acquitted and released -- or convicted, and sentenced as a criminal.
I'm not sure that such an outcome would be better for many, perhaps most of the Guantanomo prisoners.