On Wednesday 08 January 2003 23:35, Michael Cardenas wrote:
> I think you're overreacting a bit. The actual case involves someone
> who was in a foriegn country for years, and was in the war zone at
> the time he was fighting the US.
>
> The ruling says that he was "squarely in teh war zone" and discusses
> the issue that he hda been out of the US for a long time.
And the court specifically said its ruling did not cover Jose P.
Taliban, the (alleged) would-be dirty bomber.
But I strongly disagree with some of the dicta in the ruling: if there
is any time that the courts need to let the administration have its
way, it's during war time. (I paraphrased that.) My view is, if there's
any time the courts need to keep a closer eye on the administration,
it's during a popular war.
--
Steve Furlong Computer Condottiere Have GNU, Will Travel
You don't expect governments to obey the law because of some higher
moral development. You expect them to obey the law because they know
that if they don't, those who aren't shot will be hanged.
--Michael Shirley
