[lbo-talk] Charges? We Don't Need No Stinking Charges

Jordan Hayes jmhayes at j-o-r-d-a-n.com
Sat Sep 10 20:59:56 PDT 2005



> What I'm saying is, if the Justice Department's prosecution
> of Padilla makes any sense at all (i.e. if it isn't just a
> publicity stunt) he _has_ committed a crime.

So you're saying that you can't imagine a case where this would be true? It simply doesn't exist? Like I said, I doubt anyone knows what they have (or don't) on Padilla -- so I don't think it's appropriate to consider this issue just by saying, as the Washington Post does, "Indict him" ...

The go on to say "There may be times when circumstances require the detention of an American citizen fighting for the other side who, for some reason, cannot be tried in civilian courts. But ..." and "Instead of trying its luck before the Supreme Court, the administration ought to seek congressional legislation to regulate such cases. In the immediate term ..."

It's those two issues I'm more interested in here.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/09/AR2005090901807.html



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list