Yes Crazy I think its clear who is deranged and mad. If you have evidence to support your views then present it. Till then your braying remains uninformed such as your assertion that we are not following the Geneva Convention and that illegal combatants are protected under an agreement the US has signed.

You truly need your lithium, such ignorance and mendacity is beyond hope unless you are Chrissy or VOR.

Read the briefs. They are being held based on the charge of conspiracy to commit an act of war as unlawful combatants. Justice Stevens’ challenged the legitimacy of such a charge in Hamdan, but Kennedy refused to join that part of the opinion, so that part of Stevens’ brief did not command a majority of the Court.

“Waging” war and “conspiring” to commit an act of war are not synonymous.

Part of the military commission proceedings is a finding by the military commission that there is a preponderance of evidence to support the charge upon which the detainee is held.

Whose to say if the Bosnian authorities were priivy to the same information as are the US military commissioners.

This is the process the elected branches of gov’t had devised and implemented.

If Chavez and Alostmadog were given similar authority by their national legislative bodies, and they exercised such authority, they’d have a sovereign right to do so.

They’d also have to be prepared to pay the international consequences for doing so.

We are.

Unless the Dems take over.

In which case, we probably still will be.

The Boumediene detainees include six Bosnian-Algerian natives who were arrested by local Bosnian police in late 2001 on suspicion of plotting to attack the U.S. embassy in Sarajevo. See Brief for Boumediene Petitioners at 1-2. After a three-month international investigation, the detainees were released [from Bosnian custody] for lack of evidence. Id. at 2. Immediately upon release, however, the United States military transported them to Guantanamo. Id.The Boumediene detainees are joined by the Al Odah detainees, who include four Kuwati citizens and twelve Yemeni citizens, as well as the three El- Banna detainees, some of whom were taken into custody in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Most of the detainees have been under United States custody for more than five years.

For example, the petitioners in the Boumediene case allege — and the Government does not dispute — that they never waged war on the United States.

Emphasis added.

Do Presidents Ahmadinejad and Chavez have the right to “identify” people planning to blow up Iranian and Venezuelan embassies and hold them without trial, production of evidence, or possibility of defense?

In addition, here’s an interesting Congressional Research Service report on the Bush Administration’s November 2001 Order to detain and try enemy combatants before military tribunals.

no one in his right mind has denied these are illegal in all senses of the world.

Patterico himself wrote

For example, the petitioners in the Boumediene case allege — and the Government does not dispute — that they never waged war on the United States.

Who has his own facts? Who is deranged? What combat did these petitioners engage in, and in what way was their conduct unlawful under the GC? You misrepresent the facts, and you misrepresent what advocates of the rule of law are calling for.

Such breathtaking mendacity shouldn’t be attributed simply to ignorance. Article IV clearly states what happens to illegal combatants and no one in his right mind has denied these are illegal in all senses of the world.

Clearly the blog master has a resposnibility to seperate whose who are entitled to their own opinion from those who believe they are entitled to their own facts.

Separting the opinated from the derranged is clearly a different matter.

Res ipsa Loquitur.

In the case of the Bush Administration, we seem to be fighting Al Qaeda more by trying to prove W’s mojo than frustrating actual plots. You would almost think that (like the embassy takeover), domestic politics was the real consideration!

Larry #30: The issue is not the battlefield detention of hostiles. Yes, we can do that, although even many of those detainees are probably deprived of Geneva Convention rights that they should have as POWs. (A uniform, for example, is not a requirement for a local resident who takes up arms against an invader.) You wish to expand the circumstances of battlefield hostilities to any place in the world (e.g., a Bosnian prison). No go. Our interaction with many of the detainees is not “war”, and until you wrap your mind around that, you will be trapped in a dangerous and unlawful fantasy world.