From: Robert Comer 

The point here is that he got neither, and that has been Bush's
administration thoughts on how to do this all along.

My thoughts are that he is entitled to one or the other (or possibly both
if the tribunal should find so)  Rotting for 4 years in jail is totally
unacceptable.

--
Bob Comer



On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 12:15:20 -0400, Gary Britt
 wrote:

>Well I think he would or should be entitled to hearing before somebody to
>determine the appropriateness of his classification as an enemy combatant or
>illegal enemy combatant.  He is not in my view entitled to the right of
>habeas to force the government to charge him with an ordinary criminal law
>violation or set him free which is what the court in Al Marri ruled.  These
>are two very different kinds of hearings/trials and one is appropriate for
>this kind of war and one is totally inappropriate for any kind of war.
>
>Gary
>
>Robert Comer wrote:
>> USA, less than 10 miles from my home.
>>
>> He's a legal resident (not U.S. citizen). No charges, no tribunal --
>> just labeled an enemy combatant by the Bush administration.  He came
>> here with his family for education purposes supposedly.
>>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5