>>>>>Terrorists, by their policy, will intensionally target innocent civilians to cause terror, thus they are called "terrorists". That's one.
>>>>
>>>>So by this definition, Omar Khadr and many of the detainees at G'mo aren't terrorists, since they were fighting against the military.
>>>>
>>>>Doug
>>>
>>>That's something that court may decide. If court decides that he is not a terrorist, and that his military actions were in strict compliance with Geneva Convention, then he is a plain POWs and should be hold in detention until the war ends. What do you think about this?
>>>Please, note that many of these guys don't mind blowing up civilians in both Iraq and Afghanistan; at least civilian casualties from bombing are much higher in these places.
>>
>>Court? What court? A big part of the objection to the treatment of these guys is they have been stashed away for years without charges even being brought. If they are tried and convicted of terrorism, throw away the key. Nobody is in favor of terrorists. But the executive branch of the government can't just declare them guilty by fiat. Charge 'em or kick 'em loose.
>
>It is regretful, Mike, that you don't read the thread. As it was cleared already, Alan agreed with me that Gitmo clients are POWs who should be held in detention indefinitely, until the war ends. I tried to please him (or you?) by the proposal that certain guys could be sent to court, just to figure out if they are not terrorists, by chance, because in the latter case that would be convicted and transferred to ordinary US prisons. I appreciate very much your natural indignation about terrorists, but your demands about 'throwing keys' would be a direct violation of Geneva Convention, and UN Human Rights Declaration. Please, keep your composure in check.

LOL. I will try to be as composed, well, at least as composed as a cat in a roomful of rocking chairs.