Replies

Yeah, commmanding the civil rights away of anyone accused of doing anything terrorist related. If you look up the defintion of "terrorist" it includes any violation of a state's laws. So speeding could be terrorist related.

ter·ror·ism [térr rìzzm ]noun
political violence: violence or the threat of violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, carried out for political purposes

I agree with your point, but you are stretching the definition of terrorism. Perhaps a better analogy than traffic speeders is illegal aliens.

I would like to add that I'm not against military courts, in fact I think would be the best area to have one. The jurors are professionals that aren't going to be swayed like the ones at the OJ case, for example.
What I do have a problem with is if they are held in secret, which it sounds like they would like to do. That goes against what the US stands for: open and free justice for all.

but you are stretching the definition of terrorism
I wish I was, but take a gander at "h.r. 3162" on thomas.loc.gov and go through all of the different sections on there.
For example it says a lot of things like under Section 202:
SEC. 202. AUTHORITY TO INTERCEPT WIRE, ORAL, AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS RELATING TO COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE OFFENSES.
Section 2516(1)(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking `and section 1341 (relating to mail fraud),' and inserting `section 1341 (relating to mail fraud), a felony violation of section 1030 (relating to computer fraud and abuse),'.
that's just one example of going over past laws and amending them to whatever they see as terrorism related now. I.E. money laundering.
Now they don't come out and say that the above is defined as terrorism, but it isn't that far to say that you can investigate something as possibly terrorist related to having it defined as terrorism and then going before a court made to handle those cases.