[dirtboy]

Then see my post #49 and reflect upon how little criticism has been leveled at Democratic Party President FDR during WW2 for executing the American citizens who were brought back to the U.S. by German U-boats to conduct sabotage here.

They had a prompt military tribunal once SCOTUS spoke on the matter. Bush proposes that he has the power to hold a citizen enemy combatant indefinitely without a tribunal. Significant difference.

[Southack]

"They had a prompt military tribunal once SCOTUS spoke on the matter. Bush proposes that he has the power to hold a citizen enemy combatant indefinitely without a tribunal. Significant difference."

No, same law/treaty.

Per the Geneva Convention, POW's may be held as long as hostilities continue. Enemy combatants, on the other hand, may be given *any* punishment whatsoever, up to and including being shot on sight, without any trial of any form.

Thus, both POW's and enemy combatants can be held without trial and without charges and without access to attorneys.