Originally posted by Terr


Technically speaking (and legality, like it or not, has become technical), are we really at war? I don't recall seeing that the US (technically) declared war, I thought it was more of a "peacekeeping" action. (Which can mean just about anything these days)

As for the conspiracy charges, I believe you need two witnesses to an overt action. (If it was just in a state, it is possible that you might not need the overt action in some states, but this is federal.)

Ashcroft MIGHT be able to make it stick, but I almost want to see him fail. His policies strike me as being fairly authoritarian. As Newsweek said somewhere: "Would you buy a used Constitution from this man?"
Not to go over this again, but it's the treason charge that you need two witnesses, not conspiracy. That's why they aren't going after treason, because they (the gov't ) aren't going to find two Taliban dudes to testify against Walker in court. That's why they are pursuing lesser charges.

This is not technically wartime so a military tribunal is out of the question. Ashcroft actually got soft about this point even though he has been somewhat Stalinistic about other points.

P.S.
And to whomever gave me neg points and asked if I was trigger happy; I feel the inexplicable need to respond to your charge. No I am not trigger happy, I just believe that some pussbuckets that betray the country that gave them so much opportunity need to be taken out of the gene pool for the betterment of the world as a whole. And, at least I have the balls to leave my handle when I give out neg points. So there.