Rules for the Real World: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Yaron Koren (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Yaron Koren (talk | contribs) (Space) |
||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|date=September 20, 2006 | |date=September 20, 2006 | ||
|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/20/opinion/20wed1.html | |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/20/opinion/20wed1.html | ||
|quote="Both bills choke off judicial review and allow even those acquitted by a military tribunal to be held indefinitely. Either bill might be acceptable if the United States government were infallible. As it is, they would legalize the sorts of abuses of power that the United States fought against in other countries for most of the 20th century. " | |quote="Both bills choke off judicial review and allow even those acquitted by a military tribunal to be held indefinitely. Either bill might be acceptable if the United States government were infallible. As it is, they would legalize the sorts of abuses of power that the United States fought against in other countries for most of the 20th century." | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{opinion|Military Commissions Act of 2006|Act should be passed|against}} | {{opinion|Military Commissions Act of 2006|Act should be passed|against}} | ||
{{opinion|Military Commissions Act of 2006|Competing Graham-McCain-Warner bill should be passed|against}} | {{opinion|Military Commissions Act of 2006|Competing Graham-McCain-Warner bill should be passed|against}} |
Latest revision as of 16:15, September 20, 2006
This is an opinion item.
Author(s) | The New York Times editorial board |
---|---|
Source | The New York Times |
Date | September 20, 2006 |
URL | http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/20/opinion/20wed1.html |
Quote |
Add or change this opinion item's references
This item argues against the position Act should be passed on the topic Military Commissions Act of 2006.
This item argues against the position Competing Graham-McCain-Warner bill should be passed on the topic Military Commissions Act of 2006.