nate077

Do you believe that assassination has a place in the future strategies of the United States Armed Forces? I'm asking in the context of drones and the raid on Osama Bin Laden's compound as well as past actions like Admiral Yamamoto's death during World War 2.

Could they have done it? As I understand the situation the rail network through Poland and Belarus was in shambles.

Thanks for your response.

Would your analysis be different if the captured American had been fighting as a uniformed member of a formally recognized state's armed forces?

Or, for that matter, what's your take on the legal legitimacy of Abraham Lincoln's decision to suspend habeas corpus and the bill which gave him permission to do so?

When questioned about the fact that your unedited disclosures put the lives of Afghanis that were cooperating with the NATO coalition against the Taliban in danger, your response was to say "well, they're informants, so, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it."

Why do you presume to know best who deserves to live or die? Given your cooperation with the Russian state, could the same be said about you?

Stephen Vladeck and Benjamin Wittes had an exchange where Wittes initially argued that the prisoner's anonymous detention was neither precedent setting nor a cause for concern, but later conceded that the sheer length of it is an issue.

What's your take on this discussion, if you've seen it?

Do you think there is any circumstance or length of time in which the government is or should be permitted to hold a citizen anonymously?

Are there practical legislative remedies which might invalidate the government's argument that the court need not recognize the ACLU's habeas petition because they do not know the identity of the person whose identity they are trying to discover?