I noticed this little item: "Idr was accused of plotting with five others to blow up the U.S. Embassy in Sarajevo in November 2001. All were acquitted by a Bosnian court in January 2002, but U.S. agents arrested them as they left the courthouse and eventually took them to Guantanamo Bay."

Why is Mustafa Ait Idr not labeled a prisoner? Arrest and subsequent incarceration at the infamous Camp Delta in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba shows that this government was intent on not providing Mr. Idr any legal recourse to prove his innocence. Rather it is the intent of this government to simply "disappear" another person.

"The detainee, Mustafa Ait Idr, 34, an Algerian citizen living in Bosnia, has been held at the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for three years on suspicion that he plotted to bomb the U.S. Embassy in Bosnia. The lawsuit, filed by his attorneys in federal court in Boston, alleges that the government has probably videotaped Idr's beatings and demands that it produce any such tapes and all records of alleged torture and interrogation tactics at the detention facility."

There are many questions raised by this newspaper report by Carol Leonnig, Washington Post Staff Writer.

What does the creation of a DoD guide for field commanders that uses the term "enemy combatant" and Northern Command seem to be heading for trouble?

The guide has hundreds of suspected terrorist organizations. However, Northern Command is the Pentagon's "homeland" security arm.

The Northern Command was created in 2002 and is under the command of USAF General Eberhart. General Eberhart is on record advocating that the US military should have a greater role in domestic policing operations. His view is that Northern Command should be a "one stop shop" for such agencies as FEMA and the FBI but still observe the "Posse Comitas" law which prohibits domestic use of the military for policing the people of America.

However, the term "enemy combatant" has never been explicitly defined. It is a made up nonsensical and non legal term which has no basis in US law or international judicial conventions.

From New York Times reporter Neil A. Lewis:

"Pentagon planners are proposing that military commanders be authorized to declare someone an enemy combatant and detain him if he belongs to any of hundreds of suspected terrorist organizations, a human rights group said on Thursday.

The extensive list of groups suspected of terrorism is part of a 142-page draft proposal to the Joint Chiefs of Staff that is intended to provide an all-inclusive guide for military commanders on their obligations and authority for detaining people."

Need I remind people of the supposed "ban" on our own Army being used on our own soil?

"In response to the military presence in the Southern States during the Reconstruction Era, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act...to prohibit the use of the Army in civilian law enforcement. The Act embodies the traditional American principle of separating civilian and military authority and currently forbids the use of the Army and Air Force to enforce civilian laws."

The erosion of that ban which was put in place after the Civil War is due largely to the failed "War on Drugs" during the late 20th Century.

Not to put a too fine a point is that the DoJ and FBI consider the top domestic terrorist threats to be Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front. The Northern Command, which is the Pentagon's "homeland" security arm, that was formed in 2002 and is under the command of USAF General Eberhart. General Eberhart has stated, for the the record:

“My view has been that Posse Comitatus will constantly be under review as we mature this command, as we do our exercise, as we interact with FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency], FBI, and those lead federal agencies out there.... There are some situations where there’s no other alternatives, and federal forces have to be used to secure the safety and security of our people.”

In a similar vein General Eberhart has said that Northern Command will in essence become a "one stop shop" for agencies such as FEMA and the FBI to utilize for threats to the nation.

The question I have is why is the DoD utilizing a non-legal term for their field officers?

I find it ominous that the military is now codifiying terminology that the White House is using which has no legal, either domestic or internationally, basis or understanding.