I am not defending the Bush Administration or its abysmal policies, which did lead us to the position we are in today.
However, there is no reason we should spend the money associated with a Federal trial if we can have a radically less expensive military tribunal pursue the matter.
However, there is no reason we should spend the money associated with a Federal trial if we can have a radically less expensive military tribunal pursue the matter.
I’ve already stated my reasons why a Militiary tribunal in Mohammed’s case would do more harm than good. The fact that it would be a PR boon for al Qeada is undeniable, I prefer not doing them that favor. Not only that, but as I stated and as the recent history shows the tribunals don’t even work that well.
The attorney general made a different call on Mohammed than the Bush administration did. The wisdom of that judgment will be determined by future events. But none of you are helping your case by understating the criminal justice system's capacities, overstating the military system's virtues and bumper-stickering a reasonable decision.
No need to interrogate Osama bin Laden?
20/11/2009 12:48:27 AM
- 997 Views
oO uhm, what?
20/11/2009 12:54:13 AM
- 482 Views
If they're tried INSIDE the US, then yes, they are entitled to due process.
20/11/2009 01:44:08 AM
- 396 Views
Yeah, a lot of people were fuzzy on that till this started.
20/11/2009 09:30:39 AM
- 509 Views
on the other hand, we're more than willing to take them out back with a confession.
20/11/2009 06:34:12 PM
- 506 Views
New York is now asking for $75 MILLION for the KSM trial
20/11/2009 01:43:26 AM
- 437 Views
If this trial were being held in any other country
20/11/2009 01:56:07 AM
- 465 Views
It's a terrible precedent no matter how you look at it.
20/11/2009 02:13:46 AM
- 493 Views
It IS a terrible precdent, hence you and others are citing it 65 years after WWII ended.
20/11/2009 09:23:45 AM
- 379 Views
Spare me the bullshit.
20/11/2009 01:57:16 PM
- 375 Views
I will if you will.
20/11/2009 02:55:30 PM
- 465 Views
No, you won't. You never will.
20/11/2009 06:14:30 PM
- 361 Views
You're putting your cart before your horse is the problem.
23/11/2009 05:40:46 AM
- 462 Views
You don't think this is a military struggle? Wow.
20/11/2009 02:52:26 PM
- 417 Views
Allow me to point out...
20/11/2009 03:02:33 PM
- 398 Views
That's the thing, they aren't a terrorist group
20/11/2009 04:54:31 PM
- 440 Views
It would help if you would offer any argument in favour of your stance.
20/11/2009 08:43:08 PM
- 385 Views
I only use the word army cause I can't think of a better one
21/11/2009 04:32:01 AM
- 398 Views
Military struggles involve militaries.
20/11/2009 03:23:14 PM
- 551 Views
Once again, bullshit.
20/11/2009 06:09:31 PM
- 521 Views
This is wrong
20/11/2009 07:41:35 PM
- 422 Views
We're a long way from the shore of Tripoli.
23/11/2009 05:59:19 AM
- 470 Views
Your little diatribe in the beginning only makes me glad...
22/11/2009 05:32:57 AM
- 543 Views
I understand your "jihadist narrative"
22/11/2009 06:36:41 PM
- 527 Views
No you don't
22/11/2009 11:16:18 PM
- 459 Views
Oh, so you know better than Army attorneys about Miranda rights?
22/11/2009 11:52:00 PM
- 496 Views
I can explain it to you right now if you want?
23/11/2009 08:21:48 AM
- 395 Views
Credible legal and moral justifications for not trying terrorists in civilian court:
23/11/2009 02:56:19 PM
- 471 Views
Re: Credible legal and moral justifications for not trying terrorists in civilian court:
24/11/2009 04:55:12 AM
- 601 Views
I'm glad that you will never be in a position where a decision you make can affect my life.
23/11/2009 12:27:35 AM
- 367 Views
Actually people of my thinking are already making decisions that affect your life.
23/11/2009 08:29:24 AM
- 497 Views
Please explain to me how military tribunals compromise my principles?
24/11/2009 02:54:18 AM
- 363 Views
And your little hyperbolic rant would make more sense if it were grounded in reality.
22/11/2009 11:47:17 PM
- 393 Views
Looks like we'll get a Not Guilty plea, and a defense focusing on condeming US foreign policy
23/11/2009 12:36:47 AM
- 617 Views
They'll publicly accuse us of tyranny and brutality in front of a jury and without our censorship.
23/11/2009 08:27:13 AM
- 522 Views
My main objection is the awful precedent set by trying prisoners of war here in America.
24/11/2009 02:57:13 AM
- 441 Views
"My main objection is the awful precedent set by trying prisoners of war here in America. "
24/11/2009 06:57:34 AM
- 441 Views
We've had Mohammed in custody for over 6 years...
23/11/2009 07:56:49 AM
- 466 Views
I've already responded to your absurd statements, but let me reiterate a few here
23/11/2009 02:59:09 PM
- 362 Views
And I've responded to yours
24/11/2009 04:57:58 AM
- 439 Views
It's not, at least for me, that we feel the civilian courts are inadequate
24/11/2009 05:28:51 AM
- 422 Views
Good analysis of the situation.
23/11/2009 08:17:01 AM
- 531 Views
It isn't about sending a message. It's about horrible war fighting strategy.
24/11/2009 02:59:31 AM
- 488 Views
No. It's about not using a horribly ineffective strategy just to send a message to terrorists.
24/11/2009 09:29:06 AM
- 406 Views
enemy combatants and terrorists
23/11/2009 08:03:25 PM
- 499 Views
They're not different because from the Third World, but because terrorists.
24/11/2009 08:09:13 AM
- 618 Views