« Portland police responsible for killing an unarmed man | Main | Portland police are dangerous incompetents »

February 15, 2010

Comments

"Serious crime" is one thing, "war crime" is another. If I'm ever caught trying to blow a plane full of civilians out of the air prior to landing in a foreign country, I'll both expect and deserve treatment by that country as a war criminal caught perpetrating an act of war. And I'd expect the US Embassy to concur.

DJ, emotionally I resonate with your point of view. But here's the slippery slope problem. Once we start saying that people who are "obviously" guilty don't deserve to be tried by a nation's justice system, we open the door to bureaucrats, politicians, officials, and others defining "obvious" to suit their own needs. I don't want to give any government official that much power to decide when to suspend the United States Constitution, or any other nation's laws.

Regardless of how red-handed they're caught, I'm not saying call anyone obviously guilty. I'm simply saying distinguish between criminal civilians and terrorist/war combatants and treat them accordingly.

Besides, how does one try a terrorist by a jury of his peers...send jury duty notices to sleeper cells? I doubt whether even Richard Reid's lawyer considered anyone on the jury his "peer."

Another problem with giving these foreign attackers the same rights as civilians, tourists or even illegals is that you have to Mirandize them. At that point they don't have to say anything and interogators lose the opportunity to get information from them about impending attacks, their support networks, etc.

This may come out eventually in court but that is a long process and by then further attacks may occur that could have been prevented.

Let the military have at them first and then they can turn them over to civilian courts if it turns out they are not "enemy combatants".

If an American were committing acts of war against a foreign country on that country's soil, he or she should be treated accordingly.

Terrorists are not merely combatants but unlawful combatants and should be treated as such. There should be clear evidence to qualify someone for such treatment, I agree. In this case there was.

They guy who tried the Christmas bombing of an airliner has talked plenty according to what I have read. I think the fear the right has about our court system is unjustified to date where it comes to terrorists.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Strange Up Salem

Welcome to HinesSight

  • Salem Political Snark
    My local political rants are now made on this badass blog. Check it out. Dirty politics, outrageous actions, sleaze, backroom deals — we’re on it. 

  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • Church of the Churchless
    Visit my other weblog, Church of the Churchless, where the gospel of spiritual independence is preached.

  • Welcome to HinesSight. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.