Comments on: A just trial for a terrorist (Update)

By: Where’s the Outrage? » The Genius of Palin

Where’s the Outrage? » The Genius of Palin — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 04:49:26 +0000

[...] make logical decisions at the ballot box. Palin’s response to Eric Holder’s decision to try KSM in civilian court in NYC was an excellent example of her appeal to raw emotion. There was no [...]

By: ecthompson

ecthompson — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 03:20:26 +0000

Bud – I’ll tell you why? Because we are better than they are. We have laws. We don’t simply excute people. That’s not the home of the free. If killing isn’t about revenge then why? When will conservatives admit that it is all about revenge.

If want to tell me that they aren’t citizens then I will agree they aren’t. I would point out that we have international treaty obligations that we have agreed to. If after a trial and these guys are found guilty and under our current treaties and laws you want your revenge, then a judge and jury should approve the death penalty.I don’t like the death penalty but I would agree that laws allow that and I would agree with that decision.

BTW, if an economic refugee (illegal alien) kills an American during a robbery what does the law say that we do with that individual?

Finally, I really don’t care if these guys sit in jail and repent or not. We can’t change the rules just because we don’t like them. These are the rules that we’ve lived by for years. They’re called laws. We assigned the Geneva Convention which covers terrorists, enemy combatants or whatever you want to call them. To sit down and take your time and read it. It’s in there.

But, one of the reasons I feel so strongly about this has to do with our own history.

The law is the law. We’ve signed the Geneva conventions. The international criminal Tribunal has ruled that quote every person in enemy hands must be either a prisoner of war and, as such, be covered by the Third Convention; or a civilian covered by the Fourth. There is no intermediate status.

BTW, I don’t mind being wrong. I have been wrong before and I will be again. Please show me in the Geneva Convention where we can do whatever we like with the prisoner and I’ll be happy to agree with you.

Oh, about NYC. So, do you think that Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups are going to target NY more that they already have? Do you think that we are too weak as a people to try these killers? I would say that we should move the trial to Kansas City or Minneapolis but what is the point? What city has the most experience with counterterrorism — New York City. What city tried and convicted more terrorists — New York City. I’m thinking if the blind sheik is still in jail in spite of the rantings of Osama bin Laden, we can try and convict and sentence Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

Thanks again for your comments.

By: Bud Brooks

Bud Brooks — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 15:30:37 +0000

Erri, this is your biggest mistake I’ve seen; these guys are not going to sit in jail and rot and repent at the same time. They are not citizens, so they do not have the rights of citizens. There is no Constitutional right afforded these nuts. Why do you insist on giving them rights to which they are not entitled? I want them executed, and as fast as possible. We don’t owe the world an obligation to treat them fairly. And it’s not about revenge, either — it’s simply about killing them and killing them for good! No one needs these people for any reason whatsoever. And why put a target on NYC’s back again?

By: ecthompson

ecthompson — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 11:19:44 +0000

I agree 100%.

Thanks of your comments.

By: askcherlock

askcherlock — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 09:14:53 +0000

These individuals need to be put on trial. It has taken far too long to get to this proper point. I would not, however, want them put to death. That would give them martyr status among some groups. I would prefer that they have long lives imprisoned by the terror of their acts.