He's not getting a military trial.

Post #317,501 by beepster 11/18/09 10:17:21 PM Reply	He's not getting a military trial. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #317,508 by folkert 11/19/09 6:35:20 AM Reply	Crud. He needs to get one. There is no reason he should be excused from it.
Post #317,515 by jake123 11/19/09 9:58:19 AM Reply	I can think of one He committed a crime, not an act of war. Only states can commit acts of war, and Al-Qaeda is not a state.
Post #317,536 by folkert 11/19/09 5:39:13 PM Reply	UCMJ covers... Military personnel. Its nothing to do with War or anything else. The only thing that WAR does is make the penalties much more harsh.
Post #317,574 by jake123 11/20/09 10:36:54 AM Reply	I dunno if you noticed or not but he's not in any country's military either.
Post #317,582 by folkert 11/20/09 4:57:01 PM Reply	Oh FSCK me... I read the article that I thought was the root article on this one. That particular article was on the Ft. Hood shootings. I ran with it on this particular thread. SHEESH. This article on the ROOT posting is about the 9/11 "Mastermind"... Oh fsck me!
Post #317,583 by beepster 11/20/09 5:21:22 PM Reply	Oopsie I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #317,624 by mhuber 11/21/09 9:11:29 PM Reply	Exactly. The message is: This guy is not a holy warrior. This guy is a crook.
Post #317,666 by jake123 11/23/09 9:45:03 AM Reply	Bingo. I argued for a criminal enforcement approach right after 9/11 right here for just that reason. One is that it's a lot easier to get cooperation from places like Pakistan when you come to them and say "we want to arrest the guy that just murdered 3000 people" than saying "we're going to blow shit up in your borderlands and kill a lot of your citizens who've had nothing to do with it in the hopes of getting some guys we don't like because they helped someone who committed an act of war against the US. What's that you say? Individuals can't commit acts of war? Too bad... we're going to blow shit up anyway... take it or, well, take it." The message that the Rest of the World sees those people as nothing more than common murderers who've managed to cloak their sociopathic ways in the thin vestments of religious devotion also goes a long way to helping one's cause. They should either put people on trial or let them go... the whole deal where they split people based on the likelihood of conviction (cf my fellow citizen Omar Khadr) is a non-starter and destroys the efficacy of the message... for example, knowing that they still intend to attempt to convict Khadr in the kangaroo court tells me that the pretty convictions are a matter of convenience and optics, not actual belief.
Post #318,283 by mmoffitt 12/8/09 9:21:59 AM Reply	Kudos. In a nutshell whenever I encounter anyone hand-wringing over the wisdom of trying these murdering bastards in our court system, I always point out that Ramsey Yosef is in prison and Osama Bin Laden isn't. Seems treating the perps like the criminals they are and putting them on trial has better outcomes. Moreover, the American goal of war is peace. Do the supporters of a "War on Terror/Al Qaeda" really want to make peace with these criminals?
Post #318,284 by pwhysall 12/8/09 9:27:46 AM Reply	Yep. I've been banging that particular drum for years.

Welcome to IWETHEY!