That’s gonna leave a mark…

Lindsey Graham takes Eric Holder to school.

I’m not a big fan of Graham, but he was a military Judge Advocate, and in fact still is in the Reserves.  He knows what he’s talking about.

You know, when The One promised change, I didn’t expect we’d be seeing show trials in our courts.  But since Obama has decreed that KSM is guilty and that even if the jury acquits, he won’t go free, I’m not sure how it can be called anything other than a show trial.

Meantime, we give Bin Laden and his followers an international forum to spew their hate plus a treasure trove of intelligence.

Good plan guys.

8 thoughts on “That’s gonna leave a mark…

  1. Other than a trial what are you supposed to do? I know everyone wants to just take them out back and shoot them in the head but that isn’t going to work. The didn’t declare war so it can’t be deemed an act of war. They committed mass murder on American soil. They are scum and should be executed. But we have this thing called due process and it is one of the things that makes us great. Yes it sucks that shitheads get it too. Just like it sucks racist get free speech.

    A national forum to spew his hate? Kind of like the one he had on 9/11? What kind of intelligence is he going to get?

    I understand you disagree with the trial but I am curious what is your alternative?

  2. Jihad is not proclaiming war? They not only attacked civilian targets but the Pentagon. How could a military tribunal be wrong?

  3. “Jihad is not proclaiming war?” No not the way you mean it. It can be a proclamation to defend a Mulsim community/religion but it also refers to an inner stuggle against evil. Kevin is right it wasn’t an action taken in the course of a war but an act of terrorism.

    The lines have been blurred here with rhetoric such as if Bin Laden were captured today would you give him Miranda rights? If he is captured on a battlefield its war and the military law applies. If he is picked up in Pakistan (like Kahlid) or Germany by either the US or another government and extradited to America then he gets the same treatment as any other criminal.

    Lindsay Graham showed he still has the stuff of a great cross examiner by asking questions that could not be answered as asked-a great cross examination trick. Holder was no doubt thrown for a loop that Graham would misrepresent the situation as he did knowing the law as he most certianly does. You expect it from an defense attorney or prosecutor. It is the kind of game they play in courtroom battles but Holder could not “do battle” with Graham without looking very disrepectful of long-term Senator.

  4. Military tribunals are the alternative. The same day they announced KSM’s civilian trial, they sent 5 others to military tribunals, including the Cole bombers.

    And you don’t need to “declare” war to engage in an act of war. The Japanese started a war without declaring one on 7 December 1941.

    Speaking of WWII, 5 German saboteurs were captured on U.S. soil, given a military tribunal, and executed.

    In the War of Northern Aggression, Lincoln had civilians tried by military tribunals.

    As Graham noted there has never been a precedent for what we are doing here. We are making history, bad history.

  5. The trial worries me. Won’t the defense get a couple of sympathetic Muslims and a couple of bleeding heart liberals on the jury? Seems like a hung jury is very possible. And even with a conviction, could they get a death penalty?

  6. Military tribunals were used during and after the Civil War until the Supreme Court ruled them unlawful where a functioning civil court existed. The case was Milligan 1866.

    The eight Germans were spies of a country with who we were at war. Trying in them in a tribunal was challenged but the Supreme Court upheld the decision. Clearly a distinction can be made.

    Holder decided to send the 5 accused Cole bombers before military tribunals because they attacked a military target. Kahlid masterminded an attack on a civilian target and you know I admit that is seriously splitting hairs.

    Still, the main concerns for not trying thsi guy in a civil court appears to be 1) there will not be enough evidence to convict him 2)US torture tactics will be placed on trial and 3) he provides him with a forum to protray himself as a martyr. We all know it is harder to get a conviction in a civil court but even if we fail to get a conviction we have the right to confine the guy indefinitely. For the sake of our country I think we need a public trail to exonerate the us of the alleged torture practices and I am not worried that this guy is going to get a forum to make himself appear to be a martyr. That is what Mousaoui thought and he just came off as a jackass.

  7. That we are willing to provide to him the jurisprudence protections afforded to an American in a completely transparent proceeding exonerates us. Its a bold move and if we get a conviction no one will be able to say he did not get a fair trial. This trial is going to be so much more fair than anything he could have received in the Muslim world that it will derail his bid for martyrdom in a way that a military tribunal could not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *