In response to:

Trying KSM in Civilian Court: Inconsistent, Indefensible, Inexplicable

Akagi2 Wrote: Nov 18, 2009 3:12 PM

Under the law of nations, KSM could have been taken and placed against a wall and simply shot (as was done to the Werewolves in Germany at the end of WWII). He is no different from the German Sabortuers--the 8 tried in the basement of the State Department, 6 of the 8 after they were convicted were within days executed by electrocution.

A military tribunal (or even summarily executing him)would not violate the US Constitution or international law or US law. He has no protections under the Geneva Conventions.

Should say then Masaharu Homma have been tried in a US civilian court for his supposed role in the Bataan Death March?

Join the Debate!

Read Full Story

Trying KSM in Civilian Court: Inconsistent, Indefensible, Inexplicable

Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a federal civilian court is inconsistent, indefensible and inexplicable.

It is inconsistent with Holder's own decision to try Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri in a military commission. It is indefensible in light of the unmistakable intentions of the Framers of the Constitution. It is inexplicable by any prudential analysis of the national interest in dealing with an enemy like al-Qaida.

Some strange ideological impulse -- rather than common sense and respect for the rule of law -- is driving the Obama administration to give special treatment to the perpetrator of one...

Related Tags: Judges and Courts Constitution