Here's the Breakdown of the First Wave of Strikes Against Iran. It's Staggering.
CNN Was Forced to Admit That A LOT of Iranians Are Celebrating the...
Why Kamala Harris' Remarks on the Iran Strikes Are Beyond Laughable
Trump Has the Courage to Take on Iran
Iranian State Media Finally Admits What We've Known for Hours About Ali Khamenei
Trump’s Operation Epic Fury: Striking the Evil Iranian Regime That Obama and Biden...
A Quick Bible Study Vol. 309: What the Bible Says About Mystery
How America Has Destroyed Its Democracy, Part Three: And How Radical Feminism Is...
Candace Carlson
Rethinking 'Doubting Thomas' Jefferson
Atheist Group’s Attack on Health Care Sharing Ministries Is a Direct Assault on...
The Lies Before the Storm, Part 2
Marriage Is a Covenant Not a Contract
Purim Is Here and Israel Is at War With Iran Once Again
Korea Attacks an American Exporter With Foreign Lobbying in Washington
Tipsheet

Boumediene

Boumediene

Our Democratic friends are once again scrambling to defend Senator Obama’s latest national security gaffe.

Obama supports the recent Supreme Court majority opinion in the Boumediene decision, which extended for the first time habeas corpus rights to foreign enemy combatants held abroad. The Senator went even further than the Court and said that accused terrorists should be tried in American courts as was Omar Abdel Rahman, “the blind sheik”, who masterminded the first World Trade Center bombing.

Advertisement

Last week, in a call with reporters and bloggers, I pointed out Obama’s folly. The Rahman case demonstrates some of the main reasons why we should not treat enemy combatants as ordinary criminal defendants. Such proceedings potentially compromise results, sources and methods of intelligence gathering. In the course of prosecuting Rahman, the government was compelled to turn over a list of un-indicted co-conspirators to the defendant. That list included the name of Osama bin Laden. We later learned that within ten days a copy of that list reached bin Laden in Khartoum, letting him know that his connection to that case had been discovered.

My comments apparently caused the DNC to send out an A.P.B. for anything that might help their candidate out of this problem. Their “Googling” efforts revealed the fact that last year I pointed out that bin Laden would have to be given due process when he is apprehended.

Given that our Democrat friends apparently don’t understand what “due process” means for enemy combatants, they probably thought they had found a silver bullet for their candidate. For them, my statement supports Obama’s argument for terrorist trials in United States courts.

Advertisement

Of course, it doesn’t. Under several centuries of British and U.S. law, enemy combatants, especially those who are foreign combatants, do not have the same rights as American citizens. This does not mean that they cannot be given certain rights. In 2005, under the Detainee Treatment Act, Congress provided enemy combatants arrested and held abroad with certain procedural rights, such as the right to detention hearings where they may call and cross examine witnesses, etc. It was the due process to which all such prisoners were entitled at the time of my statement last year.

This is a far cry from a trial in a United States court, which Senator Obama would grant them.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement