there are many that say the whole thing behind the civilian vs military trials is because
President Barack Obama will have to personally sign the death warrant of Major Nidal Malik Hasan if he is convicted and sentenced to be executed for the Fort Hood massacre. this means a muslim ordering another muslim to his death - which is against Islamic law.
same logic with all the other terrorists.
this could be speculation - but it would not surprise me one bit. if Obama could sit through "GD America" Rev. Wright, his mentor and "uncle figure" and not know he felt that way then surely he missed any real christian messages (if any) the man espoused as well. Obamas church-going was a sham to shore up his image. THAT i do believe. the rest sure makes sense even if not substantiated....
In case you haven't noticed, Obama has had problems with many liberals because he is actually one of the more hawkish Democrats. He opposed the invasion of Iraq, but stated from the beginning of his campaign that we couldn't just pull out. He favored escalation in Afghanistan and expansion of efforts to attack the enemy even when that meant sending more and more drones across the border (as Don notes below). He has carried through on both fronts. I don't think killing Islamic terrorists gives him any sleepless nights.
Originally Posted by DSemple
Slick sympathetic politicians and lawyers kept Tiller out of trouble with the law, but that is not really the point of your thread is it?
Jeff, as to Due process, is there any dollar amount limit we have to afford to foreign terrorists to provide for their defense?
And, following your liberal logic, if we are going to provide foreign terrorist once captured due process in our American court system, should we not also provide their colleagues, who the Obama administration is perfectly willing to take out with drone missiles abroad some form of due process before we kill them?
Confused conservative regards.
I don't think many court observers have ever suggested that public defenders are providing Cadillac defenses. I also have no problems with combatant fatalities in the field. That is what war is about. However, even in war there are limits. We, as a nation, have agreed to certain rules of war, codified in the Geneva Conventions which are ratified treaties and carry the force of law. We have been torn by the fact that our system offers two ways of handling captives: we can handle them in accordance with the rule of war, or we can handle them in accordance with national and international law. If we choose to handle them without regard to law, we are lawless. It's hard to reconcile that with our claim to be a nation of laws.
Originally Posted by BonMallari
Roeder guilty 1st degree murder took the jury about 30 minutes of deliberation...no brainer
Kudos to the jury. I would love to see terrorists use their moment in the spotlight, like Roeder, to put forward their justifiable homicide defense, and have our juries listen respectfully and then convict them.