Why Would We Try People Caught on a Battlefield Fighting Against America in a Non Military Court?

Since when do we try people caught on the battlefield in civilian courts? Is this a special right for muslim terrorists?Why Would We Try People Caught on a Battlefield Fighting Against America in a Non Military Court?
This is not a trial for terrorists - it is not about offering KSM or his pals a "fair trial" - it is an opportunity for Obama to try the CIA, the US MIlitary, and the Bush Administration in the "world court".



Several months ago there was a lot of chatter about bringing CIA operatives up on charges for their actions during the prosecution of the Iraq war - then there was talk about charging their legal counsel as well.



There is a vindictive spirit among some of the far-left, they want to charge Bush and Cheney with war-crimes and purge the CIA. Assuming that everyone else in the world is innocent and that America is "The Great Satan", this is probably not a bad idea - but as Obama is now finding out with his problems in Afghanistan, the world is not such a friendly place and sometimes, in the interest of our own national security, America has to act in some nasty ways.



This trial is about that vindictiveness. There is no way to have a "fair trial" in civilian court by definition. The President himself, along with the Attorney General, have come out and publicly declared that KSM will be found guilty and possibly executed. Any lawyer worth his degree would be able to have this case thrown out on that prejudicial statement alone. KSM was arrested by the military - he was not mirandized, he was "Aggressively Interrogated" without benefit of counsel, and the evidence against him is largely the result of covert operations and vital to our war on terroism.



No, this trial is meant to expose our interrogation means, to throw the United States' detainment policy and prosecution of the war onto the mercy of the World Court. The ultimate apology.



John Gotti just got off for the fourth time. OJ Simpson was released, and Mark Fuhrman was forever branded as a racist as the result of that trial. Lance Ito, Johnny Cochrane, Robert Shapiro all got rich. The judge and jury from the Gotti trial were in danger for their lives, as will the judge and jury for the KSM trial also be. Terrorists and fundamentalist sympathizers live among us - they are not afraid to die for their cause and when they do, they like to take as many innocent people out with them.



Do not fool yourself into believing this has anything whatsoever to do with KSM or the war on terror. Follow the money, follow the ideology, follow the power. The truth is nowhere in there to be found.
Why try them at all? If they're fighting on their own turf they should be considered POWs. If US forces are involved in supporting one of the puppet governments we set up on other people's turf that 'government' should deal with any prisoners, not us. How can it possibly be a crime to fight invaders after your official army is rendered useless? I'm sure that we would do the same thing. If a private organization sees fit to attack Americans here that's a different story. These bums are criminals, who have committed the crime of murder. Of course they should be tried in a civilian court. The same goes for any criminal anywhere that's killed or attacked Americans. Those people captured in a foreign country should be brought to the US and tried in our federal courts, or turned over to the country where the crime was committed. The Israelis used to hunt down these kind of people and assassinate them. I'm not certain that we don't also do this....if we do it must be a really secret program...like the Phoenix program in Vietnam.Why Would We Try People Caught on a Battlefield Fighting Against America in a Non Military Court?
There was some question whether or not they were treated within Lawful means considering waterboarding, and the Geneva Convention.



It would be prudent to review the Human Rights within the USA Court initially--perhaps the court will send it over to the Military court, but I am not sure how that goes.



There are extenuating circumstances involved with these cases. The Military may need to prove that they upheld the Universal Human rights even available t persons during a time of war. Even when a President provides misleading counsel, it is the American citizens responsibility to correct it, and reject it.



I do think an appropriate review belongs to the Military--I think they should handle the Prosecution.



If they are found guilty in a Court of Law for the murders on 9-11; they could get either the death sentence minus 20 years for being exposed to waterboarding or something related. I am not familiar enough with the Military Court system to comment further, although I am looking forward to what they have to say.



Hi Poster below me on this page, we are not dealing with the Blues Brothers. That would be Bush and Cheney.
as we didn't try them under the geneva convention , where all prisoners of war are tried

As Bush did not have a case against most of the people ( which is why he released them after years) he chose not to take the military court



the Bush pretend court will come back to haunt us , US military will be tried one day under our rules and not the geneva convention rulesWhy Would We Try People Caught on a Battlefield Fighting Against America in a Non Military Court?
No, this is a "special right" for Obama (swt) to put the Bush Administration on trial (before a Liberal Judge dismisses all charges against the terrorists).
Since they are not enlisted in a formal military, they are not deemed to be soldiers?
Yeah, seriously. They've already plead guilty so why are they going to trial? When you plead guilty, you don't go to trial..
If you haven't noticed yet.....Our Government doesn't consider American citizens as number one priority anymore...Last actually...They do more for Foreigners and illegals than they would ever do for us...their salary payers!
Because they are trying to make it a police action instead of the war it is.