taking the comments below as a starting point [rquoter]Earlier this week John McCain's campaign accused Barack Obama of having a "Sept. 10 mindset." Bill Sammon of the Examiner newspaper asked a pointed question of some Obama advisers, and the answers he got shows just how deeply ingrained this mindset is: Barack Obama's foreign policy advisers said Tuesday that Osama bin Laden, if captured, should be allowed to appeal his case to U.S. civilian courts, a privilege opposed by John McCain. Responding to questions from The Examiner, Sen. John Kerry and former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke said bin Laden would benefit from last week's Supreme Court decision giving terrorism suspects habeas corpus, the right to appeal their military detention to civilian courts. "If he were to be brought back," Clarke said of bin Laden, "the Supreme Court ruling holds on the right of habeas corpus." Kerry, who applauded the Supreme Court ruling, said it will be carried out by whichever candidate wins the presidency. "The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that they have those rights," he said. "If John McCain were president, he would have to give them those rights." This is wrong simply as a matter of legal analysis. The Supreme Court's decision, Boumediene v. Bush, applies only to terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay (and, by extension, on U.S. territory). The court has not extended any rights to detainees elsewhere overseas. In his Boumediene dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia speculated that "the Court's ultimate, unexpressed goal is to preserve the power to review the confinement of enemy prisoners held by the Executive anywhere in the world." He may be right, but justices' unexpressed goals are not legally binding. The court is unlikely to extend its authority in this way unless a case comes to it that raises the question. And even if the majority of the current justices would favor extending terrorists' rights even further, that majority includes the two most superannuated justices, John Paul Stevens, 88, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 75. Thus President Obama or President McCain is likely to have the power, through the nomination of a new justice or two, whether the Boumediene precedent is extended world-wide. Giving Osama bin Laden a lawyer may be an unexpressed goal of as many as five justices. It also appears to be a goal of Barack Obama--expressed through his surrogates Clarke and Kerry.[/rquoter]
How better to exemplify to the world the civility of the rule of law than to put on a show trial. Like OJ, only the prosecition really needs to win this one. We need to get this worked out before November 1st when he is 'captured'. Where is Osama being held now?
If Basso was suspected of being a terrorist, do you feel that he should have any rights? Just remember.... "We do not torture." And what is wrong with bringing someone before a judge to determine if they should be held prisoner? I'd certainly appreciate that right, if for some reason they felt that I was Osama Bin Laden (being a fat white guy, that is hard to believe, but.. it could happen.)
Osama/ Obama Obama/ Osama Osama/ Obama Obama/ Osama Osama/ Obama Obama/ Osama Osama/ Obama Obama/ Osama
hey basshole, you misspelled osama's name in your poll, i don't think it was an accidnet considered its spelled "obama"
Held overseas by whom, what & where? You do realize that your question is ambiguous and not really answerable with anything other than an "it depends" in legal terms. You're also aware that there is a pending federal indictment against Osama in S.D.N.Y., right? I can tell you without having to look at SDNY local rules that criminal defendants have a right to counsel & habeas
I hope that under our next president we're done with hiding prisoners in other countries. I would very much like to see Osama in a US courtroom facing charges. And, I don't think giving him a fair trial is really so much to ask.
bassho lets ya'll argue, but really he is doing his part for the FREEDOM of AMERICA from STRIDENT CRETINS who are INVETERATE TERRORISTS by subliminally manipulating the ingoreant peephole of this forum with a suggestive typo on a pole.
Ah... trolling at it's finest. Entice people with an interesting thread title and then fool them with juvenile name calling. Honestly, I clicked on this thinking, "Oh goodness, what tricks has basso planted inside?" and the poll title made me chuckle even more. Should have been predictable, but it still got me. Kudos fine sir, kudos.
Exactly. If this really is war of civilizations what better way to show what our civilization is about than putting Osama Bin Ladin on trial.
Do you have an opinion on this, basso? What do you consider the drawbacks and benefits to a trial or non-trial? Do you feel Saddam Hussein should or shouldn't have gotten a trial?
Brilliant movie, btw. Basso really needs to watch it, to learn why fair and open trials are important. You can also learn a thing or two about how show trials are immoral by looking at the way Nazi Bert Lancaster conducted his gitmo-style trials.
