photo taken from bnp.org.uk
How should terror suspects be prosecuted by the United States government?
Note: Comments are moderated so be sure that your responses are expressed in a respectable and friendly way. We are here to express our thoughts toward controversial issues, not to scold or defame anyone. Watch what you say, and remember that by using this site, you agree to our Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.
A 3rd court in the United States needs to be created just for National Security alone because you cannot try these terrorists in a military or federal court.
Why not? And please tell me why you need to create another wasteful governmental snafu.
In my not-so-humble opinion we need to just take these poor excuses for human beings out and just shoot them – do not waste our time, money, and dwindling resources on these vermin.
I guess that is about the nicest way I can put it.
Just my not-so-humble opinion. B)
They should be tried in a military court per the sanctions put in place by the Geneva Conventions and our own military codes.
Reason why: They are prisoners of war. They were taken in what everybody loves to term a war. So, by the logical path, they are prisoners of war. The Geneva Conventions deal with such prisoners. Note- simply changing their name to 'enemy combatants' (Which is a misnomer because when they're locked up, they can't be combatants) does not make them any less entitled to the rights that we have agreed to cede prisoners.
It's a waste of time by doing that.
Civilian trials unless they were actually captured and can be shown to be enemy combatants from an actual battlefield condition. And not the Pentagon's/Bush WH's attempt to proclaim the entire world as a "battlefield", a definition so absurd as to make one wonder at the legal powers we have entrusted to those government offices. If not that, then at least military tribunals establishing that they are in fact "enemy combatants" and/or engaged in threatening actions against American civilians (and not merely American military forces) for the purposes of establishing that they are in fact terrorist suspects. Anything less than this, a fair recourse to basic justice and human rights and the attempt to redress grievances (such as I'm not a terrorist), and we're merely bloodthirsty hypocrites.
Shooting/executing them on the sole basis that the government says they're terrorists, given that the government has released hundreds of such suspects as in fact innocent entirely, is so asinine that it defies belief that people anywhere would still think this is a great country. That sort of behavior is precisely the sort of behavior that we rightly condemn when it happens in other countries. The government should always have to provide some modest attempt to prove that someone deserves death or punishment in its exercise of monopoly of force over us and the people in its custody. Otherwise it's pretty useless to grant the government that power of tyranny.
And forget the fact that many of the so-called "enemy combatants" we pick up aren't even terrorists? Were impressed into service, defending their homes in many cases from us, the invaders? Do you really want to do that, and turn the American flag into nothing more than a symbol of terror and tyranny to millions (which it is already in many cases, but we don't need to do further damage)?