WH Official does an Op-ed piece in USA Today

[Hallelujah]

You're not seeing the distinction I made. If a civil authority arrests them, then we have decided as a society that all suspects will be apprised of their rights. If a military authority arrests them, I assume there is a similar declaration of rights.

They have rights. Otherwise we should just execute them in the field. If we start parsing out rights, then we start moving towards a collapse of all rights for everyone. If you're accused of one thing, that means you lose certain rights, well then anyone could be arrested for doing that one thing, and all our rights go to hell.

Dammit, no! Rights are rights. That is what separates us from them. We believe in rights and the rule of law, for everyone, even lowlife scum who would kill me.

Do you think an hour of interrogation was sufficient considering all the info that has come out since about this terrorist?

[byu71]

You're not seeing the distinction I made. If a civil authority arrests them, then we have decided as a society that all suspects will be apprised of their rights. If a military authority arrests them, I assume there is a similar declaration of rights.

They have rights. Otherwise we should just execute them in the field. If we start parsing out rights, then we start moving towards a collapse of all rights for everyone. If you're accused of one thing, that means you lose certain rights, well then anyone could be arrested for doing that one thing, and all our rights go to hell.

Dammit, no! Rights are rights. That is what separates us from them. We believe in rights and the rule of law, for everyone, even lowlife scum who would kill me.

Wuap. Perhaps I am wrong, but my guess is there aren't military folks sitting at the airport waiting to arrest people. I suspect the attorney general made the decision not to turn the guy over to the military.

It seems what you are saying is that if a terrorist bombs a building and the local police get there first, if he is arrested he has to have the same rights you and I do. Unless I am wrong and there are military personel everywhere to make arrests, your argument is not a very good one.

I love that "what seperates" us line. As some guy pulls a gun on you, you stand there saying, what seperates me from you is I won't pull the gun. Bang, your dead, but we all admire what a nice guy you were.

[wuapinmon]

Do you think an hour of interrogation was sufficient considering all the info that has come out since about this terrorist?

No, I do not. His case was not handled appropriately, but he could've remained silent even without a Miranda warning and a lawyer. Unless you just want to beat information out of him.

[Goatnapper'96]

Back in '87 when the market crashed we ended up with an armed guard outside our door for two weeks. That is because several investement advisors were shot by their clients. I understand the danger soldiers face.

'71,

You live in a world with computers and brokers and that world must be manned. Who is going to control Americans' retirments and 401(k)'s? Wuap, Grapevine or me? YOU have more responsibility than I could possibly fathom! I weep for Bernie Maddoff because I have that luxury. But you, '71 you know. I have the luxury of not knowing what you know. Your existence, while fatcattish and full of unrighteous bonuses, provides for the financial futures of Americans. Deep down in places I don't wanna talk about, I don't want you manning that investment post, I need you there! You use words like hedge funds, Libor, EBITDA and stock jockey (I just use camel jockey and say kill the sumabitch!) and quite honestly I don't have a clue what those words even mean. These words are your backbone of a philanthropic industry where lives are spent acquiring wealth and security for others. Clearly since I am such a dumbshit, you have neither the time nor inclination to explain the complex machinations of your investment processes to those of us whose NAV rises and falls under the blanket of decision making power we have given you. And then, when we end up broke we have the audacity to question the decisions you have made. Indeed, even if we are penniless you would prefer we just said thank you and did not forget to pay our fees! Otherwise you suggest we purchase an E-Trade account and get to trading on our own! Either way I doubt you care much what I think!"

[wuapinmon]

Wuap. Perhaps I am wrong, but my guess is there aren't military folks sitting at the airport waiting to arrest people. I suspect the attorney general made the decision not to turn the guy over to the military.

It seems what you are saying is that if a terrorist bombs a building and the local police get there first, if he is arrested he has to have the same rights you and I do. Unless I am wrong and there are military personel everywhere to make arrests, your argument is not a very good one.

I love that "what seperates" us line. As some guy pulls a gun on you, you stand there saying, what seperates me from you is I won't pull the gun. Bang, your dead, but we all admire what a nice guy you were.

No, the civil authorities can arrest him and then transfer him to the military. And, your interpretation of my "what separates us" line is flawed. I would absolutely pull a gun on someone who was brandishing one at me and threatening to kill me, and I would shoot him right between the eyes if I had to do so. But, if I can take him into custody, and prevent him from shooting me, that's the better option. But, sometimes, you just have to shoot the guy. And sometimes you have to take him into custody, try him, convict his ass, and then execute him.

[byu71]

'71,

You live in a world with computers and brokers and that world must be manned. Who is going to control Americans' retirments and 401(k)'s? Wuap, Grapevine or me? YOU have more responsibility than I could possibly fathom! I weep for Bernie Maddoff because I have that luxury. But you, '71 you know. I have the luxury of not knowing what you know. Your existence, while fatcattish and full of unrighteous bonuses, provides for the financial futures of Americans. Deep down in places I don't wanna talk about, I don't want you manning that investment post, I need you there! You use words like hedge funds, Libor, EBITDA and stock jockey (I just use camel jockey and say kill the sumabitch!) and quite honestly I don't have a clue what those words even mean. These words are your backbone of a philanthropic industry where lives are spent acquiring wealth and security for others. Clearly since I am such a dumbshit, you have neither the time nor inclination to explain the complex machinations of your investment processes to those of us whose NAV rises and falls under the blanket of decision making power we have given you. And then, when we end up broke we have the audacity to question the decisions you have made. Indeed, even if we are penniless you would prefer we just said thank you and did not forget to pay our fees! Otherwise you suggest we purchase an E-Trade account and get to trading on our own! Either way I doubt you care much what I think!"

SWEET! I lay out a little sacarsm and you come up with an epic. I am taking this and framing it and hanging it in my office.

[Goatnapper'96]

Well, I'm referring specifically to the case of the Christmas bomber in formulating my response. If we arrest them via a civil authority, then they have the Miranda rights. If the military arrests them, then I have no problem with military justice, because, it is just. I assume that the military has a statement similar to the Miranda warning. Miranda is not just for US citizens.

In my mind, if you want to go to war, you don a uniform and declare your intentions. The Geneva convention is very clear about out-of-uniform punishments for captured enemy agents/combatants. Now, these combatants/terrorists/stupid kids are not parties to the GC, so do we keep the same rules for them? Terrorism isn't really war. If these guys were attacking military targets, that'd be one thing. Trying to blow up a plane is another matter entirely.

I think the larger issue is:

1. Does the military have jurisdiction over terrorists on US bound planes?
2. Are the civilian courts adequate for the trials that will happen?
3. Is it safe to have trials in civilian courts?
4. What rights do these people have?

I am very grateful that there are men (and women) who are willing to risk their lives to protect mine. While my views on the matter can be denigrated as "kumbaya," all parts of society need a voice. Unless we want to be like the Klingons, just as we need a few good men to sit on that wall, we need others to make sure that those men don't turn into Col. Jessup.

I think that at present the best place for terrorists to be tried is in a military tribunal. Regardless if they are apprehended by civilian police.

I could handle some other form of justice that is not a military court since our perception of enemy combatants still requires that they wear a uniform and be a member of the military force of some geographically designed nation-state.

Regardless, I still don't accept that military courts treat people as inhumane. That was the point I was protesting. Well that an a chance to take a gratuitous shot at an academic, I can't be the only one who feels that that honorable profession is disproportionately represented here!

[wuapinmon]

'71,

You live in a world with computers and brokers and that world must be manned. Who is going to control Americans' retirments and 401(k)'s? Wuap, Grapevine or me? YOU have more responsibility than I could possibly fathom! I weep for Bernie Maddoff because I have that luxury. But you, '71 you know. I have the luxury of not knowing what you know. Your existence, while fatcattish and full of unrighteous bonuses, provides for the financial futures of Americans. Deep down in places I don't wanna talk about, I don't want you manning that investment post, I need you there! You use words like hedge funds, Libor, EBITDA and stock jockey (I just use camel jockey and say kill the sumabitch!) and quite honestly I don't have a clue what those words even mean. These words are your backbone of a philanthropic industry where lives are spent acquiring wealth and security for others. Clearly since I am such a dumbshit, you have neither the time nor inclination to explain the complex machinations of your investment processes to those of us whose NAV rises and falls under the blanket of decision making power we have given you. And then, when we end up broke we have the audacity to question the decisions you have made. Indeed, even if we are penniless you would prefer we just said thank you and did not forget to pay our fees! Otherwise you suggest we purchase an E-Trade account and get to trading on our own! Either way I doubt you care much what I think!"

Excellence! A+!

[byu71]

No, the civil authorities can arrest him and then transfer him to the military. And, your interpretation of my "what separates us" line is flawed. I would absolutely pull a gun on someone who was brandishing one at me and threatening to kill me, and I would shoot him right between the eyes if I had to do so. But, if I can take him into custody, and prevent him from shooting me, that's the better option. But, sometimes, you just have to shoot the guy. And sometimes you have to take him into custody, try him, convict his ass, and then execute him.

Because of the love I have for you, I hope, no I pray that time doesn't come for you. If it does, I hope you make the right decision and while you are thinking about if you need to shoot him or take the higher road and take him into custody, he doesn't shoot you in the nuts.

[wuapinmon]

I think that at present the best place for terrorists to be tried is in a military tribunal. Regardless if they are apprehended by civilian police.

I could handle some other form of justice that is not a military court since our perception of enemy combatants still requires that they wear a uniform and be a member of the military force of some geographically designed nation-state.

Regardless, I still don't accept that military courts treat people as inhumane. That was the point I was protesting. Well that an a chance to take a gratuitous shot at an academic, I can't be the only one who feels that that honorable profession is disproportionately represented here!

I'm sorry, I cannot find any reference of mine, ever, to saying or insinuating that military courts were inhumane. Ever. Not once. I do not feel that way, and I have no qualms with them trying terrorists.

[happyone]

'71,

You live in a world with computers and brokers and that world must be manned. Who is going to control Americans' retirments and 401(k)'s? Wuap, Grapevine or me? YOU have more responsibility than I could possibly fathom! I weep for Bernie Maddoff because I have that luxury. But you, '71 you know. I have the luxury of not knowing what you know. Your existence, while fatcattish and full of unrighteous bonuses, provides for the financial futures of Americans. Deep down in places I don't wanna talk about, I don't want you manning that investment post, I need you there! You use words like hedge funds, Libor, EBITDA and stock jockey (I just use camel jockey and say kill the sumabitch!) and quite honestly I don't have a clue what those words even mean. These words are your backbone of a philanthropic industry where lives are spent acquiring wealth and security for others. Clearly since I am such a dumbshit, you have neither the time nor inclination to explain the complex machinations of your investment processes to those of us whose NAV rises and falls under the blanket of decision making power we have given you. And then, when we end up broke we have the audacity to question the decisions you have made. Indeed, even if we are penniless you would prefer we just said thank you and did not forget to pay our fees! Otherwise you suggest we purchase an E-Trade account and get to trading on our own! Either way I doubt you care much what I think!"

I am truely in awed. Masterful

[wuapinmon]

Because of the love I have for you, I hope, no I pray that time doesn't come for you. If it does, I hope you make the right decision and while you are thinking about if you need to shoot him or take the higher road and take him into custody, he doesn't shoot you in the nuts.

Unless I'm shooting skeet, I'm a terrible shot. Also, he would definitely hit me in the nuts. AC/DC wrote a song about me.

[il Padrino Ute]

You're not seeing the distinction I made. If a civil authority arrests them, then we have decided as a society that all suspects will be apprised of their rights. If a military authority arrests them, I assume there is a similar declaration of rights.

They have rights. Otherwise we should just execute them in the field. If we start parsing out rights, then we start moving towards a collapse of all rights for everyone. If you're accused of one thing, that means you lose certain rights, well then anyone could be arrested for doing that one thing, and all our rights go to hell.

Dammit, no! Rights are rights. That is what separates us from them. We believe in rights and the rule of law, for everyone, even lowlife scum who would kill me.

No, I see that distinction. I just don't agree with you about it.

Terrorists should not be Mirandaized. They shouldn't be executed on the spot unless it is to immediately save lives. They shouldn't be tortured to extract information. But they should not be given their Miranda rights because they commit acts of war. They should be dealt with by the military each and every time and not by civilian courts precisely because terrorism is war.

[Goatnapper'96]

I'm sorry, I cannot find any reference of mine, ever, to saying or insinuating that military courts were inhumane. Ever. Not once. I do not feel that way, and I have no qualms with them trying terrorists.

I thought somebody indicated that having the civilian police apprehend and interrogate the panty bomber was incorrect and that, in their opinion, the appropriate method would have been to apprehend and turn over to the military. You indicated that was not done because the panty bomber was still a human being despite his inhumane intentions. That is where I thought you were indicating that the military tribunal method was not human treatment. Well that and I sensed that Cowboy was getting a bit up to his REDneck in academia wankerism yesterday in his tit for tats with woot, so I thought I would let a redneck brother know that I share his fatigue with the sheer high numbers of academicians on this venue. I do have an appreciation for academics, just as you do for knuckle dragging ground pounders, but on occasion it is good to knock each other a peg or two down.

Well that I really loved COL Jessup.

[wuapinmon]

No, I see that distinction. I just don't agree with you about it.

Terrorists should not be Mirandaized. They shouldn't be executed on the spot unless it is to immediately save lives. They shouldn't be tortured to extract information. But they should not be given their Miranda rights because they commit acts of war. They should be dealt with by the military each and every time and not by civilian courts precisely because terrorism is war.

Timothy McVeigh? Civilian or Military trial?