WH Official does an Op-ed piece in USA Today

[il Padrino Ute]

Timothy McVeigh? Civilian or Military trial?

Military. McVeigh was a terrorist. Abortion clinic bombers are terrorists as well.

[wuapinmon]

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.

Well, that was a stretch from what I said. The question was asked, "why do we mirandize them?" I responded, "Because they're human beings."

They do have rights. I think that those same Miranda rights exist in the military. I'm fairly certain that you cannot be court-martialed for silent insubordination anymore, right?

[wuapinmon]

Military. McVeigh was a terrorist. Abortion clinic bombers are terrorists as well.

Ok, since we're dealing with US citizens engaged in terrorism against fellow citizens, where do you draw the line. Are hate crimes terrorism?

[Goatnapper'96]

Well, that was a stretch from what I said. The question was asked, "why do we mirandize them?" I responded, "Because they're human beings."

They do have rights. I think that those same Miranda rights exist in the military. I'm fairly certain that you cannot be court-martialed for silent insubordination anymore, right?

We probably agree more than I thought.

[Goatnapper'96]

Ok, since we're dealing with US citizens engaged in terrorism against fellow citizens, where do you draw the line. Are hate crimes terrorism?

I think the germaine difference would lie, and this is just off the cuff, in whether or not they are part of a larger organized movement. If some wacko blows up on office building because he is batshit crazy, but he acted independently I don't think that is something that should be treated as an act of war against the US. However, if a US citizen is aligned with and the terrorist activites were coordinated by/through an organization then I think that is where it begins to be an act of war against the US.

[wuapinmon]

I think the germaine difference would lie, and this is just off the cuff, in whether or not they are part of a larger organized movement. If some wacko blows up on office building because he is batshit crazy, but he acted independently I don't think that is something that should be treated as an act of war against the US. However, if a US citizen is aligned with and the terrorist activites were coordinated by/through an organization then I think that is where it begins to be an act of war against the US.

This seems like a sensible definition. Barring the revelation of classified info, should military tribunals be televised?

[il Padrino Ute]

Ok, since we're dealing with US citizens engaged in terrorism against fellow citizens, where do you draw the line. Are hate crimes terrorism?

I consider it terrorism when the intent is to kill as many innocents as possible at once. Hate crimes that kill or attempt to kill a group - such as the documented bombings of black churches in the south during the 60s when the Civil Rights Act was being debated in DC - would be considered terrorism.

Edit: Goatnapper brings up a good point about the perps being affiliated with a group whose intent is to harm the US or its citizens, so I'll steal from him and include it in my definition of terrorism.

[Goatnapper'96]

This seems like a sensible definition. Barring the revelation of classified info, should military tribunals be televised?

I don't see how it would hurt. Hell, with imbedded reporters war is now televised. But I would defer to the JAGs and I haven't read much, or anything really, on the issue one way or the other.

[byu71]

I think the germaine difference would lie, and this is just off the cuff, in whether or not they are part of a larger organized movement. If some wacko blows up on office building because he is batshit crazy, but he acted independently I don't think that is something that should be treated as an act of war against the US. However, if a US citizen is aligned with and the terrorist activites were coordinated by/through an organization then I think that is where it begins to be an act of war against the US.

From here on in this thread, napper is speaking for me also. Even the gratuitous shots at the "academic elite". Should I disagree, I will make it known.

[wuapinmon]

I consider it terrorism when the intent is to kill as many innocents as possible at once. Hate crimes that kill or attempt to kill a group - such as the documented bombings of black churches in the south during the 60s when the Civil Rights Act was being debated in DC - would be considered terrorism.

Edit: Goatnapper brings up a good point about the perps being affiliated with a group whose intent is to harm the US or its citizens.

Would gangs be considered terrorists if they use fear of death to intimidate people in their neighborhoods?

[wuapinmon]

From here on in this thread, napper is speaking for me also. Even the gratuitous shots at the "academic elite". Should I disagree, I will make it known.

One, I'm not an elite academic. I am an academic, but I'm far from elite.

Two, I think there was a false dichotomy created at the beginning of this thread that created a strawman chasm between us.

Three, Goatnapper and I agree on almost everything we've said.

Four, speak for yourself. You've got a Greatest Hits thread, viejo.

[il Padrino Ute]

Would gangs be considered terrorists if they use fear of death to intimidate people in their neighborhoods?

Yes.

[wuapinmon]

Yes.

What about a kid beating up someone for their lunch money?

[il Padrino Ute]

Would gangs be considered terrorists if they use fear of death to intimidate people in their neighborhoods?

And for that matter, even those girl scouts who set up their table to sell their cookies at the exits near Costco and other stores should be on the terrorist watch list. They scare the hell out of me.

[byu71]

Four, speak for yourself. You've got a Greatest Hits thread, viejo.

I know, but it isn't doing so well. I do appreciate your putting me in the limelight, but my star just didn't take off. Too many "academics" in here I suppose. I think amongst the Sarah Palin crowd, I would be more of a star.