Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Sallies the difference between the terror act
committed by Umar Farouk and the terrorists held
at GITMO are as bright as Rudolph's red noise,
but I have a feeling, it will be split along
party lines, whether to try him in Federal Court
or by a Military Tribunal. Farouk was
caught on the flight to Detroit and I assume,
put into detention upon its landing; whereas,
the GITMO detainees were captured in large part,
on the battlefields of Afghanistan.... So
there is really no comparison with these
incidents, other than they are both terrorist
acts. Arvin I don't know how evidence would be handled for individuals caught on the battlefield, other than, they were the enemy and they were caught. Still, with Umar Farouk the evidence is in his pants. However, I'd suggest, because it is an act of terror, and not a felony or a misdemeanor that it would be correct to try Umar Farouk in either, a federal court or a military tribunal. Still the only correct place to try the GITMO detainees is in a Military Court. Simply because the detainees were caught on the battlefields, when America obtained world wide consensus, to root out, capture, and kill the terrorists encamped in Afghanistan. |
»Back«