2007-03-16 09:01:07 · 12 answers · asked by kappalokka 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
because he isnt like other criminals.
2007-03-16 09:14:58 · answer #1 · answered by sociald 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because the secrets would have to be let out, like the names of people that they still have under observation, etc. I certainly want KSM off the street, before he has the opportunity to do anything else. Wouldn't you think that he would have more information on the terrorists? Do you think that we can act on all of it at once? Do you want to take the risk of missing one of his co-conspirators? That might be the one that does something that kills your family......
2007-03-16 16:08:41 · answer #2 · answered by Ben H 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
KSM is not like other criminals.
He is combant.
Also you have to expose how we got infromation about him and that would but agents at risk.
I still don't understand the sympathy by the left for this man and yet those who feel sorry for him trash our troops who are protecting us from the evil he represents.
2007-03-16 16:07:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
a) Because a court of law would dismiss a confession obtained through torture.
b) Because to accept the international notion that terrorism is a criminal action would by definition imply that military response is improper, acknowledging the Iraq-Afghanistan mistake.
c) Because it would give him the opportunity to defend himself. He would raise the obvious question that if blowing up a plane in order to manipulate the US into leaving the Persian Gulf then it is a crime to murder innocent civilians to get them to sign away their oil.
d) Because it would allow him to show he is not some sort of evil demon, just another militant. No different from US troops.
2007-03-16 16:33:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
He is not a US citizen and is not entitled to the rights of a US citizen. He is a war criminal. War criminals are never tried in courts of law. They are tried by military tribunals.
2007-03-16 16:06:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Have to decide if what he does is considered a criminal act or an act of war.
I believe he falls under "enemy combatant", which is supported by the description of what he is in the Geneva Convention.
2007-03-16 16:05:51 · answer #6 · answered by Labtec600 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because he is a captured enemy combatant.
We have never tried war enemies in our civil or criminal courts - why would we now?
2007-03-16 16:04:28 · answer #7 · answered by Garrett S 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
A. He's an enemy combatant
B. He's NOT a citizen of the US
C. See B, as he is not, he is not entitled to the rights provided by the Constitution.
2007-03-16 16:06:03 · answer #8 · answered by Nibbles 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
He will, but not in one of our fine liberal civil courts.
2007-03-16 16:08:08 · answer #9 · answered by mbush40 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because he isn't a criminal, he's a retard patsy that our govt is using to blame the 9/11 attacks on because they have no evidence to prove osama was involved.
2007-03-16 16:05:46 · answer #10 · answered by jeb black 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋