A new proposal.

Ishmael

Literotica Guru
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Posts
84,005
Try all terrorists (dead or alive) involved in acts where there was lose of life by military tribunal. If found guilty the penalty is death with no appeals. And then bury them in a sealed concrete container filled with pig offal in an unmarked grave at a non-disclosed location.

That shouldn't offend the Muslim world, after all we have it from the very highest authority that they aren't 'Real Muslims' anyway.

Ishmael
 
Donald Trump brings out the bloodlust in the elderly lower middle class non-college educated bitter clinger male demographic.

They're mad as hell and they're not gonna take it anymore!
 
∧∧∧Better than fantasizing about rape the way you do, Rob/ Darbhinder.
 
The way exists to treat terrorists as pirates. We deal with pirates all the time, most are drug smugglers. Our navy simply kills them. Navys have always killed pirates. Pirates are stateless criminals.
 
They'll get what's coming to them, if we're referring to the last idiot, in a civilian court made up of New Yorkers and they will send him to the chair because he's going to demand to be his own lawyer and start screaming Allahu Akbar and Insh'allah when the verdict is read...

;)
 
The way exists to treat terrorists as pirates. We deal with pirates all the time, most are drug smugglers. Our navy simply kills them. Navys have always killed pirates. Pirates are stateless criminals.

Pirates are "stateless criminals" ONLY when they commit their crimes in a stateless jurisdiction -- typically international waters. Terrorists BORN in the United States or naturalized as United States citizens who commit their crimes in the United States would almost always be entitled to the full Constitutional protections associated with criminal prosecutions. The same is generally true even for aliens committing crimes of terrorism in this country.

The only exception is when terrorists, including U. S. citizens, act under the specific control and direction of an organized enemy or government with which the United States is at war. While the Supreme Court and historical precedent clearly supports the validity of the existence of a state of war without a formal declaration OF war by Congress, it is far less clear that a military justice template imposing the Law of War over domestic criminal law is ALWAYS the appropriate application in every instance of terrorism -- particularly when the actions of the terrorist are merely "inspired by an ideology" rather then the result of "strategy and initiation by an enemy force or organization."

That's the LAW. For which most people don't give half a shit, of course. :rolleyes:
 
First this ^^^^^
Try all terrorists (dead or alive) involved in acts where there was lose of life by military tribunal. If found guilty the penalty is death with no appeals. And then bury them in a sealed concrete container filled with pig offal in an unmarked grave at a non-disclosed location.

That shouldn't offend the Muslim world, after all we have it from the very highest authority that they aren't 'Real Muslims' anyway.

Ishmael

Second, last I heard the Dalia Lama was the one who made that statement. Not that I agree with him to begin with but he's hardly the highest authority on Islam. No such entity exists for better or worse.

Finally it would offend the Muslim world which is of course your not so subtly stated goal.
 
News flash (if something we've known for 15 years can be considered a "flash"): Ishmael doesn't really believe in the Constitution.
 
Pirates are "stateless criminals" ONLY when they commit their crimes in a stateless jurisdiction -- typically international waters. Terrorists BORN in the United States or naturalized as United States citizens who commit their crimes in the United States would almost always be entitled to the full Constitutional protections associated with criminal prosecutions. The same is generally true even for aliens committing crimes of terrorism in this country.

The only exception is when terrorists, including U. S. citizens, act under the specific control and direction of an organized enemy or government with which the United States is at war. While the Supreme Court and historical precedent clearly supports the validity of the existence of a state of war without a formal declaration OF war by Congress, it is far less clear that a military justice template imposing the Law of War over domestic criminal law is ALWAYS the appropriate application in every instance of terrorism -- particularly when the actions of the terrorist are merely "inspired by an ideology" rather then the result of "strategy and initiation by an enemy force or organization."

That's the LAW. For which most people don't give half a shit, of course. :rolleyes:

Somewhere in a safehouse in Afghanistan, a 70 year old "security consultant" stirs restlessly in his sleep. He suddenly becomes instantly alert, shouts "EX PARTE QURIN", defecates in his pants, and rolls over to go back to sleep.

Thus Spake Vetteman
 
Somewhere in a safehouse in Afghanistan, a 70 year old "security consultant" stirs restlessly in his sleep. He suddenly becomes instantly alert, shouts "EX PARTE QURIN", defecates in his pants, and rolls over to go back to sleep.

Thus Spake Vetteman

Yeah, rumor has it that Anwar al-Awlaki said the same thing one morning in Yemen, but he only got as far as "Ex...." :rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Try all terrorists (dead or alive) involved in acts where there was lose of life by military tribunal. If found guilty the penalty is death with no appeals. And then bury them in a sealed concrete container filled with pig offal in an unmarked grave at a non-disclosed location.

That shouldn't offend the Muslim world, after all we have it from the very highest authority that they aren't 'Real Muslims' anyway.

Ishmael
And then we can shutter Gitmo.
 
United States made all their terrorist. Al Queda and Isis the real terrorist are the Rothschild family and his associates.
 
Seeing as Ish wants to throw out the fifth and sixth amendments, can you guys get rid of the second as well?
 
Pirates are "stateless criminals" ONLY when they commit their crimes in a stateless jurisdiction -- typically international waters. Terrorists BORN in the United States or naturalized as United States citizens who commit their crimes in the United States would almost always be entitled to the full Constitutional protections associated with criminal prosecutions. The same is generally true even for aliens committing crimes of terrorism in this country.

The only exception is when terrorists, including U. S. citizens, act under the specific control and direction of an organized enemy or government with which the United States is at war. While the Supreme Court and historical precedent clearly supports the validity of the existence of a state of war without a formal declaration OF war by Congress, it is far less clear that a military justice template imposing the Law of War over domestic criminal law is ALWAYS the appropriate application in every instance of terrorism -- particularly when the actions of the terrorist are merely "inspired by an ideology" rather then the result of "strategy and initiation by an enemy force or organization."

That's the LAW. For which most people don't give half a shit, of course. :rolleyes:

:D

There goes Corporal RINO "Saul Goodman" Butthurt, the wannabe lawyer again...

...playground practicing without a license.

http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/roflmao.gif
 
People who are easily intimidated by force imagine that everyone is.
 
Back
Top