Speaking to Vremya Novostei, Nikolai Zlobin, the director for Russian and Asian programs of the Washington Institute of World Security, said that the U.S. legal system is precedent-based and “quite a few things” have been tested during the Moussaoui trial. “The sentence will lay solid foundations of future trials to punish fanatics like Moussaoui. I hope to see such trials take place in the future,” said Zlobin.
Pravda ( Moussaoui's life sentence: why not death penalty? )
A narrowly focused "criminal" approach means entrusting the whole business to the state bureaucracy. The obvious problem with that is that it's mostly reactive . . . gives terrorists all the rights of criminals . . .Agreeing to fight the jihad with subpoenas is, in effect, a declaration that you're willing to plea bargain. Instead of a Churchillian "we will never surrender!", it's more of a "Well, the judge has thrown out the mass murder charges, but the DA says we can still nail him on mail fraud."
This is a very unsatisfying article. It is more of a whine or a lament than commentary, because Steyn leaves unwritten his proposals for dealing with . . . well, if they're not criminals, what are they? Prisoners of War? Then, prisoners of what war? Processed under the authority of what American law? Just what is Steyn advocating? Summary executions? Maybe he's suggesting we model "terror justice" after Franco's military tribunals which followed the Spanish Civil War? What?
Perhaps illegal combatants; the equivalent of spies. Summary execution would be perfectly within the bounds of "international law" in that case. So would military tribunals.
Uh, how about enemy combatants attempting to murder innocents? How about brutal killers operating outside the Geneva Conventions and outside the rules of warfare and thus deserving of a swift military trial and--if found guilty--a swift execution? Or would you prefer a little counseling followed by some really neat rehabilitation followed by a book tour?
Good grief.
I don't think Steyn is advocating anything. He is simply stating that Western Civilization has become so civilized that it can no longer deal effectively with barbarians. And if this inability continues, as it will, the West will inevitably fall to the barbarians as did the Roman Empire.
DING! DING! DING!
"Summary executions" sounds like a winner to me!
"This is a very unsatisfying article. It is more of a whine or a lament than commentary, because Steyn leaves unwritten his proposals for dealing with . . . well, if they're not criminals, what are they? Prisoners of War? Then, prisoners of what war? Processed under the authority of what American law? Just what is Steyn advocating? Summary executions?"
I guess you missed the controversy about giving Moussaoui a civil trial instead of trying him before a military tribunal, as other terrorist, saboteurs, enemy agents have been tried.
Steyn is saying it was a mistake to treat Moussaoui like he was attacking a private citizen, like an ordinary criminal. He attacked the country. It was therefore not a matter for a criminal trial.
"Maybe he's suggesting we model "terror justice" after Franco's military tribunals which followed the Spanish Civil War? What?"
You need to read up on military tribunals and US history.
Maybe he's suggesting what a lot of us on FR have advocated: military tribunal.
Why to go so far away in space as Spain, and so close as their Civil War in time?
How about staying in America, but have a look on the American Civil War?
Here is a quote for you, in which I took the liberty to change just one word, the last one:
Men, or squads of men, who commit hostilities, whether by fighting… or by raids of any kind, without commission, without being part and portion of the organized army, and without sharing continuously in the war, but who do so with intermittent return to their homes and avocation, or with occasional assumption of the semblance of peaceful pursuits, divesting themselves of the character or appearance soldiers – such men, or squads of men, are no public enemies, and, therefore, if captured, are not entitled to the privileges of prisoners of war, but shall be treated summarily as [terrorists].
General Orders No.100 of the United Stated Federal Army, Promulgated by President Lincoln on 24 April 1863.