Let's see, New York City has second thoughts about trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the 9/11 terror attacks, but it's OK to house similar terrorists in an Illinois prison. Guess the squeaky wheel got the grease this time around from the Obama administration.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg decided it would cost $200 million in extra security, tie up traffic, interfere with Big Apple commerce and depress real estate values during the duration of the trial. The Hound is just guessing here, but didn't Attorney General Eric Holder take all that into consideration when he said Sheikh Mohammed would be tried in a civilian court, rather than Guantanamo Bay, Cuba? Maybe that Massachusetts senatorial vote caused an Obamian flip-flop?
In the meantime, Illinois appears ripe to house terrorists from Gitmo. President Obama is including in his $3.8 trillion fiscal 2011 federal budget proposal $237 million to buy and upgrade the nearly vacant Thomson Correctional Center in northwest Illinois to house Gitmo detainees. The State of Illinois and the federal government are currently dickering over the purchase price of Thomson.
Maybe Illinoisans should start to squeak, just like the New Yawkers did.
Why waste all that money on a TRIAL........Just EXECUTE HIM and get it over with.....
THE HOUND SEZ: Um, even Iraq holds trials, Humpy. Then they execute them!
$200 million here, $200 million there...who's counting? Seems to me it would be just plain cheaper to keep Gitmo open, wouldn't it? Ah, but that would be too easy.
THE HOUND SAYS: Of course it would be too easy, Irene. But then, this is the government and their there to help us. Sometimes.
As many a GOP'er will tell me, we are a nation of laws and -until recently- a nation of precedents.
Many a terrorist or similar individual (Tim McVeigh, the Unabomber, etc.) has been successfully tried without military intervention in our nation. We are not a country that invokes partial martial law or that copies the actions of dictatorial or feudal states when we see fit.
Also, why shouldn't federal, state, or local authorities Mirandize someone taken into custody within the shores of the Atlantic and the Pacific?
If the person in Detroit was not Mirandized, one of two things would happen: a court would throw-out anything gleaned from the initial investigation OR our government (Republican-led or
Democrat-led) would have the right or ability to detain ANYONE
they wanted, ship them off to who knows where, not tell them why, or let them call a lawyer, etc.
This reminds me too much of mid-1960's Philadelphia, Mississippi (Neshoba County?), but that's just me. Granted, this was before Miranda v Arizona was decided, though the improper detention and 'cooperation' with n'er do wells by 'sympathetic' law enforcement took place just the same.
Hence, absolute power or the expectation thereof corrupts absolutely. Maybe, this is why we have Miranda, the Bill of Rights and the 5-10 Amendments afterward, etc.
"Do unto others as you'd have them do unto you." "Equal Justice under the law." While it is clear that people here illegally have broken the law, and the lengths we should go to correct this are debatable, if we hesitate to provide rights to those who travel to our country, we can essentially end any international tourism efforts we may have (trade offices in foreign nations as well) and remove the verbiage on US passports asking other countries to 'Bestow courtesy and fairness to our citizens abroad (and troops?).'
I find it interesting that the people who approved a pre-emptive strike, who failed to capture 'public enemy number one,' who trampled OUR rights to have the government view our all important library and bookstore records are now complaining about how law and order are being adhered to (should it not be?) given that these complainers are the supposed guardians of our Constitution (even though people like Boehner can't quote the right founding document).
Unfortunately, too many people in Springfield and Washington will not leave the posturing and cause du jur to the bloggers and journalists. They somehow believe that anything most Americans want improved in their nation will occur via osmosis or the continued status quo.
And the Cubs will win the Series.
It could just be that when the press should have questioned the pre-emptive strike theory, the tax cuts at a time of significant spending, and the incomplete, confusing and expensive legislation heralded by the Bush Administration the press did not do so and therefore failed.
It could also be that it is not for the Attorney General to defer duties to other governmental departments. Again, do we make ourselves less independent, less confident in our way of life, and more dependent upon a military that currently uses as many contractors as troops?
THE HOUND SAYS: We surrender!
HOUND.......You're right.....I stand corrected!!!!!!!!!
THE HOUND SAYS: Of course!