Get PJ Media on your Apple

by
The Editors

Bio

April 22, 2013 - 11:46 am

The White House has made it official: Suspected Boston Marathon bomber Dzokhar Tsarnaev, a naturalized U.S. citizen, will not be tried as an enemy combatant by a military commission but will be tried as a terrorist in civilian court.

“This is absolutely the right way to go and the appropriate way to go,” said Press Secretary Jay Carney.

Rep. Peter King (R-NY) disagrees, saying yesterday that “there’s so many questions unanswered. There are so many potential links to terrorism here. Also, the battlefield was now in the United States. So, I believe he is an enemy combatant.”

We’ve heard from them. Now, let’s hear from you. Leave a comment giving us your thoughts on this subject.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Here are the rules for American "citizen" traitors:

Do it on foreign soil as part of an enemy regime....summary execution.

Do it on a military base....workplace violence.

Do it on home soil, get lawyered up and get off free as a bird, win a full professorship and have a movie made about you in Hollywood.

51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
musing...
Bill Ayers was a traitor/terrorist and he walked. I've still never heard the details as to how that transpired. Are they known or is this info hidden under lock and key with his buddy Obama's?
solid (sort of)...
Unless it can be proven that he received US citizenship under false pretenses, and unless that is an actual crime for which the penalty is revocation of said citizenship(anyone know?), he is a US citizen and must be treated accordingly. It then becomes a treasonous offense, does it not? This question should be answered according to the law, if we are still a nation of laws. My opinion, therefore, should matter not. I want to live in a nation where the law is blindly applied, equally, to all. Therein lies justice. And yes, this is the ideal for which we seek. I prefer to move toward this ideal rather than further away.

51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
This was the right decision. He was an American citizen living in America who committed a crime against American civilians - that makes it a criminal matter. He's not a hard core jihadi or high-level AQ operative who needs to be broken by enhanced interrogation. He doesn't know where any high-value targets are hiding. He doesn't belong at Gitmo, where the inmates would probably radicalize him more than he is already.

Always remember how much the liberals wanted this guy to be "right-wing." And remember some of the groups Obama's DHS and Justice Department have called "extremist." The next "enemy combatant" could be you or somebody you know, just because the government wants it that way.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (117)
All Comments   (117)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
I am hesitant to allow the government the freedom to label suspects as "enemy combatants." I do not trust the government and can imagine their willingness to attach such a label to a conservative Christian, in an effort to remove his civil liberties. American citizens, whether born into citizenship or naturalized, ought to have their constitutional privileges protected. Although, in cases of proven treason certain constitutional rights should be suspended. But even this should be proven in a court of law, with the burden of proof on the government.
I also did not support the targeted assassination Anwar al-Awlaki. Before pulling his card, a case could have and should have been built against him to strip him of his citizenship for treason.
We are, after all, a nation of laws and when the government can easily bypass these laws what's to stop to from coming after you?
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
The response to jihad in America should come from the military. The trial of the blind imam has shown beyond any reasonable doubt that the military should have handled his trial-and he should have been hung. Islam is at war (jihad) with America but we do not acknowledge it, to our great detriment. It usually takes a large event to wake us up, such as Pearl Harbor and WWII. 9/11 should have done it for us in the modern era but we still snooze.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
As a stopped clock is right twice a day so is Obama and his administration. Even though there is a war on terror, it is not a formal war as declared by congresss. As such, Dzokhar Tsarnaevis neither a spy or an enemy combatant - just a terrorist. To declare him an enemy combatant would be to start a process of having congress or the Presideent deciding when they could simply suspend the rights of any citizen whenever they see fit. With everything else going on right now, that is the last development we should ever want to initiate. The lawyers will get involved now as it should be andd there is a concern that the death penalty will no longer be an optionsince he was never Mirandized. Quite frankly, I say we should let him have a life sentence and put him in with the general prison population. Once there, Dzokhar Tsarnaev will become someones girlfriend, killed, or both. Works for me considering what he has done to others.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
If we can make special laws to address new things like the Mafia at one time and hate crimes, we can make new laws to address a new thing here too. Treating this as a simple criminal matter when it clearly is not is stupid. Is the point to control this activity or to show how by the numbers we are?
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
The latter, I'm afraid, and the Democrats are quite candid about it. We're going to "show the world" how American justice works. What it shows them, I fear, is how simple-minded we are.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Interesting. A RICO Act for terrorists? Might work.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
On rare occasions the White House gets something right. This is one such. An American citizen, not acting in concert with a foreign power or organization, and not a member of the military, must be tried in US courts for crimes.

Even if they can show he WAS acting in concert with al Qaeda or such, the Constitution's treason provisions would indicate that he still has these rights. Of course, if this were the case the rest of the treason requirements are met (eyewitnesses, overt acts, etc).

But it still needs to be in a normal criminal court.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Like it or not, he was given American citizenship and should have all the rights of an American citizen. If we allow government to pick and choose what rights we have in essence we have no rights. The ones who bestowed citizenship on him should have their butts kicked and he should get the death penalty multiple times but don't go down the slippery slope of deciding which citizens should have their rights
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
ISN'T TREASON A CRIME?

Now that the Boston jihadi has been charged w/ destruction of property, we'll never be able to interrogate him to get info we need to fight terrorism. I guess this is what happens when you have a POTUS who's friendly with terrorists and appoints commies and members of the MB as advisers. However, isn't treason a crime? Why wasn't Tsarnaev the younger charged with that? Why bother to administer an oath when a person becomes a naturalized citizen -- if it's meaningless.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Sure, but he'd still have to be tried for treason in a criminal court. Probably clearer in that regard since "treason" is the one crime actually spelled out in the Constitution.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Re:
....."In the absence of evidence that he acted on behalf or with the support of a foreign government, ...."

This should be a pretty weak obstacle to overcome when dealing with our resident Muslim terrorists, who, by the very nature of being Muslim have the tacit support and approval of several Muslim foreign governments, some of which claim sickeningly to be our "allies"....cf: Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Remember that the majority of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi citizens. The handwritten memo citing them by name [s] on the stationery of the Saudi Embassy is simply not going to be available for any court anywhere.

It's long past the time when we Americans apply "lawfare" against these Muslims en masse just as these Muslims do here in their own defense with the witting assistance of the C.A.I.R and the A.C.L.U.

Turn the tables on these Muslims. What are our oh-so-clever lawyers for, anyway?

I keep saying that we're "hoist on our own petard"......because it's true.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
There's a difference between "talked to a bunch of people and saw a bunch of stuff online that gave me the idea that they'd like it if I did X" and "was recruited by Organization A to do X."

I don't think we were hampered at all in the prosecutions of the Unabomber or Tim McVeigh just because we didn't treat them as enemy combattants.

And in a way, treating him as a common criminal will be something he would find demeaning.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
While the lefties will be consumed with why he did this, his linens' thread count, and whether he has his favorite prayer rug, I'm more interested in what did he do, what can we prove, and what is the proper sentence. This should be a death penalty case, if the current administration has their way, he'll be "just a guy from the neighborhood", whose only regret is that he did not bomb enough.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
I think this story is especially relevant after today's announcement by the WH in regards to the surviving Boston terrorist.

In WWII a group of Nazi saboteurs were sent to the U.S. to target our economic interests in an operation named 'Operation Pastorius'. This group consisted of eight people who had lived in America of which two were American citizens named Ernst Burger and Herbert Haupt. After two of the saboteurs, George Dasch and Ernst Burger, turned themselves in the other six were arrested. In a case called 'Ex parte Quirin' the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the jurisdiction of a United States military tribunal over the trial of the eight Nazi agents who they called 'unlawful combatants'. They were all found guilty by the tribunal and sentenced to death. The two who turned themselves, George Dasch and Ernst Burger, had their sentences commuted by Roosevelt the rest were executed by electric chair on August 8, 1942

It is too bad that so many have forgotten, or never been taught history.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Those were cases under quite different circumstances where nation states were involved and engaged by hostile states military efforts to defeat the U.S. et al; and overthrow the sovereignty of the U.S. We are not now at war with a nation state. We are not at war with a unified central commanded enemy. We are at war with an element of people independently organized in small local and regional cell groups with a central cause of extremist religious philosophy -- killing infidels rather than overthrowing a sovereign nation. Given the circumstances at hand in this cases, would not 18 USC § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection be more applicable than treason?

Seems at the moment, their extremist ties were somewhat tied to Chechnya for which as far as I know, has never had any ambitions to expand their activities to the U.S. Seemingly, they are acting rather independent from any known 'enemy' for which the U.S. is involved in fighting. No other significant facts forthcoming, I think the elements of treason might be a bucket of worms to attempt. There would be to many constitutional risks pertaining to the definition of war on the one hand and constitutional definitions of waging war on the other hand. Probsably the highest levesl of constitutional experts void of any partisan politics would prefer this case proceed as is so far.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Unlawful combatants" ... meaning spies from a country we're at war with. Spies can be hanged ... "lawful combatants" are soldiers in uniforms. But now we hav a new catagory: "enemy combatants" ...
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Except this whole islamic war doesn't have nation states declaring war on each other as in WWII. Islam encompasses dozens of countries - some of which we have close ties with.

That's been the beauty of this war on the west from their point of view. They can send in people from China, the Philippines, Chechnya, doezens of Arab and European countries and attack anywhere against western targets.

It really is a planetary war and they are winning because the world apparently hasn't had enough of islamic attacks to go full boar on them. And the excuse about oil never has and certainly doesn't exist now.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yet another in the list of FDR's crimes against the Constitution.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
FDR's crime being commuting the sentences? Or do you speak of something else?
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
No, by his court appointees allowing tribunals to try American citizens as "unlawful combatants."
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
As Sarah Hoyt pointed out below, "...as a naturalized citizen, if I were to be found to have lied in my paperwork or in my oath, yes, the citizenship could be yanked." So if this terrorist received his citizenship on Sept 11, 2012 and it can be shown that he had been involved in planning for this bombing before that do you think his citizenship should be revoked so that he can be sent to Guantanamo and tried?
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
If it can be proven, yes. Nor do I have a problem with them waterboarding the little SOB, if it can be proven his citizenship is invalid.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
We have to follow the rule of law.

I defend the Bush administration's use of "enemy combatant" to justify the interrogation of foreign terrorists because they are not citizens and not under the protection of our laws. This does not apply to citizens. Tsarnaev is a citizen and not following the laws to the letter, with regards to our treatment of him, will merely give his lawyers ammunition to get him off. We have to do this lawfully to the letter, if we want to win it.

Besides, if we abandon the rule of law here, what precedent do we allow the government, when they decide to detain lawful gun owners, veterans, and tea partiers on the pretense of "public safety." This is a road we cannot go down.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
"This does not apply to citizens"

Oh, you're quite certain of that? Well the older brother was not a citizen. And the younger brother looks to have recently acquired citizenship under false pretenses. What we are learning is that the allegiances of these men laid not with America, and the U.S. Constitution, but, rather, with an international/transnational/supranational movement that uses terrorist actions against unarmed, unsuspecting civilian gatherings as its favored and oft-used mode of attack. These terrorists have brought large-scale, meticulously savage, civilian atrocity to Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, East Asia, Russia, South America, Western Europe, Canada, and the United States.

These two men, with others sure to follow, are not Americans if that designation actually means anything.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
We don't know for a fact that the younger brother's citizenship was gained under false pretenses and, until we do, it is better to err on the side of caution and assume he is a valid citizen. As for the older brother who's citizen was still pending; we didn't catch him. That makes his citizenship status irrelevant.

However, I would actually rather see a situation where the younger brother's citizenship is found invalid and we can do what we want with him. Until then, we must abide by the rule of law.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
I'm afraid I agree with you. This man is an American - regardless of how recent he became one. If we set precedent then they'll use to get us.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
This is why I say far better for us had the older brother been the survivor. He wasn't an American citizen.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 4 5 Next View All