Lawyers for Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, a Tanzanian accused of helping to plot bloody 1998 attacks on US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, argue that his constitutional rights have been violated because he was denied a speedy trial. . . . His case is a test of President Barack Obama’s decision to close Guantanamo and end years of shadowy legal procedures against terrorism suspects. . . . New York is due to host the trial of five men accused of plotting the September 11, 2001 attacks against the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon outside Washington.

It did not require a fortune teller to predict this. The civilian trial of KSM will present similar problems.

Yes, I’m aware of that, Dan. I’ve read the Bill of Rights.

I’m also aware that the Bill of Rights doesn’t apply to foreign nationals in time of war.

If it did we couldn’t capture enemy soldiers or enemy equipment unless we had first secured warrants based on probable cause listing the people to be captured or the equipment to be seized (with probable cause being backed up by an oath or affirmation).

Enemy soldiers, terrorists, whatever don’t have any rights under the Constitution…including the right to a speedy trial.

They don’t have a right to peaceably assemble to petition the government for a redress of grievances, they don’t have the right to keep and bear arms, they don’t have the right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures…they don’t even have the right to breathe (if they did…then our soldiers couldn’t kill them without due process).

If they had any of those rights…then we couldn’t possibly fight a war.

The idea that captured soldiers, guerrilla, terrorists, etc. have any rights guaranteed under the Constitution is patently absurd.

The treatment of enemy nationals in wartime is covered by the laws and customs of war, such as the Geneva Conventions, and in the case of Al Qaida or Taliban guerrillas…they have essentially no rights at all. They never signed on to the Conventions, and they don’t follow the Conventions themselves…which pretty much makes them dead meat rightswise.

If we succeed in getting a conviction the show trial and the compromises to our nations security will be too steep of a price to pay. Even the liberals rabid desire to damage the Bush/Cheney/CIA reputation will disspoint them.

If we don’t get a conviction we will need to release them or we will damage our own legal system.

The solution to closing Gitmo is to not close Gitmo. But if we have to then there is one secure place where we are already keeping terrorists that have already caused more danage to the US and our securuty than any other terrorist in the history of the United States. We can put all of our bad eggs in one place:

The White House

Your response outs you as a sheltered, phobic cul-de-saced coward. Of course I’ve fought off muggers–I don’t anyone who hasn’t. Male, female, gay friends. Everyone I know has had at least one or two encounters where they faced off a mugger and walked away with their cash. And when they haven’t, they’ve given it away with dignity. I assume, from your response that such a situation is as plausible to you as meeting a vampire, that you would piss your sheltered little pants in such a situation.

I’m sorry? Who are you? “Anonymous?” I was talking to moho. Also, I’m not the pathological braggart here with the inflated ego who had to boast to everyone how brave he is in between bouts of trolling insults.

“# 86 Please enlighten us VIVO why would a MUSLIM want to kill the Sheik(.) after all they were dancing in the streets in ALL Mohammedan countries as they watched the Twin Towers fall.”

So he can get his 72 virgins . . . ?

LOL. Foreign nationals in time of war have as much right to a speedy and public trial as they have a right to be secure from unreasonable search and seizures.

Guess what?

In WWII we didn’t issue arrest warrants before we seized German soldiers (or spies, or whatever)…we just snagged the bastards, and all their stuff too. As a matter of fact, sometimes we just said the hell with seizing them and blew their damned brains out. No warrants or grand jury indictments or anything else required.

Sorry, the Constitution doesn’t apply to our enemies during wartime (or after wartime, come to that, judging by the post-war trials of the Germans and Japanese leadership).

Somebody alert the half-wits at the N.Y. Times, because apparently they haven’t figured this out yet. And cc the Obama administration; they seem to have some trouble grasping this as well.