So, BUZZARD, if that's "terrorism", how is that different from what the CEO of Xe or a CIA operations planner does?

-DA 

So, BUZZARD, if that's "terrorism", how is that different from what the CEO of Xe or a CIA operations planner does?

Name which actions of KSM constitute terrorism. Also, list where this is covered by US law or the Geneva Convention. Good luck.

-DA 

For starters,  let's start with the admitted barbaric beheading of Daniel Pearl, which you seem to have overlooked. 

 

 

swhitebull  

hmm KSM in a federal court

add

 

conspiracy to commit murder times 5 (at least 5 distinct incidents)

accessory to murder times a buttload.

/but a military tribunal is still the most appropriate venue.

 

You seem to have gone over the deep end here. Are you actually saying that KSM's actions are no different then what you your self have been doing for the past few years? If so then either you have lost it or you are a murdering psychopath killing innocent people without regard. Either way honestly, i hope your above comments have raised a few red flags with the military investigators because you might need some help.

 

Tell me when was the last time the CIA or Blackwater intentionally murdered 3k innocent civilians. Your really starting to sound like the ultra left loony liberals, soon you'll be telling us it was really GWB that plotted 9/11.

 

And NO KSM is nor was at any time a legitimate combatant. He was a coward that hide behind innocent human shields, after plotting the mass murder of innocent CIVILIANS in an event that served no strategic purpose other then terrorizing a non hostile population.

 

The difference between 9/11 and Pearl Harbor is that PH was a NAVAL base! the WTC was a civilian complex. Despite what you think KSM is a text book definition of a terrorist:

 

From U.S. Code title 22 chapter 38 ss 2656f  Annual country reports on terrorism.

Definitions

Jesus, some of these responses...okay let me calm down. Look, most of you have no idea what a war is or what it means to kill people. And I hope you never have to. I do, and because of that, let me explain to you a few things. You are viewing warfare through the eyes of a westerner. OUR ENEMY DOES NOT. You can look at it one of two ways. They have EVOLVED TO A SUPERIOR WARRIOR MINDSET, OR WE HAVE DEVOLVED TO THE INFERIOR. I'm not advocating the needless death of innocents. But what I am saying is that most of you are a lot like the British during the American Revolution wearing your Red Coats and Standing in formation while partisans are sniping at your Officers and NCOs. The Only difference between then and now is that rather than Red Coats we wear ACUs. Rather than formations we have FOBs. People like KSM don't bother to fight in a way they have no hope to win. Rather they study our weaknesses and exploit! That's CLASSIC WARFARE. It's why after 8 years we are locked in a stalemate. That doesn't mean I'm saying the Army should slaughter innocents. But I am saying that to win traditional western style methods won't work. 



Legitimate to whom? You? Some western nation state initiated treaty? LOL. KSM will wipe his behind with that legal nonsense. A "legit combatant" is anybody with a weapon or a plan to harm US interest. KSM is no coward. He is a warrior using unconventional warfare and terror tactics to his advantage. Or do you really think a non state actor can fight head up with a nation state? Use your brain man.

Yeah, except not everybody has agreed to fight by the rules of our text books. By the way, what was Nanking, Hiroshima or how about the civilian targets we attacked in Kosovo? The WTC was an economic target. AQ went after the Political, Military and Economic Headquarters of the United States for the purpose of inflicting a critical blow that would SHOCK us into retreat and motivate other Muslims to join their cause. We aren't going to win this war preaching to the choir!

 

That's not terrorism. And it isn't murder either. Because if it was, you would have to PROVE THAT. And his confession isn't worth spit because he wasn't mirandized and he was tortured to get that information. It was an act of war however since the actual intended target was the USG. Daniel Pearl was simply collateral damage. Much like when a JDAM explodes in a country we are bombing and kills civilians.

-DA 

Then you woulndt mind if I lured you into a trap, captured you, and sawed off your head, would you Darth?  wouldnt be murder or terrorism by YOUR standards. But dont' darecall it Terrorism while you are screaming, OK? What a really wonderfully logical position you take, not worthy of even a high school debate club event.

That comment of yours is SO disingenuous as to be beneath contempt, and I'm being kind to contempt. You really have no clue as to the accepted conventional definitions of terrorism or murder, do you.? And are so caught up in defending your Eric Holder/OBAMA messiah positions that you cant even see the ethical and legal bankruptcy of what you are saying.?

 

I havent written much on these boards in a while, but I have a whole body of work written here over the years defining the legal framework of terrorism, the Geneva Protocols and their codicils and addendums, and just why such acts - whether YOU consider a Mirandized KSM valid or not  - doe not amount to the amount of spit , bile and knots that your tortuous attempts to call a SPADE A SPADE -  or a terrorist a terrorist - try to whitewash or excuse. That's MY area of study - international law, politics, and the Middle East. And from everything Ive seen you post, you are neither knowledgeable nor informed about terrorism, intl law, politics, nor the Middle East.  There's opinion, which you are good at - and INFORMED opinion, which you are woefully lacking in. I suppose you have a lengthy legal background to justify such a blatantly ignorant comment that you made, since to make such is to be laughed out of any court on the face of it - unless, of course, one is  a koolaid-drinking moron, or a liberal Obama-cultist,  but I repeat myself.

 

I suggest you read up on it - starting with former Prosecutor of the Blind Sheikh of WTC 1 infamy Andrew McCarthy, who knows more about murder and terrorism that you could ever aspire to define. He literally wrote the book about prosecuting terrorists, and under what authorities -  Willful Blindness. You MIGHT want to read anything by Steve Emerson as well.

To paraphrase an esteemed Supreme Court justice, I know a terrorist when I see it. - and a blowface when I see one as well.

 

 

Fortunately, there ARE people in our country that DO recognize terrorism and murder for what they are, and are doing what they can to protect the people of this country. You might be better off crawling under a rock, and ignoring facts and truths

 

 

swhitebull -  people can sleep peaceably in their beds at night because rough men are willing to do violence on their behalf.  Take heed.

Then you should have specified. As to private contractors, they are being investigated for civilian casualties they commit. If they are unavoidable in the context of a legitimate military operation, they will likely be excused. 

 

You evidently have no idea of what the term 'legitimate combatant' means. I mean none whatsoever. There's a reason we didn't sign the latter protocols to the Geneva Convention, and it's because by granting some measure of legitimate status you encourage people to contravene the recognized rules of war. KSM does not in any instance follow any of these agreed upon rules, and as such should not merit any of their protections. It was a movement by the moronic leftist elites of Europe that created those latter protocols to protect Third World terrorists, thugs, and bandits for no other reason than that they were fighting the evil westerners.

 

You are cracked. Also your knowledge of history (which seems par for you knowledge in general) is piss poor. You might recall we had war trials for the Japanese leaders that perpetrated Pearl Harbor (which counted as one crime among the many others). They were found guilty and executed. The events of 9/11 make Pearl Harbor look like a kindly romp in the park. Purposefully targeting civilians is not a legitimate wartime activity. If you somehow think it is, I worry greatly about any unit you happened to be in.

 

The above bilge you just posted is the most sorry excuse for rational analysis I've seen. You've just legitimized any criminal act. ANY CRIMINAL ACT. It doesn't matter what someone does, as long as they say it's for Christ, Allah, or the giant spaghetti monster, it's OK in your book evidently. That is utter insanity.

 

The expansion of the laws of war to cover people who don't care about rules was one of the dumbest notions of the late 20th century. Yes, people are going to use those means because they might work. However they should not be given a pass for doing so, and the protections afforded those who do behave in a legitimate fashion in war should not be extended to those that don't.