« BHO's Birth Certificate Released at Last | Main | Save the Planet: Pee Outside »

If it meant hooking up battery leads to a terrorist balls to save 1 American life, all I have to say about that is "red's positive and black's negative." And don't forget to wet em down first!

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/05/alan-keyes-among-21-arrested-at-notre-dame-in-obama-protest.html

I need an open thread.
Alan Keyes arrested for protesting that Barack Obama was speaking at Notre Dame.

Just shoot them.

None of these guys care just as long as they get reelected.

The NEW YORK SLIMES is the biggist terrorists propeganda news paper in american but there certianl are others just as bad

Watching suggests.."just shoot them"

That would sure take care of the recidivism issue.....none of 'em would ever do it again. It'd be cheaper, too.

Lindsey Graham and John McCain (who can hardly be called a hardcore right winger, but knows a thing or two about being a POW) authored an Op-Ed piece for Friday's Wall Street Journal that's worth reading:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124157680630090517.html

The whole article is worth reading; here's three of the key points:

First, do not confuse war with common criminality. The detainees held at Guantanamo are not common criminals, but warriors the vast majority of whom are fundamentally committed to the destruction of our way of life. The appropriate legal foundation upon which detainee policy should be built is the law of war, along with procedures adapted from our military justice system.

- Second, military commissions remain the appropriate trial venue for these individuals. We would strenuously oppose any effort to try enemy combatants in our civilian courts. By an overwhelming bipartisan vote in 2006, Congress passed the Military Commissions Act, which set forth procedures for trying enemy combatants for war crimes.

Our domestic criminal laws -- including their treatment of classified information -- are ill-suited for the complex national security issues inherent in the trial of enemy combatants. We have great faith in our military justice system -- appropriately modified for war crimes trials -- and we believe that military judges and lawyers render fair and impartial justice not only for our troops, but for enemy combatants as well.

- Third, preventive detention will continue to have a place in the war on terror . Under the law of war, the idea that an enemy combatant has to be tried or released is a false choice. Rather, it is well-established that combatants can be held off the battlefield as long as they present a military threat.

you mean they didn't provide answers when we asked "pretty please"??

These are the types of people that would do anything to destroy this country and to kill its citizen. The only thing they know is death.

Just shoot them. Plain and simple.

If the Obama Administration had named that clip it would be called, "Meet your new neighbors"...

Obama administration refuses to end air strikes in Afghanistan

Impeach Obamahitler!!! Stop Obama's war for oil and imperiali$m!11!!! End the war crimes!!111!!111one!!one

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The trouble with torture methods (other than moral implications) is that there is a serious epistemological gap. Quite literally, people will confess to anything under torture, in order to get it to stop. Information obtained in such a way is always going to be unreliable. You might think its justifiable when you already know the person is guilty- but then if you know the person is guilty then what kind of confirmation are you going to get from torturing them?

Also, in becoming a nation that condones the use of torture, that nation is more open to moral repugnation, and thereby be more likely to be threatened. Nobody is declaring a holy war against Finland and I don't think the reason is the cold weather.

J.D. writes,

...."You might think its justifiable when you already know the person is guilty- but then if you know the person is guilty then what kind of confirmation are you going to get from torturing them?"....and, "Also, in becoming a nation that condones the use of torture, that nation is more open to moral repugnation, and thereby be more likely to be threatened."

That is why the US doesn't torture people. We may use corecive interrogation techniques, but we don't torture.

Every coercive technique we use with our opponents (including the infamous waterboarding) is used on our own troops in training.

The US military has always been careful with such things, for both humanitarian reasons and for the safety of our own troops.

The few exceptions to this we have seen in our history are abberations, and usually have resulted in a trip to the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth.