Justice Jackson's precedent setting opinion on trying unlawful combatants

Was 9/11 any different from Operation Pastorius? If not, then why are KSM and his crew being treated any differently?

When President Roosevelt was faced with foreign combatants on U.S. soil the Supreme Court weighed-in.

“…the law of war draws a distinction between the armed forces and the peaceful populations of belligerent nations and also between those who are lawful and unlawful combatants. The spy …, or an enemy combatant who without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property, are familiar examples of belligerents who are generally deemed not to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals.”

Read full:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Quirin

Operation Pastorius (1942) was a failed plan for sabotage via a series of attacks by Nazi German agents inside the United States against strategic U.S. economic targets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pastorius

Attorney General Holder’s decision to essentially convey U.S. citizenship on Kahlid Sheik Mohammad and co-conspirators is an outrage to precedent, to our founding fathers and to you and me. Past Military War Crimes Tribunals have set standards:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/24/opinion/24iht-edgerson.html?_r=1

Express yourself: http://www.keepamericasafe.com/

Sign the petition.

Political Theater?

How is it possible for an Islamic Terrorist to hide in the United States Army, in plain sight in  for as long as Maj Nidal Malik Hasan did? How is it possible that an Army officer could repeatedly state his fervent belief that killing U.S. soldiers in the name of Allah is acceptable? Major Nidal Malik Hasan did before he killed 14 souls at Fort Hood.
That the Obama administration has 'blown off' this event as mere crime by a nut case, or the last pathetic cry for help by a victim of Pre Traumatic Stress Disorder is just wrong. From one side of the Presidential teleprompter comes: "resist the temptation to turn this tragic event into political theater." From the other side, his decision to bring Khalid Sheik Mohammad and his crew to civilian trial in NYC. Political Theater? Huh?

Does this contradiction bother you Representative Harman?

The Fort Hood massacre is the most deadly act of terror on our shores since 2001 plain and simple.

Representative Harman you effectively exerted your leadership in protecting 'us' after 9/11. This latest event and the Administration's cavalier dismissal of it cannot sit well with you.

I support Representative Peter Hoekstra's call for a Congressional review of the documentary evidence in the Hasan case. Do you?

How many more 'Hasans' are there in our military? In civilian life? One of my greatest fears is that the U.S. has been significantly compromised by Islamic terrorist sleepers. Since jihad is a personal commitment - involvement with others is not necessary for an act of jihad to be terrorism. The Ft. Hood 14 are just as dead as if an entire Al Qaeda or Hamas squad had attacked them. So what's the difference?

How bad is it? Does anyone care? Director of Homeland Security Napolitano's concerns about 'home grown' terrorism are more concentrated on people who attend tea parties, and Ron Paul rallies than in identifying Islamic militants in our midst. Why is that?

President Bush presented a case that militants were trying desperately to infiltrate our society yet he refused to close the borders. What's up with that Representative Harman? There's a huge disconnect between reality and government.

Is anyone in charge? Or is the new administration still too drunk on its new found power to effectively govern?

Are you listening?

Playa del Rey, CA