Reply With QuoteI have no idea how you could come up with the idea that it wasn't.Originally Posted by [WDW]Megaraptor
![[WDW]Megaraptor is online now](images/statusicon/user-online.png)
![[WDW]Megaraptor's Avatar](image.php?s=96df19e9209db937bb20ada7ac92f8a8&u=30547&dateline=1171465900 "[WDW]Megaraptor's Avatar")
Attacking the Pentagon was a civilian crime?
I have no idea how you could come up with the idea that it wasn't.
It is a jurisdictional issue. There are a lot of civilian courts in the US, they all have a specific jurisdiction. In this case it is in the military jurisdiction.
Why?
............
That is how it goes. There are thousands of jurisdictions in the US. City is probably the lowest ranking, all the way up to Federal. It is not that the attacker violated local, state and federal laws, it was a attack on the US. That falls under the military to handle. Look where there are held, at a military facility. It is not all black and white, they can be remanded to another court, there is politics on a federal level, etc. Jurisdictions also fight each other over who has right to be the court of first instance/original jurisdiction. There is a lot more to this, a lawyer would be a better person to answer your questions. You can also research the court system in the US. Law is highly defined in the US and where it over laps, it can be contested.
Quite Simple really, Cops didnt arrest them. there were taken Prisoner by the Military in operational zones as unlawful combatants. The requirement for trial is fulfilled by the Military Commissions Act of 2009.
Complaints?
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
or call
Comments: 202-456-1111Switchboard: 202-456-1414
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/su...s-and-comments
KSM was "taken prisoner" in Pakistan in 2003 by the ISI, not by the US military.
Simple enough even for you
Our People Attacked
Our Country
Our Laws
Dont like that?
See the padre
Who arrest him does not define jurisdiction. A city cop can arrest someone for desertion. The local jail will only house the person until the agents for the correct jurisdiction pick them up for transport to the court of first incident/court that has jurisdiction of the issue.
Supposedly DSS were there too, though it's murky.
Your skills at debating a point put up for discussion are simply amazing. Thanks for your contribution.
There is nothing to debate, all of this is define by the laws of the US. If there is any debate, it is probably beyond the scope of any members here who do not have a law degree and practice law in this field.
US laws has some of the best oversight in the world. Out side of political bantering, the rule of law will prevail.
This is MilPhotos, everything is within everyone's scope, even the stuff they don't know about. I didn't make the point about being a point of law, I made the point of "should be." It's not a legal point at all.
Not even trying to debate you as you have your position and are busily trolling it here. You and I have no decision making process here. This is what the US law says and this is how the US law will be done. Not hypothetically, or altruistically, but in reality.
your contstant version of But why? has been answered but you dont like the answer you got.
What more needs to be said?
"Should be" is your opinion. US law doesn't seem to agree. Don't see what the confusion is.
I'm not trolling but that seems to be your "go to" answer for everything, doesn't it?
Posting Permissions
