Less Upset

A short, but relatively good explanation of what is going on legally with the KSM trial.

At first, I was taken aback by the decision of the Obama Administration to bring KSM to trial for a criminal act. Why would you bring to trial someone who already has admitted his his guilt and wants to be executed? Why would you bring a military prisoner who is a soldier in a war against the US to a US Federal Court to be tried on criminal charges? Why would KSM and a few other Guantanamo Detainees be held criminally liable, but the large majority remain in military court? What if he is found "not guilty" or "criminally insane" - are we really going to let KSM go? The whole idea seemed puzzling at first - and partisan - a way to reopen the waterboarding issue and indict the Bush Administration's handling of terrorism. Am I being a paranoid right winger? I don't know. Also related - what is the point of closing Gitmo in the way we are doing it? First of all, the legal standing of the detainees whether they are in Gitmo or elsewhere will be the same. Secondly, it just looks silly promising to close Gitmo and then not actually doing it.

But the above article explains the strategy of the Obama administration - try the easy cases in Fed Court and the tough ones in military court. All of it seems to be about sending a message...what exactly the message is...well...