This is a tough question, here's all my knee-jerks:
If we are arresting him in order to "bring him to justice" in a court system, I suppose it is necessary to jump through the hoop.
It's my personal belief that OBL believes that he is at war with the US. In that case, it seems we should treat him under the rules of war. I don't believe they require Miranda.
As far as Geneva, I have read it a couple of times and my impression is that it only applies to people who identify with a country, fly the flag of that country, and wear a uniform. One would have a difficult time saying a loosely banded, multi-national, geographically disbursed band of thugs meets that standard.
It's admirable that we strive to extend our standards and rights to all people, but I believe one receives US Constitutional rights only when one is on US soil.
Miranda would only protect the person after arrest anyway. Everything they did or said prior would still be admissible.
Honestly, I'd prefer he perish during a military operation. I can't foresee any improvement of the US in the world view coming from the absolute circus an OBL trial would become. If the previous terror trials are any example of what's to come, the OBL trial would more or less be the most expensive Jerry Springer episode ever made.
__________________
Gives a man a halo, does mead.
"Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."
Last edited by Cimarron29414; 04-22-2010 at 09:03 AM..
|