Justice Scalia: Terror Ruling ‘Endangers Lives’

From Newsmax.com (June 18, 2008):

Scalia, in his blistering dissent to the constitutional decision, says the court majority is laying the groundwork for the early release of “some very dangerous people.” He cites a report by Senate Republicans that finds at least 30 prisoners have returned to the battlefield following their release from Guantanamo.

Scalia notes that one previously released prisoner from the detention camp in Cuba was found to have detonated a suicide bomb in Iraq in May. This "return to the kill," he says, happened even after the military had concluded he was not an enemy combatant. [more]

I agree with Scalia. He is dead on. The main purpose of a criminal trial is to determine guilt or innocence. Bin Laden has never denied he is the leader of Al Quada. Therefore he has confessed that he his guilty. To him he is not breaking any law--this is war to him and people like him. Since his guilt or innocence is not in question in my opinion we only have to decide his punishment once America captures him. A bullet in the head is what I choose for him. I don't think that is cruel and unusual punishment. It is quick and relatively painless.

Also, what happens if a terrorist is put on bail by a sympathetic judge? He won't just skip the country. He'll bring terrorism to this country. Homicide bombing anyone? This is what Justice Scalia is talking about. Homicide bombing is a better term than suicide bombing because the terrorist is not just killing himself.

Another issue is discovery. This is where the defense brings up evidence to support their case. That means bringing up sensitive to classified evidence about the terrorist and procedures of the military. Not to mention the defendant has the right to know who is accusing him. This ruling is a bad idea all around.