Military tribunals were established in the wake of 9/11. But, even if that wasn't true, Padilla, who was stopped a few months after Reid, was given the full military treatment you adore so much.
As I correctly stated, the order allowing military tribunals was signed in November 2001. Reid was arrested about a month later. At that time, the details of how the military tribunals would be handled were not in place.
Although, I would point out that the central issue here is whether the enemy combatant was believed to have useful information. I cannot say about Reid, but we know this fellow did have.
Why you bring Padilla into it, I don't know. As you yourself pointed out his arrest was months after Reid's.
I would also point out it isn't a matter of "adoring" one process over the other. It is a matter of employing the correct tool for a given job. Obviously, the criminal justice system was not the best tool for the job with the underwear bomber. And I've yet to see anyone make a rational case for it.
It boils down to the hard questions that Lindsay Graham asked Holder (who he supported) about the NYC trials. It is the same concept. You don't put these guys into the criminal justice system willy-nilly. There may be circumstances where that is okay, but first, and most important, you need to be able to harshly interrogate people who may have information that can save American lives.
Hopefully, the UW bomber was bullshitting. But if we go down the road a month and lose a plane to a bombing it is going to be on Obama and he's not going to be able to blame anyone else. And no amount of looking "angry" and mean talk to his cabinet is going to make it okay. |
