>>Eric Holder may turn out to be Obama's Rumsfeld. I do not predict a good outcome in this more than bone-headed decision.
>>
>>
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704888404574547681569546414.html?mod=googlenews_wsj>
>I agree with the writer that most of the questions asked by the reps were reasonable, but for one. What in heaven's name kind of question is this:
How can we be assured that these enemies will be found guilty?>
>Is this why they want a military trial? In order to assure a guilty verdict? Why bother with a trial at all - civil or military? Just pronounce them guilty and be done with it.
And here we thought the most dangerous trial to have to serve jury duty on would be for a mobster!
.·*´¨)
.·`TCH
(..·*
010000110101001101101000011000010111001001110000010011110111001001000010011101010111001101110100
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates
Vita contingit, Vive cum eo. (Life Happens, Live With it.)
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away." -- author unknown
"De omnibus dubitandum"
