"He'll have a fair trial. THEN we'll hang him."

Over at The Politic Li'l Rascals Treehouse, Martin Street has no patience with that whole "fair trial" nonsense:

It is absolutely unthinkable, absolutely impossible, that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will leave the courtroom in New York a free man. The Supreme Court finding that some of the techniques used in his interrogation constitute torture will surely come up, and in a normal case this would sink the prosecution. It will not have a bearing on the outcome of this case. There can be no other outcome but a finding of guilt and a sentence of death. As it was for Saddam Hussein, so too shall it be for KSM.

Does it bother anyone else that Martin seems positively gleeful about that? That's just creepy.

AH, THE LINGUISTIC WEASELITUDE: You have to love the semantic shiftiness of Canada's Blogging Adolescents, when they use annoyingly vague language like (emphasis added):

It proposes that any number of activities committed on foreign soil, tantamount to acts of war, should ultimately be treated as domestic criminal matters within the American civilian court system.

I'm sorry ... "tantamount" to acts of war? How conveniently ... nebulous. Come on, Martin, take a stand -- are they acts of war or aren't they? Because given how the Geneva Conventions govern behaviour during times of, you know, war, I think it's pretty important to characterize whether we're officially at war or not, don't you think?

That kind of pathetically ambiguous language is what you expect from dishonest shysters like the pro-life yokels who, when you ask them directly if abortion is murder, will most likely weasel themselves into a coma with a response like, "Well, it's tantamount to murder."

So, really, Martin, you're being a pussy here. If you want to make an argument, then define your terms and stand by them. Trying to argue with a metaphorical mouthful of marbles is just unbecoming.