administration can do, but i think they need to make the case. remember at the height, martha, of the problems that the british had with terror attacks from the ira, they created a special set of courts named for a fabled british judge named lord diplock. they didn t use the formal process for certain signs of cases. rehave military tribunals to try suspects but this administration has been very much disinclined to go that route with other cases. we ve tried a lot of cases successfully through our normal criminal justice system. but the argument this has certainly resumed the argument whether that is an adequate way ta to go and whether it 0 wouldn t be better to declare him a even knee combatant. you can try him in either place if you call him that. we ll have a serious debate over
nobody. you heard from senator mcconnell he doesn t like the civilian trial. the human rights activists who worry about the maltreatment of prisoners and so on are not amused by the fact that we held this guy without telling anybody and certainly without granting him any rights while he was interrogated for a month or so before, you know, he was finally informed of his rights and began to be treated like a criminal defendant. so it s kind of a hybrid case. it s a little bit unusual case . he s not an even knee combatant as we usually think of that, jon because he wasn t picked up on the battlefield. it appears from the charge that he s a gun runner, to put it rather inexactly. that would fit within the jurisdiction of a military tribunal if they wanted to use that because he s supporting enemy terrorist operations or potential terrorist operations, but he s in the accused of participating in a plot to