Even if he's insane, he shoudn't be killed for his Christianity, and we ought to extend him our loving care. You can be insane and a martyr too.

"Rahman is not always in full command of his faculties."

Neither was Joschka Fischer.

Neither is Moussaoui and we're going to whack him for his beliefs.

OJ:

I got the impression from the article that Rahman believes others want to kill him, not that he wants to kill others like Moussaoui?

Yes, the quality of their mental disorders varies, but not what the two societies wanted to do with them.

Well, if it's confirmed he's mentally disabled once he's safely a part of western society, we could always have Peter Singer take care of him in a similar way as the radical mullahs were proposing. Then it would merely be the cause, not the end result, that would be different.

Neither is Moussaoui and we're going to whack him for his beliefs.

Actually we are going to execute him for partcipating in a conspiracy that resulted in the deaths of over 3,000 people.

Why he did it is irrelevant.

Rahman believes others want to kill him???

Gee I wonder where he got that idea.

Especially if he decided to leave Islam.

Just because he's paranoid.....

And besides, Moosie is cooperating in making sure he gets whacked. If we really wanted to punish him, we'd stuff him into the cell between Noriega and Kaczynski and leave him there for the rest of his life.

The Lord moves in mysterious ways. This poor soul just set up a situation where the Islamic sytem of a mandatory death sentence lost - in full view of the world - while the bleating mob called for blood.

Pretty good work for a week or two. Islam loses, Jesus wins, Bush Wins.

Trifecta.

If they find him and kill him, he's a martyr, as well as another demonstration of just how nasty the current iteration of Islam is.

cg:

as so often in criminal law, we know that as a logical matter but it's completely unprovable as a legal one. Fortunately, we count on our fellow citizens to punish those who are sufficiently transgressive regardless of the evidence, and they generally do. Moussaoui will be put to death for what he believes, irrespective of what he did.

Fortunately, we count on our fellow citizens to punish those who are sufficiently transgressive regardless of the evidence,

We rely on lynch mobs, since when? That's an aspect of American jurisprdence I'm unfamiliar with.

cg:

Always. That's why whenever they look closely at death row cases it's so easy to blow holes in them.

Moosie is eligible for the death penalty, but our jurors are unlikely to give a death sentence to anyone who hasn't actually "pulled the trigger". He would most likely be "stuffed into the cell between Noriega and Kaczynski and leave him there for the rest of his life." Same thing happened to the blind sheik, and the guy(what's his name) who planned the first World Trade bombing that killed at least six. What's name is in solitary confinement ever since, he isn't even allowed to watch TV or know about 911.

Always. That's why whenever they look closely at death row cases it's so easy to blow holes in them.

Specific example if you please.

While you try to find one, you'll forgive me if I rate Lincoln's opinion higher than yours:

"I hope I am over wary; but if I am not, there is, even now, something of ill-omen, amongst us. I mean the increasing disregard for law which pervades the country; the growing disposition to substitute the wild and furious passions, in lieu of the sober judgment of Courts; and the worse than savage mobs, for the executive ministers of justice.
When men take it in their heads to-day, to hang gamblers, or burn murderers, they should recollect, that, in the confusion usually attending such transactions, they will be as likely to hang or burn some one who is neither a gambler nor a murderer as one who is; and that, acting upon the example they set, the mob of to-morrow, may, and probably will, hang or burn some of them by the very same mistake. And not only so; the innocent, those who have ever set their faces against violations of law in every shape, alike with the guilty, fall victims to the ravages of mob law; and thus it goes on, step by step, till all the walls erected for the defense of the persons and property of individuals, are trodden down, and disregarded.
But all this even, is not the full extent of the evil. — By such examples, by instances of the perpetrators of such acts going unpunished, the lawless in spirit, are encouraged to become lawless in practice; and having been used to no restraint, but dread of punishment, they thus become, absolutely unrestrained. — Having ever regarded Government as their deadliest bane, they make a jubilee of the suspension of its operations; and pray for nothing so much, as its total annihilation.
There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law. In any case that arises, as for instance, the promulgation of abolitionism, one of two positions is necessarily true; that is, the thing is right within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of all law and all good citizens; or, it is wrong, and therefore proper to be prohibited by legal enactments; and in neither case, is the interposition of mob law, either necessary, justifiable, or excusable."

He suspended habeus corpus so he could round up undesirables and waged a war that killed hundreds of thousands in order to make half the country confform to the political opinion of the other half. Dicey ciatation, no?

So what does emergency wartime measures have to do with yo claim that our criminal justice system is based on lynch mobs?