KSM Needs to Die-- in Order to Prove Our Belief in Due Process

Obama isn't ruling out a New York trial of Khalid Sheik Mohammed-- although there are "logistical issues involved."

Here's an interesting editorial from the New York Post (h/t Michelle Malkin).

From the article:

"White House spokesman Robert Gibbs declared last week that 9/11 kingpin KSM 'is going to meet justice, and he’s going to meet his maker and he’s likely to be executed for the heinous crimes that he committed.'

"And President Obama himself said something similar last November, declaring of KSM: 'I don’t think that it will be offensive at all when he’s convicted and the death sentence is applied to him.'

"Now, obviously KSM is guilty, and richly deserves to die.

"Indeed, he and his comrades offered to plead guilty before military tribunals — and to accept the death penalty.

"But now that Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have decided, in order to prove that America really is committed to civil liberties, to try these killers in civilian court, they need to . . . well, respect civil liberties.

"Loose talk like that from Gibbs and Obama is a hanging curveball for defense lawyers determined to exploit every single one of KSM & Co.'s new constitutional rights."

But beyond the legal wrangling, which is by no means an insignificant thing, what exactly are Gibbs and Obama saying? Yeah, I know. They're talking tough for the cameras... but what is their logic here?

According to their own words they are saying that the US government should extend to these terrorists civil liberties that they don't have-- in order to take them away from the terrorists, and then execute them after an all but pre-determined show trial.

This is the logic that's supposed to make the US look great in the eyes of the world again? Seriously?