On August 8, 1942, six men, including a naturalized American citizen, were executed by electrocution after having been found guilty in a military tribunal of spying and sabotage for the Nazis during World War II (the other two involved had their death sentences commuted for turning in the others). This was following the Supreme Court's Ex Parte Quirin decision being released to the FDR administration a little more than a week earlier (it wasn't officially released for a further three months). While there is no evidence to support this, it remains unlikely that the Nazis harbored any more "grievances" against the U.S. than they already had, considering Hitler had declared war on the U.S. nine months earlier.
Via Glenn Reynolds, Bridget Johnson has a post at PJ Media about the trial of U.S.S. Cole terrorist Ayman al-Rahim al-Nashiri where the Obama DoJ is trying to request a competency review, apparently to avoid having a trial. Initially, the regime dropped its charges against al-Nashiri in order to facilitate ending military tribunals and moving all the terrorists at Gitmo to the civilian courts. When the public outcry against such trials were answered by the regime, the DoD refiled its charges in 2010 and al-Nashiri was going to face a military tribunal, with a potential death sentence carried out if the terrorist is convicted. There still hasn't been a trial, and it looks like Obama doesn't want one. In this sentence, Johnson may have the reason why [emphasis mine]:
If al-Nashiri was found guilty, the government would be under pressure to hand down the maximum possible penalty in the attack that killed 17 American sailors in October 2000. That would mean putting an al-Qaeda figure to death, something the U.S. may be unwilling to do especially as the administration has put a premium on building relations in the Muslim world — though appeals would surely spill into future administrations before such a sentence could be carried out.
I think the highlighted portion is true. The Obama regime is still carrying out drone strikes, and it is highly likely the attack on Benghazi last year was carried out in response. Carrying out a sentence of death against al-Nashiri would add to the ever-growing phony-baloney "grievances" the terrorists have against the U.S.: we support Israel; we have troops on Muslim holy ground (Saudi Arabia); we invaded Afghanistan; we invaded Iraq; we overthrew Mossadegh fifty years ago; we supported the Shah of Iran; we supported tyrannical regimes in the Arab world; the American people don't submit to Islam like good little dhimmi; blah, blah, blah. And yet, the Obama regime is so afraid of having bad press in the Islamist world the regime will make it a point to violate the First Amendment regularly, as it did when trying to prevent Korans from being burned and having one of the people involved in making an insignificant and hardly-watched anti-Islamist film targeted and trying to force YouTube to shut it down (the regime was lucky the one person they knew about was violating his parole; by contrast, there have been no arrests of any terrorist for the Benghazi murders, nor anyone from the State Department fired for their criminal negligence).
There is a hard truth that must be accepted. Islam has a problem and the U.S. is doing everything it can to enable the problem. A friend of mine said it isn't ordinary Muslims who are the problem, but the leaders of the Islamic and Islamist world; I believe he was right, up to a point. A huge number of Muslim leaders across the globe insist the terrorists who commit murder in the name of Islam are still Muslims, and publicly proclaim it. That is why within the Muslim world, there are a huge amount of radical preachers, a far greater percentage than exist in every other religion; worse, they have a huge sway on the opinion of Muslim leaders and on a healthy percentage of their adherents. By comparison, one of the worst groups of radicals claiming to be Christian is the Westboro Baptist Church, but they are shunned by all sides and have no influence outside of their little circle of fellow radicals.
Unfortunately, the spineless "leadership" in the federal government still insists on coddling the radicals. The Obama regime still insists on dealing with Palestinian terrorists who have never shown an inclination on wanting to let Israel remain Israel, a problem exacerbated by the Bush administration for insisting on elections in the West Bank and Gaza. Iraq is a mess. Iran is close to a nuclear weapon, one that could possibly reach the U.S. Syria is being overrun by terrorists, which has hardened the Hezbollah animals running Lebanon. And then there is North Africa: the Obama regime helped to get terrorists to run Egypt; the Obama regime messed up Mali, which required French intervention; there was a terrorist attack in Algeria that left Americans dead. With Libya, the Obama regime decided not to inform Congress or the American people it was going to unilaterally overthrow Qaddafi, then left a huge swath of the country in the hands of terrorists, terrorists who murdered a U.S. ambassador and other Americans. Despite all that, Obama still wants to make nice with the barbarians.
With the ability to get at the vast reserves of oil within our country through fracking, there is even less of a reason for babying these bastards as Obama is doing. Other than protecting our country from a potential nuclear attack from Iran and protecting Israel, I would announce to the world the U.S. doesn't care if Muslim leaders want to slaughter their own people into oblivion. But thanks to Obama, our country is going to continue to be under threat from these uncivilized 8th Century throwbacks Obama is enabling.
Cross-posted at Scipio the Metalcon.