I find this really bizarre. Somehow, according to Andy McCarthy, treating terrorists like common criminals is imparting onto them some majesty:
"So, according to the judge, if you kill more people than the Japanese killed at Pearl Harbor, and you do it by flouting the laws of war — i.e., you don't identify yourself as a warrior, you don't carry your weapons openly, you target civilians and civilian infrastructure for mass-destruction attacks, and you further endanger civilians by hiding among them, making retaliation and capture difficult — we should reward you with all the majesty of the Bill of Rights and all the privileges of the citizens you have massacred. Very sensible."
Really? If you flout the laws of war, then you are a criminal. Treating them as anything but a criminal imparts majesty and force to them; treating them like the lowlifes they are says they are nothing. They are not even as important as the muggers in our cities.
To be treated as a combatant is a special honor. It says that those we are fighting behaved as soldiers, and are thus deserving of rights beyond those of the ordinary criminal. Treating like as "unlawful combatants" just says they are soldiers we want to torture. Terrorists are nothing of the sort; they are criminals, and should be tried as such.
This is further proof of the idea that conservatives have actually become terrified, and that the terrorists have succeeded with that portion of society. Get over it! We can maintain our country and its glorious traditions without granting some special status of invincible soldier to our enemies.