Terrorists in US Courts, get off?

This is frustrating and perhaps a good argument for not trying international criminal terrorists in US courts. To begin with, our courts pretty much, in many ways, well, suck. And we really don't need to be letting terrorists off, or to have our same rights. Because, they have no US rights, so do not, try to give them to these people. 

They do however, have Human rights. There's a difference. We should treat them like Human beings, but we should also dole out appropriate punishment. Terrorism and their advocates are a special class of criminal. Handling them as a civil criminal, is frankly, a little insane, or at best case, ignorant and childish. Leaving them alive, in jail, forever, can give them a kind of bully pulpit to preach from, to become a leader to others on their side, on the out side of prison and can make them a kind of living, speaking martyr. 

Let's not do that. Just remember, do not look at terrorists, as the kind of criminal you are used to. Consider that in movies, remember how the anti terrorists work with city cops, go up against the terrorists and the city cops try to handle it like the terrorists are civil criminals, and they die, or let them escape? Rewatch the Sylvester Stallone, Billy Dee Williams, Rutger Hauer film from the 80s, Nighthawks. Regardless of what you think of that film as popular medium, it has an antiterrorist from Europe who tries to train the city cops, and repeatedly fails, until they finally get it. And that's the point.

Terrorists are not to be handled like normal criminals.

"A federal jury in Manhattan acquitted the first Guantanamo Bay prison detainee to face a civilian court of all but one of the charges he faced.
NPR's Dina Temple-Raston reports:

"It took a Manhattan jury seven days to find Ahmed Ghailani guilty of just one count of conspiracy and acquit him of murder and terrorism charges.
Prosecutors said Ghailani bought a truck and explosives for the bombing before he left Africa and hid in Pakistan.
The defense said Ghailani was a dupe and had no idea that he was helping with a terrorism plot for al-Qaeda."

"Federal prosecutors had charged Ghailani with 276 murder and attempted murder counts in connection with the 1998 attacks on U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, which killed 224 people, including a dozen Americans." by Eyder Peralta

I think this is a good argument to not try this type of crime in a court that will only find them guilty of 1 out of hundred of crimes against Humanity. Perhaps the World Court is the place; a court where this is handled and has been handled well, in the past. But to do that, we need to follow certain guidelines and perhaps that is part of the problem in this current situation.

But I would argue, they need to either execute them on the spot, or treat them appropriately so they can be tried, and sentenced for the crimes they have committed; and not be able to wiggle away. Those arrested by the Military, need to be handled by the Military, don't they?