|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 |
QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED
|
PACNWguy 
User ID: 688273
 United States
11/17/2009 12:28 AM
Report abusive post | QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED
| Quote |
Pat Buchanan makes a very interesting point. We dont have the right to go around killing mobsters because they are protected under the constitution and have a right to due process. When we are at war, we can go kill terrorists and others with bombs at will. Yet liberals believe that if they live, they should be given a trial with the same protections as a us citizen.
ITS NOT FUCKING LOGICAL TO GIVE TERRORISTS TRIALS IN US COURTS NO MORE THAN IT WOULD BE LOGICAL TO GIVE A DOG A TRIAL IN DISTRICT COURT.
-------------------------------------------------
Is America at war, or not?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: November 16, 2009
Patrick Buchanan
Are we at war – or not?
For if we are at war, why is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed headed for trial in federal court in the Southern District of New York? Why is he entitled to a presumption of innocence and all of the constitutional protections of a U.S. citizen?
Is it possible we have done an injustice to this man by keeping him locked up all these years without trial? For that is what this trial implies – that he may not be guilty.
And if we must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that KSM was complicit in mass murder, by what right do we send Predators and Special Forces to kill his al-Qaida comrades wherever we find them? For none of them has been granted a fair trial.
When the Justice Department sets up a task force to wage war on a crime organization like the Mafia or MS-13, no U.S. official has a right to shoot Mafia or gang members on sight. No one has a right to bomb their homes. No one has a right to regard the possible death of their wives and children in an attack as acceptable collateral damage.
Yet that is what we do to al-Qaida, to which KSM belongs.
We conduct those strikes in good conscience because we believe we are at war. But if we are at war, what is KSM doing in a U.S. court?
Minoru Genda, who planned the attack on Pearl Harbor, a naval base on U.S. soil, when America was at peace, and killed nearly as many Americans as the Sept. 11 hijackers, was not brought here for trial. He was an enemy combatant under the Geneva Conventions and treated as such.
When Maj. Andre, the British spy and collaborator of Benedict Arnold, was captured, he got a military tribunal, after which he was hanged. When Gen. Andrew Jackson captured two British subjects in Spanish Florida aiding renegade Indians, Jackson had both tried and hanged on the spot.
Enemy soldiers who commit atrocities are not sent to the United States for trial. Under the Geneva Conventions, soldiers who commit atrocities are shot when caught.
When and where did Khalid Sheikh Mohammed acquire his right to a trial by a jury of his peers in a U.S. court?
When John Wilkes Booth shot Abraham Lincoln, alleged collaborators like Mary Surratt were tried before a military tribunal and hanged at Fort McNair. When eight German saboteurs were caught in 1942 after being put ashore by U-boat, they were tried in secret before a military commission and executed, with the approval of the Supreme Court. What makes KSM special?
Is the Obama administration aware of what it is risking by not turning KSM over to a military tribunal in Guantanamo?
How does Justice handle a defense demand for a change of venue, far from lower Manhattan, where the jury pool was most deeply traumatized by Sept. 11? Would not KSM and his co-defendants, if a change of venue is denied, have a powerful argument for overturning any conviction on appeal?
Were not KSM's Miranda rights impinged when he was not only not told he could have a lawyer on capture, but that his family would be killed and he would be waterboarded if he refused to talk?
And if all the evidence against the five defendants comes from other than their own testimony under duress, do not their lawyers have a right to know when, where, how and from whom Justice got the evidence to prosecute them? Does KSM have the right to confront all witnesses against him, even if they are al-Qaida turncoats or U.S. spies still transmitting information to U.S. intelligence?
There have been reports that in the trials of those convicted in the first World Trade Center bombing, sources and methods were compromised, weakening our security for the second attack on Sept. 11.
If the trial is held in lower Manhattan, how much security will be needed to protect against a car bomber who wants the world to see a mighty blow struck against the Great Satan? And if, as some suggest, the trial should be held on Governor's Island, would that not make the United States look like a nation under siege?
What do we do if the case against KSM is thrown out because the government refuses to reveal sources or methods, or if he gets a hung jury, or is acquitted, or has his conviction overturned?
In America, trials often become games, where the prosecution, though it has truth on its side, loses because it inadvertently breaks one of the rules.
The Obamaites had best pray that does not happen, for they may be betting his presidency on the outcome of the game about to begin.
Last Edited by PACNWguy on 11/17/2009 at 12:41 AM
OBAMA - THE FASTEST FAILED PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY
"I inherated and I am Great!" |
|
mathetes
User ID: 793782
United States
11/17/2009 12:33 AM
 | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
It is a contradiction which goes to heart of the matter...are we at war or not,Obama seems perplexed by this
The ACLU will be working overtime pro bono to free KSM
So after the trial will KSM rent an apt. with a view of Central Park? Or will the ACLU fly him to Pakistan?
Sickening
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. |
|
Evil Twin 
Senior Forum Moderator
11/17/2009 12:36 AM
 | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
That's a damn good question.
Considering becoming an "undocumented worker".
eviltwin618@yahoo.com |
|
PACNWguy
User ID: 688273
United States
11/17/2009 12:39 AM
| | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
It is a contradiction which goes to heart of the matter...are we at war or not,Obama seems perplexed by this
The ACLU will be working overtime pro bono to free KSM
So after the trial will KSM rent an apt. with a view of Central Park? Or will the ACLU fly him to Pakistan?
Sickening Quoting: mathetes
If he walks it will be like someone playing with a fish they caught and letting him slip back into the water and getting away.
The Terrorists dont need trials by jury. They need a tribunal to determine punishment. They are already guilty of being the fucking enemy.
How many japanese pilots who attacked Pearl Harbor get trials by jury in Hawaii?
OBAMA - THE FASTEST FAILED PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY
"I inherated and I am Great!" |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 807177
United States
11/17/2009 12:43 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
It's no more a real war than the war on drugs is. Pretty absurd really to think the most powerful country in the history of the world could be at war such insects to begin with. We've got nukes and every imaginable high tech weapon ever invented, and a real military, while they've got... boxcutters.
No. It's not a real war. |
|
PACNWguy
User ID: 688273
United States
11/17/2009 12:48 AM
| | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
It's no more a real war than the war on drugs is. Pretty absurd really to think the most powerful country in the history of the world could be at war such insects to begin with. We've got nukes and every imaginable high tech weapon ever invented, and a real military, while they've got... boxcutters.
No. It's not a real war. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 807177
Obama is fighting terrorist in Afghanastan and Iraq with orders to kill on sight, but giving them trials in New York city as common criminals with protections under the US constitution.
How do you rectify that in your mind?
OBAMA - THE FASTEST FAILED PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY
"I inherated and I am Great!" |
|
mathetes
User ID: 793782
United States
11/17/2009 12:52 AM
| | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
It's no more a real war than the war on drugs is. Pretty absurd really to think the most powerful country in the history of the world could be at war such insects to begin with. We've got nukes and every imaginable high tech weapon ever invented, and a real military, while they've got... boxcutters.
No. It's not a real war. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 807177
Thats what the Soviets thought too
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 807177
United States
11/17/2009 12:53 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
It's no more a real war than the war on drugs is. Pretty absurd really to think the most powerful country in the history of the world could be at war such insects to begin with. We've got nukes and every imaginable high tech weapon ever invented, and a real military, while they've got... boxcutters.
No. It's not a real war.
Obama is fighting terrorist in Afghanastan and Iraq with orders to kill on sight, but giving them trials in New York city as common criminals with protections under the US constitution.
How do you rectify that in your mind? Quoting: PACNWguy
What's to rectify? The orders are never to "kill on sight." If that were true there would be no prisoners to try to begin with. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 819780
 Ireland
11/17/2009 12:57 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
The problem occurs when captures occur off an actual battlefield.
Most prisoners in this 'war' would be taken from their homes or workplace, or even off the streets... arrested and detained.
So the issue is proving they are in fact enemy combatants, the process of proving this is known as a "trial"... duh.
However, I do not believe they should be afforded the protection of the US constitution if they are not US citizens.
Why has the almighty UN not devised a charter to establish protocol for this?
International terrorists should be prosecuted using mutually agreed international legislation.
Obamas decision to prosecute the 911 dudes in new york was stupid because it has sparked up this debate when it could have been avoided.
Prosecute them in an international criminal court such as the Hague, as WAR CRIMINALS... UBER DUH!
If that can't be done then legislate policy to do it... what the hell else is the UN for but this kind of shit? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 807177
United States
11/17/2009 12:59 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
It's no more a real war than the war on drugs is. Pretty absurd really to think the most powerful country in the history of the world could be at war such insects to begin with. We've got nukes and every imaginable high tech weapon ever invented, and a real military, while they've got... boxcutters.
No. It's not a real war.
Thats what the Soviets thought too Quoting: mathetes
Yes, and they went home and now look who has the problem? Legally it's not a real war because Congress didn't declare it. Whether it's a war in Afghanistan or not is, I suppose, a matter of definition. Vietnam was called a "police action" but that was in many ways more a real war than this is, while this is more a "police action" than Vietnam was. |
|
mental illness
User ID: 465669
United States
11/17/2009 12:59 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
Do you and your maniacs have any idea how psychotically ill it is to be okay with torturing and killing anybody and their families on sight?
That's a rhetorical question, because people like you are so lost in your paranoid, right-left schizophrenia, that you, like all psychotics, are unable to see the level of your mental illness.
Don't worry about some terrorist getting you, your sadistic thinking is what keeps this world spiraling deeper and deeper into a black hole of demonic hell that will pull you to your own destruction.
Hitler, Stalin and Mao were all caught in this same downward- spinning vortex, so you'll be in good company as your world is destroyed around you. |
|
PACNWguy
User ID: 688273
United States
11/17/2009 1:00 AM
| | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
It's no more a real war than the war on drugs is. Pretty absurd really to think the most powerful country in the history of the world could be at war such insects to begin with. We've got nukes and every imaginable high tech weapon ever invented, and a real military, while they've got... boxcutters.
No. It's not a real war.
Obama is fighting terrorist in Afghanastan and Iraq with orders to kill on sight, but giving them trials in New York city as common criminals with protections under the US constitution.
How do you rectify that in your mind?
What's to rectify? The orders are never to "kill on sight." If that were true there would be no prisoners to try to begin with. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 807177
Our troops sure as hell do have an order to shoot on sight.
What do you think is going on with the drones in Afghanistan and Iraq Buckwheat? We see a group of AlQaeda sitting around a camp fire polishing their AK47s and we blow the shit out of them from 8,000 miles away.
No search warrants or Miranda warnings.
Bam,,,you are dead motherfuckers. Go collect your virgins.
You would think they would have some rights under the Obama bill or rights and all. ya know?
Last Edited by PACNWguy on 11/17/2009 at 1:02 AM
OBAMA - THE FASTEST FAILED PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY
"I inherated and I am Great!" |
|
mathetes
User ID: 793782
United States
11/17/2009 1:04 AM
| | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
It's no more a real war than the war on drugs is. Pretty absurd really to think the most powerful country in the history of the world could be at war such insects to begin with. We've got nukes and every imaginable high tech weapon ever invented, and a real military, while they've got... boxcutters.
No. It's not a real war.
Obama is fighting terrorist in Afghanastan and Iraq with orders to kill on sight, but giving them trials in New York city as common criminals with protections under the US constitution.
How do you rectify that in your mind?
What's to rectify? The orders are never to "kill on sight." If that were true there would be no prisoners to try to begin with.
Our troops sure as hell do have an order to shoot on sight.
What do you think is going on with the drones in Afghanistan and Iraq Buckwheat? We see a group of AlQaeda sitting around a camp fire polishing their AK47s and we blow the shit out of them from 8,000 miles away.
No search warrants or Miranda warnings.
Bam,,,you are dead motherfuckers. Go collect your virgins.
You would think they would have some rights under the Obama bill or rights and all. ya know? Quoting: PACNWguy
Don't give Obamantion any ideals...he will start ordering leaflets dropped form the Drones 1st
STOP!
PUT YOUR HANDS UP!
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. |
|
PACNWguy
User ID: 688273
United States
11/17/2009 1:05 AM
| | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
The problem occurs when captures occur off an actual battlefield.
Most prisoners in this 'war' would be taken from their homes or workplace, or even off the streets... arrested and detained.
So the issue is proving they are in fact enemy combatants, the process of proving this is known as a "trial"... duh.
However, I do not believe they should be afforded the protection of the US constitution if they are not US citizens.
Why has the almighty UN not devised a charter to establish protocol for this?
International terrorists should be prosecuted using mutually agreed international legislation.
Obamas decision to prosecute the 911 dudes in new york was stupid because it has sparked up this debate when it could have been avoided.
Prosecute them in an international criminal court such as the Hague, as WAR CRIMINALS... UBER DUH!
If that can't be done then legislate policy to do it... what the hell else is the UN for but this kind of shit? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 819780
Only a handful of Japanese, Surbian, Korean and German detainees accused of war crimes were taken prisoner on the battle fields. Not one of them got a trial by jury to see if he was a war criminal under the protection of the US constitution in New York.
OBAMA - THE FASTEST FAILED PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY
"I inherated and I am Great!" |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 807177
United States
11/17/2009 1:11 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
Our troops sure as hell do have an order to shoot on sight.
What do you think is going on with the drones in Afghanistan and Iraq Buckwheat? We see a group of AlQaeda sitting around a camp fire polishing their AK47s and we blow the shit out of them from 8,000 miles away.
No search warrants or Miranda warnings.
Bam,,,you are dead motherfuckers. Go collect your virgins.
You would think they would have some rights under the Obama bill or rights and all. ya know? Quoting: PACNWguy
So what do you think should be done with those that get taken prisoner? Especially the one's that weren't captured on a battlefield, but were taken out of their homes based on who knows what intelligence? Particularly under the Bushies I imagine they tended to err on the side of 'grab em and lock em up,' in cases where they weren't sure, and that means a good many of them are probably even innocent.
What would your solution be? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 819780
Ireland
11/17/2009 1:17 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
The problem occurs when captures occur off an actual battlefield.
Most prisoners in this 'war' would be taken from their homes or workplace, or even off the streets... arrested and detained.
So the issue is proving they are in fact enemy combatants, the process of proving this is known as a "trial"... duh.
However, I do not believe they should be afforded the protection of the US constitution if they are not US citizens.
Why has the almighty UN not devised a charter to establish protocol for this?
International terrorists should be prosecuted using mutually agreed international legislation.
Obamas decision to prosecute the 911 dudes in new york was stupid because it has sparked up this debate when it could have been avoided.
Prosecute them in an international criminal court such as the Hague, as WAR CRIMINALS... UBER DUH!
If that can't be done then legislate policy to do it... what the hell else is the UN for but this kind of shit?
Only a handful of Japanese, Surbian, Korean and German detainees accused of war crimes were taken prisoner on the battle fields. Not one of them got a trial by jury to see if he was a war criminal under the protection of the US constitution in New York. Quoting: PACNWguy
Exactly.
These guys didn't skip a parking fine ffs, these trials are a prime example of the pussy admin Obama reigns over.
If they can't be classed as war criminals then devise a classification.
If no clear and transparent legislation exists for dealing with this shit then they should fucking write some!
What the hell else are we all paying them for? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 807177
United States
11/17/2009 1:19 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
Exactly.
These guys didn't skip a parking fine ffs, these trials are a prime example of the pussy admin Obama reigns over.
If they can't be classed as war criminals then devise a classification.
If no clear and transparent legislation exists for dealing with this shit then they should fucking write some!
What the hell else are we all paying them for? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 819780
Yeah! Screw international law and the Constitution! The Constitution is for pussies anyway! Right? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 819780
Ireland
11/17/2009 1:20 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
So what do you think should be done with those that get taken prisoner? Especially the one's that weren't captured on a battlefield, but were taken out of their homes based on who knows what intelligence? Particularly under the Bushies I imagine they tended to err on the side of 'grab em and lock em up,' in cases where they weren't sure, and that means a good many of them are probably even innocent.
What would your solution be? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 807177
Transfer custody from US to UN, fair trial in international court.
That's it. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 819780
Ireland
11/17/2009 1:23 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
Yeah! Screw international law and the Constitution! The Constitution is for pussies anyway! Right? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 807177
Say some guy gets picked up off the streets of pakistan thrown on a rendition flight and detained in Cuba... should he be tried under the US constitution?? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 807177
United States
11/17/2009 1:24 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
So what do you think should be done with those that get taken prisoner? Especially the one's that weren't captured on a battlefield, but were taken out of their homes based on who knows what intelligence? Particularly under the Bushies I imagine they tended to err on the side of 'grab em and lock em up,' in cases where they weren't sure, and that means a good many of them are probably even innocent.
What would your solution be?
Transfer custody from US to UN, fair trial in international court.
That's it. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 819780
Sounds good, but then of course all the wingnuts would be screaming about sovereignty. Oh that wussie Obama just giving up our prisoners to that commie U.N.! Blah blah blah.
Plus I'm not sure the U.N. wants them. I suspect if we just handed them over to the U.N. they'd just let most of em go the next day. |
|
PACNWguy
User ID: 688273
United States
11/17/2009 1:24 AM
| | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
So what do you think should be done with those that get taken prisoner? Especially the one's that weren't captured on a battlefield, but were taken out of their homes based on who knows what intelligence? Particularly under the Bushies I imagine they tended to err on the side of 'grab em and lock em up,' in cases where they weren't sure, and that means a good many of them are probably even innocent.
What would your solution be? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 807177
Only 800 or so have been sent to GITMO. 500 were relased and 61 of them went back to killing Americans. That is more than 10% and is too high.
We are at war, leave the ones in camps that we feel are dangerous like we did with the German soldiers we captured in WW2.
OBAMA - THE FASTEST FAILED PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY
"I inherated and I am Great!" |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 807177
United States
11/17/2009 1:25 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
Yeah! Screw international law and the Constitution! The Constitution is for pussies anyway! Right?
Say some guy gets picked up off the streets of pakistan thrown on a rendition flight and detained in Cuba... should he be tried under the US constitution?? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 819780
Yes. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 819780
Ireland
11/17/2009 1:26 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
Yeah! Screw international law and the Constitution! The Constitution is for pussies anyway! Right?
Say some guy gets picked up off the streets of pakistan thrown on a rendition flight and detained in Cuba... should he be tried under the US constitution??
Yes. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 807177
Why? |
|
mathetes
User ID: 793782
United States
11/17/2009 1:26 AM
| | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
Only 800 or so have been sent to GITMO. 500 were relased and 61 of them went back to killing Americans. That is more than 10% and is too high.
We are at war, leave the ones in camps that we feel are dangerous like we did with the German soldiers we captured in WW2. Quoting: PACNWguy
Or KSM could turn into another Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman Who got his commie radical attorney Lynne Stewart, paralegal Ahmed Abdel Sattar, and interpreter Mohamed Yousry to pass messages to his followers urging strikes against the US
He even brokered a cease fire between the Egyptian government(While in a maximum security facility) and a terrorist Islamic Group. Which he later withdrew,he also approved of the hit to kill Fifty-eight foreign tourists in Luxor, Egypt
NICE!!
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 807177
United States
11/17/2009 1:27 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
So what do you think should be done with those that get taken prisoner? Especially the one's that weren't captured on a battlefield, but were taken out of their homes based on who knows what intelligence? Particularly under the Bushies I imagine they tended to err on the side of 'grab em and lock em up,' in cases where they weren't sure, and that means a good many of them are probably even innocent.
What would your solution be?
Only 800 or so have been sent to GITMO. 500 were relased and 61 of them went back to killing Americans. That is more than 10% and is too high.
We are at war, leave the ones in camps that we feel are dangerous like we did with the German soldiers we captured in WW2. Quoting: PACNWguy
So make them POW's? With all that implies? |
|
PACNWguy
User ID: 688273
United States
11/17/2009 1:27 AM
| | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
Exactly.
These guys didn't skip a parking fine ffs, these trials are a prime example of the pussy admin Obama reigns over.
If they can't be classed as war criminals then devise a classification.
If no clear and transparent legislation exists for dealing with this shit then they should fucking write some!
What the hell else are we all paying them for?
Yeah! Screw international law and the Constitution! The Constitution is for pussies anyway! Right? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 807177
The US constitution doesnt have a damn thing to do with enemy combatants. Do you think that the japanese who bomed pearl harbor should have gotten trials by jury in Hawaii?
Then what?
OBAMA - THE FASTEST FAILED PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY
"I inherated and I am Great!" |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 819780
Ireland
11/17/2009 1:29 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
So what do you think should be done with those that get taken prisoner? Especially the one's that weren't captured on a battlefield, but were taken out of their homes based on who knows what intelligence? Particularly under the Bushies I imagine they tended to err on the side of 'grab em and lock em up,' in cases where they weren't sure, and that means a good many of them are probably even innocent.
What would your solution be?
Only 800 or so have been sent to GITMO. 500 were relased and 61 of them went back to killing Americans. That is more than 10% and is too high.
We are at war, leave the ones in camps that we feel are dangerous like we did with the German soldiers we captured in WW2.
So make them POW's? With all that implies? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 807177
That's the whole problem though... are they POWs?
Only if we are at war... are we at war?
Who is the enemy?
Where is the enemy? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 820188
United States
11/17/2009 1:30 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
[link to eclipptv.com] |
|
PACNWguy
User ID: 688273
United States
11/17/2009 1:31 AM
| | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
So what do you think should be done with those that get taken prisoner? Especially the one's that weren't captured on a battlefield, but were taken out of their homes based on who knows what intelligence? Particularly under the Bushies I imagine they tended to err on the side of 'grab em and lock em up,' in cases where they weren't sure, and that means a good many of them are probably even innocent.
What would your solution be?
Only 800 or so have been sent to GITMO. 500 were relased and 61 of them went back to killing Americans. That is more than 10% and is too high.
We are at war, leave the ones in camps that we feel are dangerous like we did with the German soldiers we captured in WW2.
So make them POW's? With all that implies? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 807177
Better to classify them as POWs than to say they are citizens and offer constitutional protection and jury trials in us courts with all the bull shit tactics that lawyers pull to get their clients free.
We dont need to prove guilt of crimes with POW's. Its implied in the fact that they are the enemy.
OBAMA - THE FASTEST FAILED PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY
"I inherated and I am Great!" |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 820188
United States
11/17/2009 1:31 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
War was never declared. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 807177
United States
11/17/2009 1:31 AM | | Re: QUESTION: IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL AL QAEDA AND THEIR FAMILIES ON SIGHT, WHY DO LIBS THINK THEY DESERVE A TRIAL IN US COURT IF THEY ARE CAPTURED | Quote |
Yeah! Screw international law and the Constitution! The Constitution is for pussies anyway! Right?
Say some guy gets picked up off the streets of pakistan thrown on a rendition flight and detained in Cuba... should he be tried under the US constitution??
Yes.
Why? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 819780
How else? Make them POW's? Military tribunals with no declared war? Hand them over to the U.N.?
All bad answers. The rule of law is what our society is supposed to be based on. If we abandon that just because it's not convenient we have already lost the "war on terror." |
|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 |
|
