|
Post by pete1 on Nov 14, 2009 21:32:37 GMT -4
Some say the trials should be held in Military Court. What say you?
|
|
|
Post by hisea on Nov 14, 2009 21:37:27 GMT -4
Trial? What are you talking about? Shoot now!
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Nov 14, 2009 21:40:40 GMT -4
They should be held in Military Court. These terrorists should not be allowed the privileges granted to US citizens in our courtroom. The only benefit to us is supposedly the jails they will be in while they are here are suppose to be worse than Gitmo. The only problem with that is most likely special arrangements will most likely be made in order to accomodate the criminals and make them happy and comfortable. Maybe we will get lucky and they will have "an accident" soon so our tax dollars will not be wasted. Frank should juice up his taser. Or, I have an even better idea. Send a suicide bomber on the plane that will pick them up at Gitmo to bring them here.
|
|
|
Post by funnel101 on Nov 14, 2009 21:53:53 GMT -4
Innocent until proven guilty.
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Nov 14, 2009 21:55:30 GMT -4
Innocent until proven guilty. They pled quilty. Now that they will come to US court system, I bet they change their pleas. They know much of the evidence will not be allowed.
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Nov 14, 2009 22:02:48 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Nov 14, 2009 22:08:46 GMT -4
Some say the trials should be held in Military Court. What say you? What do you think about this pete, and why?
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Nov 14, 2009 22:19:16 GMT -4
Innocent until proven guilty. ............ and 8 of 10 that have been released from gitmo have been caught again, doing what they do.
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Nov 14, 2009 22:37:28 GMT -4
Innocent until proven guilty. ............ and 8 of 10 that have been released from gitmo have been caught again, doing what they do. The other 2 out of 10 are doing what they do they just have not been caught yet.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Nov 14, 2009 22:46:56 GMT -4
............ and 8 of 10 that have been released from gitmo have been caught again, doing what they do. The other 2 out of 10 are doing what they do they just have not been caught yet. ;D Ah HAH!
|
|
|
Post by pete1 on Nov 14, 2009 22:48:56 GMT -4
InvisableAbuser......Due to the fact that the country in not officially at war, these Terrorist should be tried as criminals in federal court. I feel these men should have the same rights as any other criminal, and the trial should be televised. If our judicial system stands tall it will show the world why we are the the greatest country ever seen. The Constitution is the law, and that's what we fight for.
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Nov 14, 2009 23:11:28 GMT -4
InvisableAbuser......Due to the fact that the country in not officially at war, these Terrorist should be tried as criminals in federal court. I feel these men should have the same rights as any other criminal, and the trial should be televised. If our judicial system stands tall it will show the world why we are the the greatest country ever seen. The Constitution is the law, and that's what we fight for. We were not offically at war when they flew our planes into our buildings and killed over 3000 Americans. That was an act of war. The trials cannot be televised, much of the information is classified and should not be open to the public. Much of the evidence will not be admitted because it is unacceptable in our court system. There is a good chance some of these guys will walk and be set free on USA soil and some will receive sentences, serve their time only to be set free on American soil. We will not be showing anyone how great we are, we will be blatantly showing our stupidity. Political correctness is no longer correct, it is killing American citizens.
|
|
|
Post by dej on Nov 15, 2009 10:33:05 GMT -4
InvisableAbuser......Due to the fact that the country in not officially at war, these Terrorist should be tried as criminals in federal court. I feel these men should have the same rights as any other criminal, and the trial should be televised. If our judicial system stands tall it will show the world why we are the the greatest country ever seen. The Constitution is the law, and that's what we fight for. Our country was not officially at war because our government made a deliberate decision to ignore a declaration of war by Al Quaida leaders Usama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri in February 1998. In their declaration they called for "the murder of any American, anywhere on earth". bin Laden clarified that the war was specifically against America three months later in an ABC-TV interview from Afghanistan. He stated "It is far better for anyone to kill a single American soldier than to squander his efforts on other activities". Later in that same interview he went on to state "We do not have to differentiate between military or civilian. As far as we are concerned, they are all targets". Unfortunately these declarations of war so clearly stated in 1998 were not treated as such until it was too late in 2001. By clearly stating their intentions to target civilians during the declarations of war, followed by attacks that did just that, anyone associated with Al Quiada has clearly earned the status of unlawful combatant. The Supreme Court made it pretty clear in 1942 that unlawful combatants should by handled by military tribunal.. From "The conduct of hostilities under the law of international armed conflict" by Yôrām Dinstein: "The legal position re unlawful combatancy was summed up by the Supreme Court of the United States, in the Quirin case of 1942 (per Chief Justice Stone): By universal agreement and practice, the law of war draws a distinction between the armed forces and the peaceful populations of belligerent nations and also between those who are lawful and unlawful combatants. Lawful combatants are subject to capture and detention as prisoners of war by opposing military forces. Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful". Personally, I'm in complete agreement with the position stated by Chief Justice Stone. That's why I feel military tribunals, not Federal Court is the proper place for the trials.
|
|
|
Post by island tech on Nov 15, 2009 13:19:48 GMT -4
Innocent until proven guilty. I hear you and agree but at the same time I could care less if these douche bags get treated fairly!
|
|
|
Post by island tech on Nov 15, 2009 13:22:02 GMT -4
First off it should be held in Federal court! And second if I was a resident of New York I don't know how I'd feel about you bring them closer to my home where they cause so much destruction!
I say strap them to a bomb buster and dropped them off in the Afgan mountains close to their friends!
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Nov 15, 2009 14:33:20 GMT -4
First off it should be held in Federal court! And second if I was a resident of New York I don't know how I'd feel about you bring them closer to my home where they cause so much destruction! I say strap them to a bomb buster and dropped them off in the Afgan mountains close to their friends! Why do you prefer Federal Court over a military tribunal? Just curious.
|
|
|
Post by island tech on Nov 15, 2009 18:52:11 GMT -4
First off it should be held in Federal court! And second if I was a resident of New York I don't know how I'd feel about you bring them closer to my home where they cause so much destruction! I say strap them to a bomb buster and dropped them off in the Afgan mountains close to their friends! Why do you prefer Federal Court over a military tribunal? Just curious. Whichever gets the job done. I don't know much about the tribunal though to really make a good choice. I forgive these guys but we need to help arrange the meeting with their maker!
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Nov 15, 2009 19:17:53 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by highlander73 on Nov 16, 2009 14:35:03 GMT -4
InvisableAbuser......Due to the fact that the country in not officially at war, these Terrorist should be tried as criminals in federal court. I feel these men should have the same rights as any other criminal, and the trial should be televised. If our judicial system stands tall it will show the world why we are the the greatest country ever seen. The Constitution is the law, and that's what we fight for. Our country was not officially at war because our government made a deliberate decision to ignore a declaration of war by Al Quaida leaders Usama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri in February 1998. In their declaration they called for "the murder of any American, anywhere on earth". bin Laden clarified that the war was specifically against America three months later in an ABC-TV interview from Afghanistan. He stated "It is far better for anyone to kill a single American soldier than to squander his efforts on other activities". Later in that same interview he went on to state "We do not have to differentiate between military or civilian. As far as we are concerned, they are all targets". Unfortunately these declarations of war so clearly stated in 1998 were not treated as such until it was too late in 2001. By clearly stating their intentions to target civilians during the declarations of war, followed by attacks that did just that, anyone associated with Al Quiada has clearly earned the status of unlawful combatant. The Supreme Court made it pretty clear in 1942 that unlawful combatants should by handled by military tribunal.. From "The conduct of hostilities under the law of international armed conflict" by Yôrām Dinstein: "The legal position re unlawful combatancy was summed up by the Supreme Court of the United States, in the Quirin case of 1942 (per Chief Justice Stone): By universal agreement and practice, the law of war draws a distinction between the armed forces and the peaceful populations of belligerent nations and also between those who are lawful and unlawful combatants. Lawful combatants are subject to capture and detention as prisoners of war by opposing military forces. Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful". Personally, I'm in complete agreement with the position stated by Chief Justice Stone. That's why I feel military tribunals, not Federal Court is the proper place for the trials. Well said. Thoughtful statements with factual and historical backup.
|
|
|
Post by dej on Nov 17, 2009 7:08:16 GMT -4
Our country was not officially at war because our government made a deliberate decision to ignore a declaration of war by Al Quaida leaders Usama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri in February 1998. In their declaration they called for "the murder of any American, anywhere on earth". bin Laden clarified that the war was specifically against America three months later in an ABC-TV interview from Afghanistan. He stated "It is far better for anyone to kill a single American soldier than to squander his efforts on other activities". Later in that same interview he went on to state "We do not have to differentiate between military or civilian. As far as we are concerned, they are all targets". Unfortunately these declarations of war so clearly stated in 1998 were not treated as such until it was too late in 2001. By clearly stating their intentions to target civilians during the declarations of war, followed by attacks that did just that, anyone associated with Al Quiada has clearly earned the status of unlawful combatant. The Supreme Court made it pretty clear in 1942 that unlawful combatants should by handled by military tribunal.. From "The conduct of hostilities under the law of international armed conflict" by Yôrām Dinstein: "The legal position re unlawful combatancy was summed up by the Supreme Court of the United States, in the Quirin case of 1942 (per Chief Justice Stone): By universal agreement and practice, the law of war draws a distinction between the armed forces and the peaceful populations of belligerent nations and also between those who are lawful and unlawful combatants. Lawful combatants are subject to capture and detention as prisoners of war by opposing military forces. Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful". Personally, I'm in complete agreement with the position stated by Chief Justice Stone. That's why I feel military tribunals, not Federal Court is the proper place for the trials. Well said. Thoughtful statements with factual and historical backup. Thanks. Every once in awhile I try to show my opinion can be based on more than emotion.
|
|