 |
The six men will be tried jointly at the U.S. Naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, but Pentagon officials said that it will not begin for at least another five months. Even so, the process, including appeals, could last for years.
So this is the injustice some on the Left is whining about? Whatever happened to a fair and speedy trial?
NPR: Pentagon Charges Six in Sept. 11 Attacks
You believe a speedy trial is owed to whom?
Like…why aren't they dead?
I won't be surprised if the government doesn't end up being on trial by the Left wing media.
Any chance of a speedy trial was sabotaged by the ACLU etc by contesting the status of the prisoners. The lefties are now going to contend that these trials are election year stunts or that we have to dispose of them before they can testify about the conditions at Club Camp Delta .
Of course Muslim Rep Keith Ellison came back from Gitmo recently and he now says he's not so sure the prison should be closed mostly because members of Congress and the media have access to the site ,and conditions are not bad . Guantanamo isn't Auschwitz after-all . But I digress...
It will be interesting to see how the candidates register on the issue. Come on Evita and Obama... say you oppose the death penalty for KSM and his band of mass murderers. I want to hear you say that they are not getting a fair trial .
Swift and speedy justice would've been a summary court-marshal in the theater immediately after capture.
Good point about Evita and Obama…I suspect they will dance around the question.
Yeah, the field summary court-marshal right after the Mossad counter-terrorism unit got through with them.:p
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_crow
I shouldn't have laughed at that :o but I did :p
As long as the are collected and stored away - I don't care what they do with them.
Six? Aren't there a multitude of others?
Will they have this trial on TV. I sure hope they do. Prime Time. And all of America should watch it.
I even think we should all be permitted to call in our vote... I think all of America should get to be the jurors. Am I wrong?
No, we shouldn't kill 'em; try them and if found guilty, sentence them to pick up garbage in all 50 states until each of them returns to Allah.
Yes, and then maybe more people will understand the Military Commissions Act and exactly what it means.
These criminals should be brough to justice no doubt. And if the death penalty is what justice is then so be it. The death penalty is another debate.
But no matter what these men's crime shouldn't they be entitled to justice just as any other criminal? Oh that's right. These men isn't criminals. They are enemy combatants. The type of people that can be held for 6 years or more without charge, the type that can be tortured and treated like animals.
In that case they should just do what they like to them then. Maybe make a game show of it and get that guy of Millionaire to host it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skell
Skell,
For me personally my comments were just a release of upset for what was done. In my lifetime, it is the first time I experienced and witnessed a direct attack. Do I mean any of what I said, I really don't know but it's hard for me to even call those that had anything to do with driving a plane into our buildings as "men".
It is very hard for me, as I would never want to hurt another human with even a word let alone torture them. And no, I don't want them tortured.
But I will admit, the anger that swells up in me for what was done on our soil is more then I can express. And I don't want to give those "men" the wrong impression. Anger probably is not the correct word to describe the feelings. I would say a strong sense to stand up and defend against such irrational behavior. And even greater pride and love for my country. Forgive me if my comments were less then rationale but you have to admit, driving a plane into a building because of hatred is a little less then rationale.
And may God forgive me for the anger that I do have towards those that have hurt us and continue to. And I fully realize that other countries have experienced similar attacks for years, and my heart goes out to them and I have very similar anger.
Sorry Skell, don't have my head on quite right, I admit.
I had to learn and I did learn which I am most grateful for, to accept and reach an understanding, at negative comments said about my country, my Government and in some cases my fellow Americans. And I actually am now able to have some understanding and acceptance when I see the numerous post against my Government and such by non-Americans. So, I guess I would like some understanding as well.
Skell, if this were to happen in your country, I would say Skell, have had it hun. Speak your peace and be heard!! I'd be upset right with you.
America is a civilized country. You know darn right well they are not going to be tortured. We had some hiccups in the past, no one is perfect. This is a great country with highly intellegent people and if these "men" were held 6 years, so be it. They probably just wanted to make sure the evidence was solid and if we didn't keep them until trial, we would have a hard time finding them again.
It is my belief, that if these are the "men" who drove planes into our buildings, evil has penetrated them so deeply, they hardly remsemble men and barely human.
But don't feel too bad for them Skell, I think there may be 77 females, who don't know what they are doing, waiting for them. Brilliant I say, just brilliant.
(in my heart Skell, I wish no one any harm, humor is a tool to release, let me and whomever voice whatever is in our hearts at this disgusting tradedgy
That took place.)
Hello:
Couple things.
Do you know the why the representation of justice is blind? Do you even know what I'm talking about?
Blind Justice is the theory that law should be viewed objectively. It means that the determination of innocence or guilt should be made without bias or prejudice. It is the idea behind the United States Supreme Court motto “Equal Justice Under Law”.
We adopted the idea from the ancient Hammurabi code. It's probably the oldest and most famous example of what was called lex talionis, or an eye for an eye. The accused would literally sit behind a blind out of the courts view. An administrator would hear a charge and dispense the law as written. If found guilty, punishment was pre-determined. It didn't matter how much influence the accused had or what anybody's opinion of him was.
We thought that was a good idea, so in our system we've agreed that the status of the accused should not be considered. That is the basis of our legal system. It just is and, I actually like it that way.
Now, I don't disagree that if I had MY way, these people wouldn't have even gotten to Gitmo. But, that's just the point. I DON'T have my way, and neither do you. In this great nation of ours, I (along with you) gave up my vigilantism to the Justice Department, who hopefully will dispense justice better and fairer than I would.
Consequently, in our great system, WHO they are doesn't matter. How badly we hate them isn't germane. How much we want to hang them from the nearest tree isn't important.
We treat people this way, because it works. There are those amongst you who think we should treat THESE people different because they're really, really bad.
No we shouldn't.
The next thing is the confessions. I don't know how you can have a fair trial using confessions that you only got because you tortured 'em. I have trouble with that. No, of course, some of you don't.
excon
The six being brought to trial... we tortured the confession out of them?
I didn't know that.
I do want us to be civil - the humane side of me does - and actually all of me does - but I
Also want t spout some upset - but no, do not want anyone wrongly convicted or tortured.
But those guilty... I want them to pay... within the law... but I want them to pay.
There is no such thing as making an example out of these 6 - the people that wish us that kind of harm couldn't and wouldn't get it nor would it stop them.
I do not know the names of all the defendants but the ring leader of the 9-11 attacks was subject to waterboarding for a reportedly 30 seconds before he became a very cooperative interrogant.
Here is my response to excon on another posting on the subject:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/politi...in-181320.htmlQuote:
We now know from testimony from CIA chief Michael Hayden that waterboarding was used a total of 3 times on Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, mastermind of attack on the USS Cole, Abu Zubaydah, the brains behind the thwarted millennium attacks, and Khalid Sheik Mohammed, who directed the 9/11 attacks. According to his testimony the CIA got a quarter of all the useful human intelligence it obtained from 2002 to 2006 from this trio .
We also found out from his testimony that the leading Democrats of both houses of Congress were briefed on this fact .(Madam Mimi and Senator Jay Rockefeller )
Thanks Tom.
What's waterboarding? I didn't know that had the lead guy allegedly behind the USS Cole. :) I'm a happy girl.
Hello again, All:
Waterboarding is torture. There's a discussion about whether it is or not, but that's because it's illegal and if they determine that it IS torture, they'll have to arrest somebody. Besides, they want to DO it so they justify doing it just like tom did.
However, we know waterboarding is torture, and we've always known it. Even John McCain knows it, to his credit. Course, he was tortured so he'd know.
Lest you think I like that scumbag Kalid, he also said it was HIS blessed hand that beheaded the American Daniel Pearl.
excon
Thanks ex.
No, we are better then torture.
Allheart
Waterboarding is a very unpleasant experience. It must be so because it is considered 100 percent effective and usually induces cooperation within 30 seconds. What McCain endured was indeed torture . He carries the scars on him today. Waterboarding is the act of strapping the person down on a board ;covering their face with a wet towel and dripping water onto it to make the person think they are going to drown. It causes no physical damage.
Excon says that he knows torture when he sees it. So the best I can do is let you determine for yorself if this crosses the line . I don't think so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Wow Tom - thanks for explaining that. Seems like it would be hard to breath.
But I think if I were to do the right thing... and it's not to skirt around making a choice as to is it or isn't it, I would leave it in the hands of those that I place my trust in and hope they don't betray that trust in doing something that is unwarranted.
I have never served one second of military service, I have never been in the heat of battle, I have never been beside a fellow soldier and seen injured or worse. I don't think I have a right to voice an opinion on it.
Face value - I would prefer we wouldn't do that. I feel like I can't breath just thinking about it.
And I said on another thread, detectives get murders to confess without this type of torture.
It may take longer to get the information with doing those acts but I bet and know that we could still get it just the same.
What if they guy doesn't know anything... what if he's innocent. It could happen.
Now, with all that said... I still would never vehemently say it is wrong - I trust in those
who are to make those type of calls. I just don't feel qualified.
Excon's been there... that's all it would take for me... his word and view has my attention and respect.
Tom, Excon and all, I am just so incredibly grateful for you sharing all that wisdom and knowledge on things I should know...
Just know I am grateful.
( Imagine how dangerous I will be once I am well informed ;)
I think the waterboarding of animals like KSM was an exercise in restraint, not an orgy of mistreatment. In the wake of 9-11 it might have been easy for officers to justify all kinds of treatment that they didn't even contemplate. They used one method that was known not to leave lasting damage and that breaks subjects very quickly. There is a difference of opinion as to it's legality... obiviously something Congress needs to clarify one way or the other . I would be interested in hearing the opinions of Speaker Pelosi and Sen Intel Chair Rockefeller since they were briefed on the issue in real time.
Hello again,
Tom continues to use the "real bad guy" justification for their treatment. As I mentioned above, its use is abhorrent to me as an American.
His definition of torture, which mirrors US policy, is it's OK if it doesn't leave lasting damage. I don't support that viewpoint at all.
To me, it's clear that it's his anger that is driving his beliefs and he uses it to justify has actions. I'm angry too, but we're a nation of laws - not men.
It would be no surprise to ME to hear the Dems he mentions waffle on the subject. I'm not a Dem. What THEY think and how THEY lead doesn't change the law and it doesn't change what I think.
excon
No, they are terrorist not enemy combatants, and what they do is no different than a person changing into their enemies’ uniform in order to kill them at will and escape notice. That calls for an immediate firing squad unless it is believed they have important knowledge. What they do is the lowest place a human can sink to and they have forfeited any rights at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skell
I think raping and killing your own child sinks to the lowest form of human. That's what I think. That's my opinion. Your opinion is that these "terrorists" are. That's your opinion. The law doesn't work on opinion.
Do you miss the point or just choose not to respond to excons posts? Just because they are really bad men and they did something that you and the rest of the world really didn't like doesn't mean they don't deserve a fair trial and justcie.
Where do we stop?
Is this directed at me…in case it was…I understand Excon, I just don’t agree with his fear of a “Slippery Slope.” You apparently agree with that because you say, “Where do we stop?” In view of the fact that all knowledge and every pursuit aims at some good, and in War, that good is to win- and not lose our families at home to the evil of those who would take them from us.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skell
There is no constitution on the battlefield and the enemy brought the battlefield here.
George
A little time spent in Israel, dodging rockets and crazy bombers with their families and these Idealistic moral giants would realize an attitude adjustment very quick. Well, at least most of them.
Hello again, DC:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_crow
We agree. But, that would make you a moral midget with no ideals at all, wouldn't it? I think it would.
excon
Where does anyone get the idea that these terrorists are entitled to due process under our law in the first place? Our Constitution does not extend its benefits to foreigners, and certainly not to foreigners who want to destroy this country. The Geneva Convention does not extend benefits to those who act as these terrorists did. We have people whining about their "rights". I do not wish harm on anyone, but when these people hit us again, maybe these whiners will be at ground zero. If waterboarding can save even one innocent American life, then I am for it. Our people knew who these men were. What they had to find out was what further plans they had for us. It's not like they may have been innocent.
Hello again, Allheart:
I offer the following for your edification.
In 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding called the “water treatment” on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk.
For that act, Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.
Others who were found guilty of the “water treatment”, including the officers who directed the torture and those who carried it out, were guilty of war crimes. Some were executed.
The bottom line is that when the “water treatment” was practiced against our side, it was called a war crime. Now, we justify its use.
excon
ANSWER TO EVERYONE AS TO MY THOUGHTS ON THIS MATTER:: - I WILL SAY THAT WE ,THE usa STARTED THIS , THEY BROUGHT IT TO US ,AND I MEAN ON usa SOIL WE DID NOT POVOCK THIS, AND IT WAS NOT THE FIRST TIME THEY HAVE DONE THIS, A FEW YEARS EARILER THEY TRIED ,BUT IT Didn't WORK THAT TIME. I THINK THIS cOUNTRY was TO SOFT ON THEM I THINK THEY SHOULD HAVE TOOK SOME (b52s) AND LAID SOME EGGS IN ABOUT 6 COUNTRIES, I Don't THINK THAT I WOULD HAVE ANY SEVERE AFTER THOUGHTS ABOUT DOING IT . I'm NOT A RADICAL ITS JUST THAT WE ( america ) HAVE FOUGHT A USELESS WAR THAT WILL BE CALLED A POLICE ACTION ,JUST LIKE KOREA,& VETNOMand aMERICA HAS LOST A LOT OF PERSONNEL OVER THERE FOR NOTHING , GET THE HECK OUT AND LET THEM KILL EACH OTHER, BUT JUST LIKE KOREA, GO SO FAR AND STOP, THEY GET OVER THAT GET BUILT BACK UP AND HIT US AGAIN, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED IN THE LATE 90'S WHEN BUSHS DADDY WAS OUR PRESDIENT, GEORGE WANTED TO TRY TO OUT DO DADDY.:: noW LETS GET TO THE 6 CHARGED FOR 9-11, I THINK THEY SHOULD BE TRIED UNDER WAR REASONS, THEN TOOK OUT AND given a very slow death <by hanging > , or ANY WAY THAT WOULD BE very slow , you TALK ABOUT HOW THEY HAVE BEEN TREATED IN PRISON, have you stopped to think of what they have done to some of the americans over there they sure did show care for them that they be headed <some were beheaded and hung upside down from a bridge now who is really at the wrong?? F.B.E. hELLO EXCON ; I know ,lets round up their familys and bring them over here and put them to death right in front of them and let them live about 6 mo's. Before putting them to death so that they bwill have time to think about what they done to america on 9-11??
They should be having the same trial all of the WWII POW's had, stay confined till the war is over. Or even better why not turn them over to the Iraq government for them to put them on trial ?
Thanks Ex. And I now am completely convinced. It's torture and we SHOULD NOT use it.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Guess what? If I read that being done to one of ours, in this current day, TRUST me, my curls be in a swirl and I'd be none to pleased.
I now can safely say, in my opinion, it's wrong and we should not use it.
Ex - thanks for making it clear and explaing sharing that history with me.
In no way should we use it and would made us start up to use it? We need to have more confidence and faith in our civilized tatics to get the answers we need.
NO WATER TREATEMENT -
I'd be furious if it were one of ours -
Well that is a nice narrative spreading around the web and by Ted the swimmer Kennedy in debate in the Senate (how ironic that he was the one who mentioned water torture) ;but the facts are more revealing .Yes "water torture" was one of the charges against him but more likely he served the bulk of his time for multiple incidences of real torture like beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; and burning using cigarettes.
Defendant: Asano, Yukio
Docket Date: 53/ May 1 - 28, 1947, Yokohama, Japan
Charge: Violation of the Laws and Customs of War: 1. Did willfully and unlawfully mistreat and torture PWs. 2. Did unlawfully take and convert to his own use Red Cross packages and supplies intended for PWs.
Specifications:beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; water torture; burning using cigarettes; strapping on a stretcher head downward
Verdict: 15 years CHL
Yokohama Reviews - Asano
Hello again:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Tom appears to be saying that waterboarding is OK, but THOSE things above are war crimes and we'd NEVER do that.
However... Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia defends that stuff. In an interview broadcast on Tuesday, he said that interrogators can inflict pain to obtain critical information about an imminent terrorist threat.
He used the "24" scenario that I debunked earlier. He says, "...it would be absurd to say you couldn't, I don't know, stick something under the fingernail, smack him in the face. It would be absurd to say you couldn't do that", Scalia told the British Broadcasting Radio Corp.
I guess we were absurd after WWll to think that someone shouldn't do that to our boys...
Yup. We're torturers, and we should be ashamed. If you're not, I'm ashamed for you - very VERY ashamed.
excon
You did not debunk the ticking time bomb scenario at all.
What is your answer... ok we know another 3000 civilians will be incinerated in a mass murder soon . We have someone who knows the when, where ,and how ,but that person will not talk... now what ?
Hello tom:
In legal terms, you are assuming facts not in evidence.
"ok we know another 3000 civilians will be incinerated in a mass murder soon." Where did that information come from? Why don't you torture the guy who told you THAT??
"we have someone who knows the when, where ,and how" How do you know that? Again, why don't you torture the guy who told you that? Obviously HE knows.
Finally, how do you know that the guy you're about to torture KNOWS something about it? The fact is, you don't.
Indeed, your want to torture scenario falls apart under real world scrutiny. You can't know ANY of the facts you have presented AS fact. It's all make believe.. What you forget to insert was the IF word. Don't worry. I did it for you.
IF you knew thus and so, and IF you knew that the guy you have knows something……. IF that was so, then I'd say go ahead. But you don't know, of course, and you never would know.
It's a great plot. But, in the final analysis, those things are only going to happen on TV. I would have thought, however, that our Supreme Court Justices weren't getting their law from the tube.
I would have thought wrong.
excon
Forget judges . No jury would ever convict the interrogator if that person prevented a TTB . But when the bomb goes off you can feel content that you did not sink to the terrorist level ;which is another false platitude.
This week the terrorists strapped bombs on Down's Syndrome women and sent them into a crowded Baghdad market. You can equate getting them wet with such a despicable act. I can't .
Hello again, tom:
We're going round and round here. The thing is I DON'T equate the two behaviors. You're the one doing that. You think it should be tit for tat.
In fact, YOU want us to base OUR behavior on how the enemy is behaving. I don't agree at all.
I want to base our behavior on how WE behave (or at least used to). I know you remember how that was.
excon
PS> You keep on dodging too. What about Scalia? The old under the fingernail thing is OK with you too??
Hi Tom and Ex,
Again, thank you both for sharing all your knowledge - I do apprecite it.
Tom, I do have two questions;
1) If they did that to our POWs or even when they do torture are men and women who are captured... how does it make you feel? Honestly?
2) Tom, sadly, in today's day, if someone is willing to give their life or support those and believe in the same things as those who are willing to pilot a plane into our buildings etc. knowing they will die, are they going to really give up what they know, if they know anything because they are being tortured?
3) Tom with today's technology, if someone we think knows something and won't talk,
Between our technology and intelligence, there has to be other avenue and resources
That we can now take, that were not available in years passed.
I'll reply with Scalia's words (in the same interview )
I think he makes a valid point in that it is not as black and white an issue as you make it appear to be.Quote:
"Is it really so easy to determine that smacking someone in the face to find out where he has hidden the bomb that is about to blow up Los Angeles is prohibited by the Constitution?
"Is it obvious, that what can't be done for punishment can't be done to exact information that is crucial to the society? I think it's not at all an easy question, to tell you the truth."
"How close does the threat have to be, and how severe [would the] infliction of pain be. I don't think it's easy at all, in either direction, but I certainly know you can't come in smugly and with great self-satisfaction and say 'oh, well it's torture, and therefore it's no good.' You would not apply that in some real life situations. It may not be a ticking bomb in Los Angeles, but it may be where is this group that we know is plotting some very painful action against the United States. Where are they and what are they planning?"
1) I am leaving my feelings out of this . That is why I favor harsh interrogation and not torture. Emotionally if I knew someone was going to do harm to my family then anything goes. That is not what I am suggesting .
2) The proof is in the results . KSM was the lead man on the 9-11 plot . He is a top al-Qaeda leader . He knew a lot about their organization structure and other plots in the works . With this technique that did him no harm he started singing like a canary in 30 seconds .That after being tight lipped and non-cooperative before.
3) Are you suggesting truth serums ? Why would they not cross the line if the bar is being set at tea and crumpets ?
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:20 AM. |