• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Administration halts prosecution of alleged USS Cole bomber

you've confused him with bush....no wait...bush was FOR torture AND indefinite incarceration. what a silly thread.

I'm going to bet the "stay on topic" police don't jump down your throat. Just a guess.
 
What does "technically speaking" mean here? Should he be released, or shouldn't he?

If there is some evidence to at least take him to trial then it should be done.

I'm not advocating letting terrorists out.

But if there's 0 evidence and he's merely suspected, then yes he should be set free. Immediately.
 
So no innocent until proven guilty...

Me and him aren't bleeding out our hearts.

For me it's this: If you allow it to happen to one person, you can do it to many more.

You always howel, Less government this, less government that, yet in your fear after 9/11 you let the government do whatever they wanted, illegal search and seizures, illegal wire tappings all in the name of Anti-Terrorism.

Now almost a million people could have access to every single thing about you, including what Porno you enjoy.

How long before this monstrosity of a government security operatus is turned against the people themselves? Do you think it couldn't happen?

So less government.... when..... it's convenient for you to say so.



Dying to hear this.



They have the right to have justice served, not a show trial for political expediency.



All mens rights are important, not just the ones you deem convenient at the time.

You don't give enemy combatants, not wearing uniforms, not fighting for a country trials. You wait until the war is over to find out what to do with them.

May they die in Gitmo of old age.

.
 
You don't give enemy combatants, not wearing uniforms, not fighting for a country trials. You wait until the war is over to find out what to do with them.

May they die in Gitmo of old age.

.

So you're not concerned AT ALL that some of them may be innocent?

Some have already been released innocent that were detained there FOR YEARS and that doesn't bother you in the slightest?
 
If there is some evidence to at least take him to trial then it should be done.

I'm not advocating letting terrorists out.

But if there's 0 evidence and he's merely suspected, then yes he should be set free. Immediately.

Let's say that we know that he's a terrorist, but there is no evidence that would be admissible in a civilian court. What do we do?

We already know Obama's answer: "Detain him indefinitely."
 
Who's sh**ing who? Whatever Obama's plan is you won't agree with it because you are a self-confessed Obama hater.

ricksfolly

No, I'm not a self-confessed Obama Hater. Nice try. I'm a Conservative who is appalled by Obama's Actions, most of the time. However I've repeatedly stated I do not hate the man.

Have a nice life living in lies bud.
 
Speaking of trying terrorists........remember all the controversy over trying Khalid Sheik Muhammad in New York.

What's the latest on that? It's been silent.
 
Speaking of trying terrorists........remember all the controversy over trying Khalid Sheik Muhammad in New York.

What's the latest on that? It's been silent.

Obviously out of concern that he wouldn't get a fair trial, they're waiting for the hubbub to die down, and will slip him in on the Night Court docket.
 
Whatever dude, you're bleeding your heart for a man that helped plan the deaths of American's. I know that fact eludes your righteous outrage that he was "waterboarded", but it's scant consolation to the families of the dead.

The real truth is, Obama and Co want to try him under Federal Law, and the methods to capture the guy don't meet those guidelines. There will be no trial for this man, we can't do it under the new system, and if we go ahead with the older guidelines people like you scream and cry about this scums rights.

What about the rights of those he helped murder? Oh that's right, criminals and terrorist rights are more important to folks like you.

See thats the problem, we all know he's the guy who did it. There is enough open source intelligence and evidence that any court of law would find him guilty, that should be used to the fullest. The problem comes from the evidence gathered while he was tortured and from evidence gathered by secret sources and methods. Traditionally for evidence to be considered it has to have a long history behind it, police officers have to take logs of exactly where and when it was found, and every single person who handled it, and where it was every moment of every day until its brought to trial. The problem with evidence gathered with secret methods, the sources and methods cannot be revealed for national security reasons, which I understand. But basically because the other members of the court are not capable of seeing how this evidence was gathered they have to trust information from a single source which they cannot verify.

The real question is how much do we want to reveal, or do we want to reveal anything at all, during a trail and how will these trails, with secret evidence, be different than others?

Torture isn't needed anywhere in here.
 
So you're not concerned AT ALL that some of them may be innocent?

Some have already been released innocent that were detained there FOR YEARS and that doesn't bother you in the slightest?

We are at war, are a merciful and benevolent country. War has fog, and picking up enemy combatants isn't perfect. I'll trust the judgment of our military and intel thanks. They've erred on the side of the terrorista's many times.

If it takes a while, well it's just too bad. It's what happens when your enemy doesn't wear uniforms and doesn't fight for a country. **** happens... Blame the terrorists, not the US.

Until these matters are clarified, the inmates can enjoy their tropical island and all the comforts provided by the US tax payer.

.
 
We are at war, are a merciful and benevolent country. War has fog, and picking up enemy combatants isn't perfect. I'll trust the judgment of our military and intel thanks. They've erred on the side of the terrorista's many times.

If it takes a while, well it's just too bad. It's what happens when your enemy doesn't wear uniforms and doesn't fight for a country. **** happens... Blame the terrorists, not the US.

Until these matters are clarified, the inmates can enjoy their tropical island and all the comforts provided by the US tax payer.

.

He's right in many ways. The ambiguity of who is and who is not an enemy combatant is as thick as mud. And SOMEONE will get caught up in the mess who is innocent of everything, war has always had those casualties either killed on the battlefield or placed in a POW camp. And on top of that mistakes will happen, we have released individuals we believed to be innocent or which we believed not to be innocent but couldn't prove anything either for lack of evidence, lack of admissible evidence, or secret evidence. But at the same time we can't just lock them up for the rest of their lives either. A method has to be found to deal with this people and since its obvious there is no perfect solution or universally acceptable solution, Obama and Congress should stop beating around the bush like Bush did for 7 years and pick a method and use it.
 
See thats the problem, we all know he's the guy who did it. There is enough open source intelligence and evidence that any court of law would find him guilty, that should be used to the fullest. The problem comes from the evidence gathered while he was tortured and from evidence gathered by secret sources and methods. Traditionally for evidence to be considered it has to have a long history behind it, police officers have to take logs of exactly where and when it was found, and every single person who handled it, and where it was every moment of every day until its brought to trial. The problem with evidence gathered with secret methods, the sources and methods cannot be revealed for national security reasons, which I understand. But basically because the other members of the court are not capable of seeing how this evidence was gathered they have to trust information from a single source which they cannot verify.

The real question is how much do we want to reveal, or do we want to reveal anything at all, during a trail and how will these trails, with secret evidence, be different than others?

Torture isn't needed anywhere in here.


That is a smoke screen. You even said yourself

There is enough open source intelligence and evidence that any court of law would find him guilty

So what's the problem again?


j-mac
 
Doesn't any body think that other facts have a bearing on this decision by Obama's DOJ
1. Holder before becoming DOJ AG participated in defending 25 of the Guantanamo Terrorists.
2. The Head in the Sand regard Major Hassan in calling his massacre a non terrorist event.
3. The WH bannig the use of the word terrorist.
4. The DOJ awarding Miranda Rights to all Non Combatants - which on its surface my eliminate much evidence of culpability.
5. The decision to try Guantanamo residents in the US under US Judicial rules.
6. The what should be apparent Obama administration doing all that is legally possible to stall or white wash the terrorist acts.
5. There are so many anti-US pro Marxist aides in the Obama administration who naively or stupidly believe that the US is the creator of Terrorist.
6. It seems that Obama has either kissed or bowed to every major anti-US entity. - What's next - bowing on bended knee?
7. Obama has allowed Iran to acquire a Nuclear Reactor - whose absolute certain use and intent will be to build Nuclear Bombs to arm his newly acquired Chinese long range Missiles and threaten the world and any chance at peace. What will the world do as a reaction if they wiped Israel off the Map? Start a Nuclear War or sputter, mutter and go back and sit in the corner?
 
Fantastic post Cyborg, and welcome.


j-mac
 
I'm secretly an Islamic Bigot who believe Obama has turned the WH into a Mosque and is out to institute Sharia Law on America.

:roll:

ANYHOOTS...

This is really piss poor timing on the WH's part, do they WANT the dems to get wasted in the election?

One can only hope.
 
He's right in many ways. The ambiguity of who is and who is not an enemy combatant is as thick as mud. And SOMEONE will get caught up in the mess who is innocent of everything, war has always had those casualties either killed on the battlefield or placed in a POW camp. And on top of that mistakes will happen, we have released individuals we believed to be innocent or which we believed not to be innocent but couldn't prove anything either for lack of evidence, lack of admissible evidence, or secret evidence. But at the same time we can't just lock them up for the rest of their lives either. A method has to be found to deal with this people and since its obvious there is no perfect solution or universally acceptable solution, Obama and Congress should stop beating around the bush like Bush did for 7 years and pick a method and use it.

Let me pick up the last point, seeing as we seem to agree on everything else.

The method is to wait until the war on terror is over.
We do not try enemy combatants until the war is over.
They are prisoners... Eternal prisoners.

That's the beauty of it. It's poetic... beautiful music... almost makes me want to get up and dance.

These MF's should know they will be on permanent holiday, funded by the US Taxpayer... until their last breath, or until we defeat the terrorists. That way they may off themselves before we get the chance to put hoods over their scruffy little necks.

And when they die, we will dump them in the ocean, head first towards Mecca.
Fish food.
End of story.

.
 
Last edited:
Yeah **** eh.

Wouldn't want anyone to have an actual trial. That's un-amer... oh wait ****!

I think thats the point...they WANT to have him in a regular trial. it doesnt WORK that way. in a regular trial there are certain procedures that have to be followed, evidence chains, criminal rights, etc. In the war on terror these people are captured often on the field of battle, not by trained officers but by military members. They dont file for warrants...they collect data and go after them. They dont issue miranda rights. The individuals are not US citizens covered under the constitution. Square pegs, round holes...they just dont fit. Which is precisely why this should go forward in a military tribunal and not an actual court trial.
 
Doesn't any body think that other facts have a bearing on this decision by Obama's DOJ
1. Holder before becoming DOJ AG participated in defending 25 of the Guantanamo Terrorists.
2. The Head in the Sand regard Major Hassan in calling his massacre a non terrorist event.
3. The WH bannig the use of the word terrorist.
4. The DOJ awarding Miranda Rights to all Non Combatants - which on its surface my eliminate much evidence of culpability.
5. The decision to try Guantanamo residents in the US under US Judicial rules.
6. The what should be apparent Obama administration doing all that is legally possible to stall or white wash the terrorist acts.
5. There are so many anti-US pro Marxist aides in the Obama administration who naively or stupidly believe that the US is the creator of Terrorist.
6. It seems that Obama has either kissed or bowed to every major anti-US entity. - What's next - bowing on bended knee?
7. Obama has allowed Iran to acquire a Nuclear Reactor - whose absolute certain use and intent will be to build Nuclear Bombs to arm his newly acquired Chinese long range Missiles and threaten the world and any chance at peace. What will the world do as a reaction if they wiped Israel off the Map? Start a Nuclear War or sputter, mutter and go back and sit in the corner?

Quite frankly, considering Holders ignorance on the Arizona situation and the number of idiotic things he said about the Arizona immigration law, I wouldnt be even a little bit surprised if Holder hasnt read any of the actual case material on this guy either. Seems to be his track record.
 
I think thats the point...they WANT to have him in a regular trial. it doesnt WORK that way. in a regular trial there are certain procedures that have to be followed, evidence chains, criminal rights, etc. In the war on terror these people are captured often on the field of battle, not by trained officers but by military members. They dont file for warrants...they collect data and go after them. They dont issue miranda rights. The individuals are not US citizens covered under the constitution. Square pegs, round holes...they just dont fit. Which is precisely why this should go forward in a military tribunal and not an actual court trial.

They should prepare for a military tribunal, but not execute one until the war is over.
Those things happen after victory is declared.
That these pricks choose to fight from schools, hospitals, Mosques, use human shields like an Amsterdam hooker uses condems, and don't wear uniforms or fight for a country... that is the game they chose to play... for that we have an answer.

We wait until we can declare victory.
Then tribunals, but not a second before.

For those caught in the fog of war... sorry... just be happy it was Americans that you're dealing with.

.
 
Fantastic post Cyborg, and welcome.


j-mac

Thans J-mac - so far I have had a plethora of Liberal Statist yelling Wingnut - the apparent favored word.
 
Thans J-mac - so far I have had a plethora of Liberal Statist yelling Wingnut - the apparent favored word.


yeah, that's how you know you winged them....

j-mac
 
Name calling isn't really productive, neither is pompous arrogance.
 
They should prepare for a military tribunal, but not execute one until the war is over.
Those things happen after victory is declared.
That these pricks choose to fight from schools, hospitals, Mosques, use human shields like an Amsterdam hooker uses condems, and don't wear uniforms or fight for a country... that is the game they chose to play... for that we have an answer.

We wait until we can declare victory.
Then tribunals, but not a second before.

For those caught in the fog of war... sorry... just be happy it was Americans that you're dealing with.

.

I disagree. That was the normal way of doing things in war-time, finish the war then conduct the war trails. However, unlike WW2, where the last US-led war crimes trails were conducted there will be no clear end to the War on Terrorism. AQ or the Taliban won't just surrender like Germany did, I could see a time perhaps that Afghanistan was stable and AQ, the Taliban and other likeminded groups are merely fringe groups with no real power or ability to act. But that is so far off, and I'm worried we'd be sitting on these people for another decade while we try to decide if anything in the last 10 years counts as the "end of the war."
 
Back
Top Bottom