And if he would be sentenced by an Afghan court, you would assume that he had a fair trial?Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Printable View
And if he would be sentenced by an Afghan court, you would assume that he had a fair trial?Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Horetore, give me a break. I've said that he wasn't waterboarded, that people are using vague terms to describe what happened to him. Sexual humiliation? Is that where he is stripped down and genitally electrocuted with a stick up his arse, or is it where a pretty woman comes in, tempts hims with sex and then puts on the pressure?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
The former is absolutely unacceptable and the later is pragmatic. I would like to see the report in question. If it was kept by the authorities (which I have read it was and coincides with his account), I highly doubt that it resembled the former.
You should be losing sleep when you have facilitated the death of thousands of people and solitary confinement is used for jerks who punch other inmates. Why shouldn't we use it on guys like Salim?
We can't talk to prisoners anymore because you calim abuse and when we leave them alone, you claim solitary confinement? What if we give him a brand new car and a house in the Hamptons? Would that be appropriate?
Mad man definition and classification is open to debate. But I was trying to point out how entire logic of "guilty by association" is flawed. If we are to truly press that further, half the world's politicians would find themselves in jail. Well, there's a nice thought...:yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by BigTex
The US would probably not give him to an afghan court. :dizzy2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Andres
I once held a door open for John Darwin. He got 6+ years so I should get...1 year + probation?
5 1/2 years.
Shock.
Horror.
But will the liberal outrage end???? :furious3:
I don't think that's considered a life sentence anywhere. :beam:Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
It's the average life of a liberal brain cell. I can understand their skittishness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
tee-hee~:cool:
Not including you, Little Grizzly. You recognized that transporting scuds for use in terrorist activity was a criminal offense. I give you massive kudos.
Did you know that John Darwin was the criminal behind this evolution theory at the time and did he pay you for it? :inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Craterus
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Is this to include time served already ?Quote:
5 1/2 years.
so he completes his sentence in 5 months time upon which he can remain inindefinate custody at the whim of the leader of the free world
Yay freedom and justice
Jack Bauer would approve. :2thumbsup:
Yes , but the important question is does Paris Hilton approve ?Quote:
Jack Bauer would approve.
You recognized that transporting scuds for use in terrorist activity was a criminal offense.
I was working off the basis he was just a driver, now it seems alot more reasonable, obviously i still don't agree with his detention in gauntanamo and assume that will count as time served ?
I believe that is the deal. It was determined by a military jury and will be appealed at the Pentagon. I support the decision.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Yes, let us all ignore the fact that the notion "fair trial" is at the least questionable in this case.
TBH, while your intentions are noble and your point does resonate, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone here in America who gives a damn what you - the international citizen - think about this. If you catch them in your country, happily send them off to the Hague; but America was attacked in one of the most vile and disgusting ways imaginable, and if and when we nab these guys, they will answer to American justice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andres
We have widely varying views on our relations with the international community on most issues including Kyoto, Iraq, and trade, and you’ll find that many Americans do not agree with the current administration’s "our way or the highway" approach, but I think there is a fairly strong consensus on this one.. :shrug:
And that is where they screw up , because like it or not this wide ranging campaign to attempt to bring people from al-qaida to justice needs lots of international co-operation and you don't get much co-operation if people think you are acting like an ass .Quote:
TBH, while your intentions are noble and your point does resonate, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone here in America who gives a damn what you - the international citizen - think about this.
Think about this .
If a country arrests some al-qaida operative and America wants them extradited , that country may have a legal requirement to block any extradition if there is any question about the fairness of the trial that will be conducted .
Not of course to forget mentioning the other legal aspect that if a country catches some big Al-qaida knob and America wants to execute the knob then the country may be legally obliged to block all attempts at extradition .
The whole thing about the farcical events surrounding Gitmo , kidnap , rendition , torture , secret prisons , detention without trial and fairness of the justice system is that it has actually weakened your ability to conduct opertions against those that you are supposed to be binging to justice .
As i understand certain countries are not allowed to extradite people they believe will be tortured as well, though with the process of rendition it is a sneaky way around that, but how long do you think countries will just let you quietly take guys from our country with no legal proceedings ? (probably a bit longer but sooner or later people will get pissed off with it, and then you might find it is suddenly harder to extradite through legal means)
By all means ignore international opinion but that don't be surprised (or angry) when international opinion ignores you
Ask him what he had in the trunk ?Quote:
So....
A taxi driver who picks up and drives a criminal(which he is bound to do by law, btw) is now a criminal too?
I agree with you to a certain extent. Enhanced interrogation et al should have been kept far away from the prying eyes of the media or not done at all. I'm just saying that most Americans do not support sending these guys off to an international court for the same reasons Adres doesn't support them being tried here.. fairness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
We can't lost from watch who is our enemy.
:daisy: who are not caring about any convension when they will not benefit from it.
They demand human rights but ... they never show it when torturing their victims.
They are murdering every prisoner or every civilian they caught but they are first to complain
when our forces kill civilian by mistake.
When I'm listenting to people yelling because law of terrorists are being broken - I think they should be send to Iraq and leave on street of Bagdad without weapons. I wonder if terrorist would show them human rights.
Every country and every nation has right to defend itself. Rule of law can be broken when
its necessary to defend nation or country. Thats why this judgement is right.
Terrorists must know that as long they break war rights they will not be under their protection.
At addition I would like to ask.... How human rights of war were being born?
Because when enemies behave with your soldiers same like you with enemy - it was bad option to torture prisoners. We have to show terrorists that we will not be playing with them.
The question is though, if we are to adopt the methods of the terrorists in order to combat them, why bother to combat them at all? We will have lost by default and achieved the terrorists' aims for them.
The struggle against Al Qaeda is first and foremost an ideological one, not military. This is the point Bush has always missed. The most important thing is that we show through our actions that our ideals are superior to theirs, by not engaging in the same sort of despicable methods they do. Actually convicting known terrorists is a secondary goal and is pointless if doing so means losing the ideological struggle.
Post above is good point but...
you forgot about their ideological point of view.
We have wars justified and non-justified.
Justified is defensive war or war for freedom.
They have justified and non-justified wars too.
But !!! war vs non islamists is always justified.
This is their religion and they seems respect this strategy.
Thats why we will never convince muslims and they will never support us as long
as they don't see potential benefits - stronger than their religion.
Understand that we are for them people of worse category. Their religion
tells them datase us and conquer us - we are destinated to be their slaves.
I think if we show them that we will not be .... with them like with young .....
and we reply on every act of agression with full strenght - they will understood that
long life might be better than islamic heaven.
Look at Americans and Mahdi Army. They made terrorist attacks into Faludża and keep that they
are undefeated warriors of god. When Americans show them that their will not .... with them
and conquered city eliminating most of islamists.... undefeated warriors of god started crying about
unjustified methods of fight used by Americans.
The man isnt just "guilty of association" he has moved past association. He was working for Bin Laden, driving and apparently being a bodyguard on occasions. That's way beyond just assiociating with him, which is what he went to trial for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Great news. At this rate they should get a conviction on Osama's hairdresser by, oh, 2025.
Problem with this. Of all the terrorists in prison, we hold a trial for a car driver? And one who wasn't even involved in the 9/11 attacks? Talk about a waste.Quote:
If you catch them in your country, happily send them off to the Hague; but America was attacked in one of the most vile and disgusting ways imaginable, and if and when we nab these guys, they will answer to American justice.
I don't think any of this matters anymore; Russia invaded Georgia, and the U.S. is going to get involved and World War 3 is going to start and the world will end!!!!!!!!!! :help::help::help::sweatdrop: :sweatdrop: :sweatdrop::help::help::help:
He got off easy though. 66 months minus time served. He might get out while Bush is still in the office.Quote:
Originally Posted by SwedishFish