Yeah, so doesn't really matter what New York's stance on the DP is.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Obama subverts justice
Obama subverts justiceFollow
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
gbaji wrote:
I'm more curious how and when Obama thinks they're going to get the death penalty in New York...
Heh. Your political analysis would be better served if you knew which court he was being tried in.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I'm more curious how and when Obama thinks they're going to get the death penalty in New York...
Heh. Your political analysis would be better served if you knew which court he was being tried in.
That's what I said.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Samira wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I'm more curious how and when Obama thinks they're going to get the death penalty in New York...
This.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Who cares if he gets the death penalty anyways? If he's found guilty, I'd be happy with him being locked up for the rest of his life with no chance at parole. That'd probably be a worse punishment than the death penalty anyways. Being treated like any other prisoner, and getting the **** beat out of him on a daily basis by the American prisoners, while the guards stand by and watch.
PigtailsOfDoom the Eccentric wrote:
getting the sh*t beat out of him on a daily basis by the American prisoners
He would, most assuredly, be kept in solitary confinement.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
PigtailsOfDoom the Eccentric wrote:
getting the sh*t beat out of him on a daily basis by the American prisoners
He would, most assuredly, be kept in solitary confinement.
Yeah, I'm assuming they'd put him in solitary confinement too, but honestly I think it'd be more of a punishment to treat him like a regular prisoner.
Varus since when the **** do you care about due process?
This is the most transparently and purely partisan complaint I've ever seen you make, and I'm not using hyperbole here.
This is the most transparently and purely partisan complaint I've ever seen you make, and I'm not using hyperbole here.
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
Varus since when the @#%^ do you care about due process?
This is the most transparently and purely partisan complaint I've ever seen you make, and I'm not using hyperbole here.
This is the most transparently and purely partisan complaint I've ever seen you make, and I'm not using hyperbole here.
gbaji wrote:
These guys are going to spend the rest of their lives in one jail or another.
...
They lose nothing.
...
They lose nothing.
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
bsphil wrote:
gbaji wrote:
These guys are going to spend the rest of their lives in one jail or another.
...
They lose nothing.
...
They lose nothing.
gbaji doesn't understand that it isn't about what they lose, it is about what we, as a society, gain.
The ideal punishment for him would be to forcibly change him into a woman, tits and all, and then dump him back in the middle of the Taliban (where he'd probably get stoned for being "unnatural").
However, because we have some strange idea that this constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment", I'll have to be disappointed.
Off to cook pork chops.
However, because we have some strange idea that this constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment", I'll have to be disappointed.
Off to cook pork chops.
MDenham wrote:
Off to cook pork chops.
OMG throw a pork chop at him and then he'll be all like "OMGWTF now I can't go to Heaven ohnoes!!"
I heard this one guy did it in Northwest Central Guam and they NEVER had a killing ever again.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
publiusvarus wrote:
Does Obama assuming this guys guilt prejudice any potential jurist?
I thought you were the one who wanted to bypass due process and have the 9/11 ringleader summarily executed?
This development should make you happy.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
gbaji wrote:
And they get to put folks on the stand who will speak about all the horrible torture and treatment they received under the Bush administration. It's kind of the fall back position for Dems.
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
Speaking of leaders not telling the truth, have we found those nucular weapons yet?
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
lolgaxe wrote:
Speaking of leaders not telling the truth, have we found those nucular weapons yet?
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I'm more curious how and when Obama thinks they're going to get the death penalty in New York...
Heh. Your political analysis would be better served if you knew which court he was being tried in.
It doesn't matter. I was presenting the only possible option in which he *could* possibly get the death penalty. A state could possibly determine that they had jurisdiction over them with regard to a set of crimes disconnected from those at the federal level and therefore possibly apply the death penalty.
If this is federal jurisdiction, then the death penalty is completely out. The nature of the way they were captured and status they've been already defined to be for the last however many years makes it a violation of US treaty to apply the death penalty.
Point being that Obama is presenting a rational for the case which is quite simply not true. I can be excused for not knowing exactly in which court the trial is occurring. It's not like this has been something I've been involved in. What is Obama's excuse? He's got whole teams of legal experts working for him. You'd think one of them might have clued him in to the legal realities of the situation...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Bardalicious wrote:
gbaji doesn't understand that it isn't about what they lose, it is about what we, as a society, gain.
Ok. I'll bite.
What do we as a society gain from this?
It's a show trial, with absolutely no consequences for those on trial. What do we gain? Do you honestly think this will make people feel better about themselves? Do you think that by having a trial it'll create some kind of national catharsis and we'll all just relax or something? Really?
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Death sentence or life in prison. Either way, they're never going to kill another citizen. Well, maybe another inmate, but I don't think you, me or any other conservative gives a damn about them.
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
gbaji wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
gbaji doesn't understand that it isn't about what they lose, it is about what we, as a society, gain.
Ok. I'll bite.
What do we as a society gain from this?
It's a show trial, with absolutely no consequences for those on trial. What do we gain? Do you honestly think this will make people feel better about themselves?
about themselves? no. About the general "terrorism" situation? yeah.
I wouldn't expect you to see the difference between indefinitely detaining someone and maintaining judicial standards that are an important foundation of our society.
gbaji wrote:
...makes it a violation of US treaty to apply the death penalty.
Quote:
If this is federal jurisdiction, then the death penalty is completely out. The nature of the way they were captured and status they've been already defined to be for the last however many years makes it a violation of US treaty to apply the death penalty.
I'm not at all sure what makes you think this is true. Foreign nationals can absolutely be convicted of capital crimes under Federal law.
His consulate will be (may already have been) allowed to participate in his defense if they wish. I don't see that happening, under the circumstances.
If we have no formal diplomatic relationship with his country of origin, he's pretty much SOL for that intervention.
I'm not sure why you're confused. This is a Federal criminal trial, not a military hearing. He's being denied a military tribunal, in fact, and treated as a common criminal. The only risk is that he might by some miracle be found innocent.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
MDenham wrote:
gbaji wrote:
...makes it a violation of US treaty to apply the death penalty.
I'm talking about the Geneva Conventions. And actually, having gone back and read the relevant sections again, it does appear that the death penalty is possible, but only under some pretty specific conditions.
Quote:
The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.
Now, normally they're talking about civilians unlawfully taking arms against an occupying power, which doesn't exactly apply since while they were captured as part of a military operation, the attack they are being charged with occurred in the US, not where they were captured, nor where the conflict specifically occurred. But, if we broaden the meaning of an area of conflict to include any location where battles are being fought, and assume that the US was one such place on 9/11, then for purposes of this section, the US becomes the "occupied territory" in which the attack occurred, and it falls to the rule of law at that time and place.
So yeah. I suppose it's possible that they could get and receive the death penalty. I think it's highly unlikely though. It's a legalistic mine field to try to get there and I frankly don't believe that this administration has the will to go through with it. They'll get what they can out of the idea that they *might* do so, but almost certainly will not.
Anyone want to place odds on whether a single one of those five men are executed in the next 10 years?
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Samira wrote:
I'm not at all sure what makes you think this is true. Foreign nationals can absolutely be convicted of capital crimes under Federal law.
The issue is that they have been held as "unlawful combatants". Whether you agree with the terminology or not, that is the legal condition they exist under. That places them firmly under the protections of the 4th Geneva Convention (and general provisions of all Conventions). There's some screwy bits in terms of whether or not this would be a federal crime or not in the first place. We can argue that the hijackings count as federal jurisdiction, and the attack on the Pentagon absolutely does (and is in fact the easiest one to fit into the applicable legal language). But they're holding this in New York, with the presumed purpose being to address the deaths at the World Trade Center.
That's the one crime which is hardest to argue can have the death penalty applied. I'm sure you *could* if you worked at it hard enough. As I said just above, I just don't think that this administration actually will do so.
Quote:
I'm not sure why you're confused. This is a Federal criminal trial, not a military hearing. He's being denied a military tribunal, in fact, and treated as a common criminal. The only risk is that he might by some miracle be found innocent.
The means by which he was captured does actually matter.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Recent Visitors: 547
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (547)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Obama subverts justice
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC