Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4
Reply To Thread

Today's Poli-Poll: 9/11 TrialsFollow

#1 Mar 05 2010 at 10:29 AM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
NPR wrote:
NPR has learned that the Obama administration is close to deciding that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — the self-professed mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks — will be tried in a military court.

The move would be a major reversal in the terrorism case. Attorney General Eric Holder announced weeks ago that Mohammed and four other detainees would be tried in a civilian court in New York. Fierce political opposition to the plan appears to have prompted an about-face.

Details are still sketchy, but it is likely that civilian lawyers will be able to take part in the trial. The big change is that instead of having the five men face charges in a federal courtroom, they will be in a military setting with military judges deciding their fate.


Khalid Sheikh Mohammed should be tried in...
A US civilian court:27 (44.3%)
A US military tribunal:31 (50.8%)
No trial, just hold him indefinitely:3 (4.9%)
Total:61
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2 Mar 05 2010 at 10:40 AM Rating: Decent
Karnak says: Liberals, Asylumites and Stupid People

/opens envelope

"Who in Zeus's butt-hole would think a terrorist mastermind should be tried in civilian courts?"
#3 Mar 05 2010 at 10:44 AM Rating: Good
I'm sure this is a stupid question, but what would be the difference? I don't know much about military courts.
#4 Mar 05 2010 at 10:49 AM Rating: Decent
I don't think you have the option for a trial by jury in a military court, for one.

#5 Mar 05 2010 at 10:51 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
catwho wrote:
I don't think you have the option for a trial by jury in a military court, for one.

Does anyone believe he could get a fair, unbiased jury from US civilians?
____________________________
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

#6 Mar 05 2010 at 10:53 AM Rating: Decent
The correct answer is "trial by firing squad", but I'll go with "no trial at all" as a stopgap measure.
#7 Mar 05 2010 at 10:54 AM Rating: Good
catwho wrote:
I don't think you have the option for a trial by jury in a military court, for one.


You also don't have to put classified intelligence gathering methods in to public record.
#8 Mar 05 2010 at 10:59 AM Rating: Good
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Karnak says: Liberals, Asylumites and Stupid People

/opens envelope

"Who in Zeus's butt-hole would think a terrorist mastermind should be tried in civilian courts?"


Why should he be tried in a military court? The reason you use military courts is to try a lot of people really quickly. In this case, there's no danger of the courts clogging up and the case has dragged on far too long for anything to make it short anyway. Do you think a bunch of officers are better at administering justice than American courts? Pretty fascist viewpoint, if you ask me.
#9 Mar 05 2010 at 11:13 AM Rating: Decent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
catwho wrote:
I don't think you have the option for a trial by jury in a military court, for one.


You also don't have to put classified intelligence gathering methods in to public record.


That, and the state (presumably New York) won't have to bear the expense.

Also the whole thing of finding an unbiased jury at this point. Yeah.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#10 Mar 05 2010 at 11:16 AM Rating: Excellent
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Karnak says: Liberals, Asylumites and Stupid People

/opens envelope

"Who in Zeus's butt-hole would think a terrorist mastermind should be tried in civilian courts?"


Why should he be tried in a military court? The reason you use military courts is to try a lot of people really quickly. In this case, there's no danger of the courts clogging up and the case has dragged on far too long for anything to make it short anyway. Do you think a bunch of officers are better at administering justice than American courts?

No, the reasons you try them in Military Tribunals are numerous. Not the least of them is classified material in the public record. Another is fact that to millions of Americans the bestowing of Constitutional Protections to non-citizens who plotted and carried out the largest attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor is an anathema. The precedent for trying combatants in military court is well established.
Quote:
Pretty fascist viewpoint, if you ask me.

I didn't, but since you shared, I'll let you know that I think yours is a fairly Pollyanna-ish viewpoint. You might as well be asking Rainbow Bright to pull together Strawberry Shortcake and the My Little Ponies and the Care Bears to be on a jury and mead out some flower-power justice.

Just out of curiosity, what's your stance on the death penalty for terrorist ring leaders?
#11 Mar 05 2010 at 11:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Moe wrote:
Another is fact that to millions of Americans the bestowing of Constitutional Protections to non-citizens who plotted and carried out the largest attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor is an anathema.


This to me is not a problem. We're the good guys. If our laws are fair for us, they're fair for everyone. Our principles can stand, or they can fall, but they cannot be applied only to some people some of the time, whenever it's convenient for us.

The way we treat others has, or should have, less to do with them than it has to do with us.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#12 Mar 05 2010 at 11:22 AM Rating: Good
Samira wrote:
Moe wrote:
Another is fact that to millions of Americans the bestowing of Constitutional Protections to non-citizens who plotted and carried out the largest attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor is an anathema.


This to me is not a problem. We're the good guys. If our laws are fair for us, they're fair for everyone. Our principles can stand, or they can fall, but they cannot be applied only to some people some of the time, whenever it's convenient for us.

I wouldn't characterize you as one of the millions, though.
#13 Mar 05 2010 at 11:38 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Samira wrote:
Moe wrote:
Another is fact that to millions of Americans the bestowing of Constitutional Protections to non-citizens who plotted and carried out the largest attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor is an anathema.


This to me is not a problem. We're the good guys. If our laws are fair for us, they're fair for everyone. Our principles can stand, or they can fall, but they cannot be applied only to some people some of the time, whenever it's convenient for us.

I wouldn't characterize you as one of the millions, though.


The point stands though.

To do otherwise is to make a mockery of the 6th amendment.

The constitutional amendment protections weren't meant just for the easy cases, where as matter of course they will be undertaken anyway. They are there to set the course for the tough ones, the ones that are really hard to do. The ones where taking the easy road looks incredibly inviting.

Otherwise they are naught but worthless scraps of paper.

And if they are, for what reason do we call ourselves citizens of the United States?
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#14 Mar 05 2010 at 11:39 AM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I don't really buy into the classified information argument. US Courts seal records all the time and for much less important reasons than national security.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#15 Mar 05 2010 at 11:41 AM Rating: Decent
Jophiel wrote:
I don't really buy into the classified information argument. US Courts seal records all the time and for much less important reasons than national security.

Yeah, sealed court documents never get leaked. Go Go Pollyanna-phiel!
#16 Mar 05 2010 at 11:43 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I don't really buy into the classified information argument. US Courts seal records all the time and for much less important reasons than national security.

Yeah, sealed court documents never get leaked. Go Go Pollyanna-phiel!


Sounds like instead of calling for a tribunal, you should be railing for better document protection and accountability.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#17 Mar 05 2010 at 11:46 AM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Yeah, sealed court documents never get leaked. Go Go Pollyanna-phiel!

Classified documents get leaked from the Pentagon, FBI, CIA and DHS as well. So you take measures to avoid it. "There'll be classified infoz and maybe sealing them just won't be enough!" is a pretty lame defense for avoiding a civilian court.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#18REDACTED, Posted: Mar 05 2010 at 11:49 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I'm all for shooting people who commit treason. Line up congress the day after they ram healthcare reform down our throats.
#19 Mar 05 2010 at 11:49 AM Rating: Good
Quote:
No, the reasons you try them in Military Tribunals are numerous. Not the least of them is classified material in the public record. Another is fact that to millions of Americans the bestowing of Constitutional Protections to non-citizens who plotted and carried out the largest attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor is an anathema. The precedent for trying combatants in military court is well established.


Heh, "combatants".

The whole point of a trial is to determine whether someone is guilty - it's not like giving them the more accurate trial is some kind of personal favor to the accused. it seems pretty stupid to use someone's supposed guilt as a justification for not attempting to ascertain to the best of one's ability if they are actually guilty, but hey, millions of Americans are often pretty damn stupid.

Quote:
I didn't, but since you shared, I'll let you know that I think yours is a fairly Pollyanna-ish viewpoint. You might as well be asking Rainbow Bright to pull together Strawberry Shortcake and the My Little Ponies and the Care Bears to be on a jury and mead out some flower-power justice.

Just out of curiosity, what's your stance on the death penalty for terrorist ring leaders?


Against, unless there's something tangible to be gained from their death. For example, if there was pretty solid evidence killing them would seriously harm their organisation, fine. Otherwise, I see no reason to.

I'm not sure why you think that. I don't know if you think these clowns pose more of a threat than they actually do or if you assume I think these guys are gonna get a fair trial. I know they're not - it'd probably be possible to find an approximately unbiased jury of Americans if you really looked, but no one will. They're pretty much already dead.
#20 Mar 05 2010 at 11:50 AM Rating: Good
Quote:
Classified documents get leaked from the Pentagon, FBI, CIA and DHS as well. So you take measures to avoid it. "There'll be classified infoz and maybe sealing them just won't be enough!" is a pretty lame defense for avoiding a civilian court.

Perhaps, but then I can't imagine there'd be one someone like you didn't see as lame, so good job to the president for seeing the light regardless.
#21 Mar 05 2010 at 11:52 AM Rating: Good
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Quote:
Classified documents get leaked from the Pentagon, FBI, CIA and DHS as well. So you take measures to avoid it. "There'll be classified infoz and maybe sealing them just won't be enough!" is a pretty lame defense for avoiding a civilian court.

Perhaps, but then I can't imagine there'd be one someone like you didn't see as lame, so good job to the president for seeing the light regardless.


Why, has Jophiel got some kind of cripple vision?
#22 Mar 05 2010 at 11:53 AM Rating: Decent
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
Heh, "combatants".

We could just leave it there and suss out your opinion on the whole thing.

Personally, I believe that a penalty should be commensurate, or as near to as we are able to make it, with the offense. Since we can't draw and quarter the ******* or pull his still beating heart out of his chest to make him watch it as he dies, a bullet to the base of the skull will suffice.
#23 Mar 05 2010 at 11:54 AM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Perhaps

I'll accept that as the "You're correct, Jophiel" you intended it to be. Thank you and that was very gracious.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#24 Mar 05 2010 at 11:54 AM Rating: Good
Kavekk the Ludicrous wrote:
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Quote:
Classified documents get leaked from the Pentagon, FBI, CIA and DHS as well. So you take measures to avoid it. "There'll be classified infoz and maybe sealing them just won't be enough!" is a pretty lame defense for avoiding a civilian court.

Perhaps, but then I can't imagine there'd be one someone like you didn't see as lame, so good job to the president for seeing the light regardless.


Why, has Jophiel got some kind of cripple vision?

See? And people wonder why most comedy writers are liberal. It's because they're funny, people!

Ok, not that funny.
#25 Mar 05 2010 at 11:55 AM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel wrote:
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Perhaps

I'll accept that as the "You're correct, Jophiel" you intended it to be. Thank you and that was very gracious.

Why not? It fits with the rest of the leaps your arguments usually make.
#26 Mar 05 2010 at 11:56 AM Rating: Good
@#%^
*****
15,953 posts
They can't just take him out behind the chemical sheds and shoot him?
____________________________
"I have lost my way
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all hell for a basement"

« Previous 1 2 3 4
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 298 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (298)