the bad news just keeps on coming for The Apologist

[david gibson]

wow, he gets his butt kicked on nov 2 so he leaves the country to go places where he thinks they like him and then gets his butt kicked on his whirlwind "Praise Islam" tour and comes home to yet another butt kicking!!!! its a merry-go-round of comical lashings for this buffoon:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/17/AR2010111705663.html?wpisrc=nl_natlalert

[Gerry Clinchy]

Just last week, a senior administration official said a not guilty verdict would be a "disaster" for the administration's Guantanamo policy.

Disaster might be a good word.

Not to mention the note to the judge where one juror thought she would be attacked for her position.

[dnf777]

The article refers to Ahmed Gailani, who was arrested on July 25, 2004.

Now I'm wondering why he just came to trial. Did we not have him in custody for 6 1/2 years?? What was going on for the past half decade, that we neglected to hear his case, when more witnesses were probably available to secure a conviction?

I know, Obama's fault.

[david gibson]

The article refers to Ahmed Gailani, who was arrested on July 25, 2004.

Now I'm wondering why he just came to trial. Did we not have him in custody for 6 1/2 years?? What was going on for the past half decade, that we neglected to hear his case, when more witnesses were probably available to secure a conviction?

I know, Obama's fault.

you are finally catching on, what took so long?

now, wasnt there some debate awhile back about civilian court vs military court??????

[dnf777]

you are finally catching on, what took so long?

now, wasnt there some debate awhile back about civilian court vs military court??????

We had him in custody for 6.5 years. Didn't anyone have spine enough to decide when and how he would be tried, and follow through with it?

[david gibson]

We had him in custody for 6.5 years. Didn't anyone have spine enough to decide when and how he would be tried, and follow through with it?

ohhhhhhh i get it. bush had him the first 4.5 yrs so its his fault......puhhhleeeeeze

obama is the one who decided on civilian trials. he is solely to mblame.

[dnf777]

bush had him the first 4.5 yrs so its his fault......


I think your first statement is worth repeating.

[david gibson]

I think your first statement is worth repeating.

you are right. and my first statement was:

"wow, he gets his butt kicked on nov 2 so he leaves the country to go places where he thinks they like him and then gets his butt kicked on his whirlwind "Praise Islam" tour and comes home to yet another butt kicking!!!! its a merry-go-round of comical lashings for this buffoon"

glad to see you agree!

[depittydawg]

you are finally catching on, what took so long?

now, wasnt there some debate awhile back about civilian court vs military court??????

Yeah, that debate has been around for about 8 years now.

[Clay Rogers]

We had him in custody for 6.5 years. Didn't anyone have spine enough to decide when and how he would be tried, and follow through with it?

Since when do we try POW's in civilian court? Because that's what they are, POW's.

[david gibson]

Since when do we try POW's in civilian court? Because that's what they are, POW's.

since we have socialists in charge, thats when

[dnf777]

Since when do we try POW's in civilian court? Because that's what they are, POW's.

Exactly Stumpholehunter! So why didn't our commander-in-chief, who sat on these barbarians for most of his 8 year term, DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT? Take charge. Be a leader.

Instead, he sat around and did NOTHING and just passed it off to the next guy, and blame him.


DG said: since we have socialists in charge, thats when

See above, AND your own comment about having them for 4.5 years. You had plenty of time to do something, but instead, handed off the ball and took a shower.

[Clay Rogers]

Exactly Stumpholehunter! So why didn't our commander-in-chief, who sat on these barbarians for most of his 8 year term, DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT? Take charge. Be a leader.

Instead, he sat around and did NOTHING and just passed it off to the next guy, and blame him.


DG said: since we have socialists in charge, thats when

See above, AND your own comment about having them for 4.5 years. You had plenty of time to do something, but instead, handed off the ball and took a shower.

First, I don't think you have heard GWB say anything about Obama or blaming him for the POW's in Gitmo. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Second, you don't do anything with POW's until the war is over, typically, right?

Third, I think Obama decided to try these yahoo's and it has blown up in his face on the first try.

I never mirandized one POW that I took so how can we try them in civilian court. Soldiers are not police and POW's are not criminals(at least not in the same as a rapist or thief).

[david gibson]

Exactly Stumpholehunter! So why didn't our commander-in-chief, who sat on these barbarians for most of his 8 year term, DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT? Take charge. Be a leader.

Instead, he sat around and did NOTHING and just passed it off to the next guy, and blame him.


DG said: since we have socialists in charge, thats when

See above, AND your own comment about having them for 4.5 years. You had plenty of time to do something, but instead, handed off the ball and took a shower.


are you serious? isnt there adifference between a POW and a criminal?

how many VC did we try on Guam? how many germans did we put on trial, you know - the thousands of german POWs we brought stateside during the war? or japanese? when has this EVER occured before this half-muslim president?

it was The Half Muslim Apologist and his socialist winkies who came up with the brilliant idea that foreign enemy combatants captured on foreign soil deserve rights under our civilian criminal justice system.

The Half Muslim Apologist is just showing his true colors.

[dnf777]

are you serious? isnt there adifference between a POW and a criminal?

how many VC did we try on Guam? how many germans did we put on trial, you know - the thousands of german POWs we brought stateside during the war? or japanese? when has this EVER occured before this half-muslim president?

it was The Half Muslim Apologist and his socialist winkies who came up with the brilliant idea that foreign enemy combatants captured on foreign soil deserve rights under our civilian criminal justice system.

The Half Muslim Apologist is just showing his true colors.

What I'm saying is try them however YOU think is appropriate. Just don't let them sit and pass the job off to the next guy. You had 6 years with many of them. Oops...too late. Time to sell books.

[dnf777]

First, I don't think you have heard GWB say anything about Obama or blaming him for the POW's in Gitmo. I could be wrong, but I doubt it. No, but he did pass the ball, rather than run with it.

Second, you don't do anything with POW's until the war is over, typically, right? According to the last GOP candidate, this war will last 100 years. They'll be dead by then. We have a little nuisance in our Constitution called Habeus corpus.
Third, I think Obama decided to try these yahoo's and it has blown up in his face on the first try. No argument from me. At least he tried to do SOMETHING, though.

I never mirandized one POW that I took so how can we try them in civilian court. Soldiers are not police and POW's are not criminals(at least not in the same as a rapist or thief).
Again, I won't argue with you on that. I would say that this is largely untested ground in many regards. I don't have the expertise to know WHAT should be done.......just that SOMETHING should be done. Maybe the smart play for Obama would be to pull a Bush, let them sit for another two or six years (whichever the case may be) and drop them in the lap of the next republican president.




...........................................

[road kill]

Again, I won't argue with you on that. I would say that this is largely untested ground in many regards. I don't have the expertise to know WHAT should be done.......just that SOMETHING should be done. Maybe the smart play for Obama would be to pull a Bush, let them sit for another two or six years (whichever the case may be) and drop them in the lap of the next republican president.




...........................................

Just that if Bush did it, or didn't do it, he was wrong!!!:D


RK

[dnf777]

Just that if Bush did it, or didn't do it, he was wrong!!!:D


RK

Generally speaking, that's a safe bet. But even I will admit the guy did a *few* things right. And I do think he was a decent guy, and would be honored to sit down to dinner with him.

His book is really enjoyable. I recommend it.

[BrianW]

Maybe it's just me, but does anybody else remember this ?
http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/declassified/2009/11/18/heads-i-win-tails-you-lose-in-9-11-case-ksm-won-t-walk-free-even-if-found-not-guilty.html

Holder's comments at a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee would seem to turn the criminal justice system on its head. The whole point of a criminal trial is to determine guilt—and if the government fails to make its case beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant walks free.
At least that's the way the system usually works.

But pressed today by Sen. Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, about what might happen "if, by some one in a million fluke, one of the defendants were acquitted," Holder responded in effect that they won't be released.

First, he noted, Congress has already barred any Guantánamo detainees from being released inside the United States. But then, pressed again about what would happen "if one of these terrorists" in the future were found not guilty or given a short sentence, Holder agreed that the Justice Department would still retain the authority to lock them up as enemy combatants.

"I certainly think that under the regime that we are contemplating, the potential for detaining people under the laws of war, we would retain that ability," Holder said.

So what's the bfd about who is holding/held Ghailani, did/didn't prosecute etc?
This "regime" (to use Holder's own words) doesn't care about the law & verdicts.
Guilt or innocence is a moot point to them.
PBO and his minion have already set themselves (& The US as a whole) up to FAIL no matter what.

[Gerry Clinchy]

If Brian's quotations are accurate (I haven't looked them up), then Holder did put his foot in his mouth.

Now what will they do?

They did something which didn't turn out as anticipated ... will they flout the law even more egregiously by ignoring a jury verdict? What would be the purpose of more civilian trials like this if the verdict means nothing?

This was my question from the beginning: were they POWs who could be held until the end of hostilities, or were they civilian criminals?

[david gibson]

If Brian's quotations are accurate (I haven't looked them up), then Holder did put his foot in his mouth.

Now what will they do?

They did something which didn't turn out as anticipated ... will they flout the law even more egregiously by ignoring a jury verdict? What would be the purpose of more civilian trials like this if the verdict means nothing?

This was my question from the beginning: were they POWs who could be held until the end of hostilities, or were they civilian criminals?

they were POW's but the Half Muslim Apoloist changed the rules so he could look good to the muslim world.

i amk pretty sure he is quite happy right now, he got one of his brothers partially off and still got a sentence, so now he can claim victory on each side of his face. instead of one side applauding him for his actions and the other side raging mad.

thats his game - appeasement. also called zero cajones. nothing new

[Gerry Clinchy]

Napolitano May Exempt Muslims From Airport Pat-Downs | Judicial Watch (http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2010/nov/napolitano-may-exempt-muslims-airport-pat-downs)

I couldn't find the thread about the airport pat-downs, where this would fit.

[duckheads]

[quote=dnf777;705749]Exactly Stumpholehunter! So why didn't our commander-in-chief, who sat on these barbarians for most of his 8 year term, DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT? Take charge. Be a leader.

He did not get anything done because of all the bleeding heart left winger liberal (like our own resident independants) attorneys that lined up to provide free leagl representation to these terrosists. The attorney's have filed so much total bull shite in court that the trials where not able to go forward. look it up some time your not on the huffington post!

[Clay Rogers]

Again, I won't argue with you on that. I would say that this is largely untested ground in many regards. I don't have the expertise to know WHAT should be done.......just that SOMETHING should be done. Maybe the smart play for Obama would be to pull a Bush, let them sit for another two or six years (whichever the case may be) and drop them in the lap of the next republican president.




...........................................

Sounds great to me. I would prefer to send their cold lifeless bodies back to from where they came with a pork chop sandwich and letter from santa, but that's just me. And again, I may be wrong(but I don't think so), the constitution only applies to citizens of the United States of America, which these POS's are not, so Habeus Corpus doesn't apply to them.

[Roger Perry]

ohhhhhhh i get it. bush had him the first 4.5 yrs so its his fault......puhhhleeeeeze

obama is the one who decided on civilian trials. he is solely to mblame.
And wasn't it Bush that authorized waterboarding to get the confessions which let to the aquital on most of the charges?

[Roger Perry]

[quote=dnf777;705749]Exactly Stumpholehunter! So why didn't our commander-in-chief, who sat on these barbarians for most of his 8 year term, DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT? Take charge. Be a leader.

He did not get anything done because of all the bleeding heart left winger liberal (like our own resident independants) attorneys that lined up to provide free leagl representation to these terrosists. The attorney's have filed so much total bull shite in court that the trials where not able to go forward. look it up some time your not on the huffington post!

I have seen many times where the right wingers quoted the huffington post. So I guess that is alright unless it does not fit the right views.:confused:

[road kill]

And wasn't it Bush that authorized waterboarding to get the confessions which let to the aquital on most of the charges?


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Good one Roger, what a complete surprise that you, of all people, would blame Bush!!!!:D


RK

[Clay Rogers]

And wasn't it Bush that authorized waterboarding to get the confessions which let to the aquital on most of the charges?

You guys must grow some good stuff down in Florida. Our guys used the means neccesary to get useful information. It was not bush who decided to try these guys in an american court system, it was your messiah, trying to keep a campaign promise. But boy did it backfire. Bet he will be putting ice on these bruises for some time. Just proves the point that he shouldn't be where he is because of lack of experience, plain and simple.

The truth gets easier to swallow once you start accepting it.

[Roger Perry]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Perry http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=706402#post706402)
And wasn't it Bush that authorized waterboarding to get the confessions which let to the aquital on most of the charges?


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Good one Roger, what a complete surprise that you, of all people, would blame Bush!!!

RK
__________________



Quote:



Originally Posted by Roger Perry http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=706402#post706402)



And wasn't it Bush that authorized waterboarding to get the confessions which let to the aquital on most of the charges?




You guys must grow some good stuff down in Florida. Our guys used the means neccesary to get useful information. It was not bush who decided to try these guys in an american court system, it was your messiah, trying to keep a campaign promise. But boy did it backfire. Bet he will be putting ice on these bruises for some time. Just proves the point that he shouldn't be where he is because of lack of experience, plain and simple.




The truth gets easier to swallow once you start accepting it.



__________________



RIP SGT. David Blake Williams KIA 22 Mar 2008 Iraq





Every day should be Veteran's day.





Aparantly neither of you two yahoos read the whole article that David posted. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/17/AR2010111705663.html?wpisrc=nl_natlalert

But the judge ruled that the government learned of the witness only through the use of coercive interrogations at CIA prisons and that the participation of the witness would taint the process.

He added: "The original sin here is torture. It would have haunted a military trial, too, with likely the same result. The only difference is that in this courtroom, Ghailani was convicted with legitimacy and finality."

[Buzz]

Aparantly neither of you two yahoos read the whole article.

But the judge ruled that the government learned of the witness only through the use of coercive interrogations at CIA prisons and that the participation of the witness would taint the process.

He added: "The original sin here is torture. It would have haunted a military trial, too, with likely the same result. The only difference is that in this courtroom, Ghailani was convicted with legitimacy and finality."


I loved the FOX headline that this guy "Almost walked free."

Like 20 years to life is almost walking free!:rolleyes:

[Roger Perry]

I guess the two yahoos don't want to comment on what was in the article posted by David. They only see what they want to see.

[BrianW]

I loved the FOX headline that this guy "Almost walked free."

Like 20 years to life is almost walking free!:rolleyes:

You aren't considering that out of 280 charges, that he was only convicted of 1?!?
That's 'prreetty" close to "almost walked free" from my viewpoint.
That is, if you don't consider that DOJ says they weren't going to let the terrorists go free anyway, acquittal or not.

PBO/Holder thought these trials were sure things, "slam dunks" as it were, arrogantly confident about their ability tp prosecute these cases in civilian court. To get this guy on a "conspiracy to damage or destroy US property " is like getting Al Capone on tax evasion. Yes, it does put the guy behind bars, I'll grant that, but it's the "throw away charge", the one you use when there's nothing else! A couple of teen agers could get that for planning to throw firecrackers in a National Park outhouse but this is the guy who "allegedly" bought the explosives to blow up the embassies..

This is the best that the President of the Harvard Law Review/graduates from Columbia can come with? Maybe they should have played a little less basketball and studied more law?

[Clay Rogers]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Perry http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=706402#post706402)
And wasn't it Bush that authorized waterboarding to get the confessions which let to the aquital on most of the charges?


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Good one Roger, what a complete surprise that you, of all people, would blame Bush!!!

RK
__________________



Quote:



Originally Posted by Roger Perry http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=706402#post706402)



And wasn't it Bush that authorized waterboarding to get the confessions which let to the aquital on most of the charges?




You guys must grow some good stuff down in Florida. Our guys used the means neccesary to get useful information. It was not bush who decided to try these guys in an american court system, it was your messiah, trying to keep a campaign promise. But boy did it backfire. Bet he will be putting ice on these bruises for some time. Just proves the point that he shouldn't be where he is because of lack of experience, plain and simple.




The truth gets easier to swallow once you start accepting it.



__________________



RIP SGT. David Blake Williams KIA 22 Mar 2008 Iraq





Every day should be Veteran's day.





Aparantly neither of you two yahoos read the whole article that David posted. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/17/AR2010111705663.html?wpisrc=nl_natlalert

But the judge ruled that the government learned of the witness only through the use of coercive interrogations at CIA prisons and that the participation of the witness would taint the process.

He added: "The original sin here is torture. It would have haunted a military trial, too, with likely the same result. The only difference is that in this courtroom, Ghailani was convicted with legitimacy and finality."



First, I am not a yahoo, maybe a google, but not a yahoo. Second, this judge doesn't know his a$$ from yours, because it wouldn't have haunted a military trial at all, and the finality would have been death by firing squad or hanging.

As far as tainting the process, you are missing the big picture here Roger Rabbit, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN TRIED IN A UNITED STATES CIVILIAN COURT TO BEGIN WITH. The crimes he committed where not committed in the US, but africa and the middle east, so he should have been tried there. And he probably would have got the same thing your buddy Sadam got, which if I remember right was his neck stretched.

[david gibson]

First, I am not a yahoo, maybe a google, but not a yahoo. Second, this judge doesn't know his a$$ from yours, because it wouldn't have haunted a military trial at all, and the finality would have been death by firing squad or hanging.

As far as tainting the process, you are missing the big picture here Roger Rabbit, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN TRIED IN A UNITED STATES CIVILIAN COURT TO BEGIN WITH. The crimes he committed where not committed in the US, but africa and the middle east, so he should have been tried there. And he probably would have got the same thing your buddy Sadam got, which if I remember right was his neck stretched.

his neck was not just stretched - but snapped free! they all deserve that.

what is sad to me is that thees libs on here are fellow americans, and i love them for that - but that only. i missed viet nam by one year, but i do know what i am made of because i have been tested many times in my life.

and i know exactly who in this forum i would trust in the foxhole next to me or even sharing one.

and ialso know exactly which ones i would NOT trust.

no names - just sayin'......

[cotts135]

]they were POW's[/B] but the Half Muslim Apoloist changed the rules so he could look good to the muslim world.

i amk pretty sure he is quite happy right now, he got one of his brothers partially off and still got a sentence, so now he can claim victory on each side of his face. instead of one side applauding him for his actions and the other side raging mad.

thats his game - appeasement. also called zero cajones. nothing new


These guys were never classified POW's as far as I can see, in fact if I remember correctly the Bush administration did everything in it's power to assure their status would not be POW's for the simple reason that they could not be afforded Geneva Convention rights.

[david gibson]

These guys were never classified POW's as far as I can see, in fact if I remember correctly the Bush administration did everything in it's power to assure their status would not be POW's for the simple reason that they could not be afforded Geneva Convention rights.

the reason for that is because they do not wear uniforms as required by the geneva convention. theyt were POWs plain and simple, call 'em what you want, but if they dont play by the rules why should we have to?

[cotts135]

the reason for that is because they do not wear uniforms as required by the geneva convention. theyt were POWs plain and simple, call 'em what you want, but if they dont play by the rules why should we have to?

The fact is that there not considered POW's (you even admitted that by saying that they don't wear uniforms) but enemy combatants. The difference in classification makes a huge difference in how they are handled. The Supreme court has ruled that these guys( Guantanamo detainees) whether we like it or not have access to the Federal court system with regards to Habeus Corpus appeals. POW's would have no such right.

[david gibson]

The fact is that there not considered POW's (you even admitted that by saying that they don't wear uniforms) but enemy combatants. The difference in classification makes a huge difference in how they are handled. The Supreme court has ruled that these guys( Guantanamo detainees) whether we like it or not have access to the Federal court system with regards to Habeus Corpus appeals. POW's would have no such right.

then the supreme court got that one supremely wrong. so all an enemy has to do is not wear a uniform when attacking us overseas and they get to go through civilian criminal court here? with court-appointed attys? who pays for that? :rolleyes: that is so stupid its unbelievable. do you understand what that means? that means soldiers will be responsible for collecting evidence at the scene. they are not trained for that, and hanging around a firefight where captives are taken could put them in additional jeopardy. and if they dont collect evidence as expertly as a seasoned CSI expert then all the evidence gets thrown out.

that is just ridiculous. no matter how much you hate bush surely you see how that just makes no sense. classifying as an enemy combatant should not give them a free ride. but then again, all you lefties just want to make sure we are fair with our enemies....

ha

[cotts135]

then the supreme court got that one supremely wrong. so all an enemy has to do is not wear a uniform when attacking us overseas and they get to go through civilian criminal court here? with court-appointed attys? who pays for that? :rolleyes: that is so stupid its unbelievable. do you understand what that means? that means soldiers will be responsible for collecting evidence at the scene. they are not trained for that, and hanging around a firefight where captives are taken could put them in additional jeopardy. and if they dont collect evidence as expertly as a seasoned CSI expert then all the evidence gets thrown out.

that is just ridiculous. no matter how much you hate bush surely you see how that just makes no sense. classifying as an enemy combatant should not give them a free ride. but then again, all you lefties just want to make sure we are fair with our enemies....

ha

I actually agree with you to some degree on the first point. What I would hope you see though is that if we take someone detain them and keep them in jail for an indefinite period of time the burden is on us to prove they did something. How we do that can and should be argued.
My point from the beginning is that I am not going to call a guy a car dealer when in fact he is a drug dealer. The difference matters

[david gibson]

I actually agree with you to some degree on the first point. What I would hope you see though is that if we take someone detain them and keep them in jail for an indefinite period of time the burden is on us to prove they did something. How we do that can and should be argued.
My point from the beginning is that I am not going to call a guy a car dealer when in fact he is a drug dealer. The difference matters

this is war. the rules are different. does the geneva convention require we prove anything? we hold them indefinitely in a clean prison where they get sunshine and fresh air, they take our men that they capture and commit unspeakable acts.

i can just see some of you lefties in battle. in the heat of a firefight if you see an enemy combatant carrying an ak-47 weapon across a field or a courtyard you wont shoot him because he isnt pointing his weapon directly at you, so you just wait and look until you see someone actually aiming at you before you fire - and you take a picture first so you can prove it justifiable homicide later in civilian court back home where the jury that has no clue about combat is going to judge your actions. and the rpg that just buzzed over your head and killed a fellow soldier behind you?? "well, i think it came from that bunker over there behind the guys with the guns, but i cant prove it, so i better not return fire just yet"

now, finally three of your units better men storm the bunker where they find three enemy combatants with a cache of 30 rpgs. they are now captives, so the good guys march them out at gunpoint back to the base while under fire - but because they are overloaded with their own gear they cant carry out the 30 rpgs. ooops! no evidence! they have to be released or a jury of people that think like you would acquit them of all charges.

this is why liberalism is a mental disorder.

:rolleyes:

[cotts135]

this is war. the rules are different. does the geneva convention require we prove anything? we hold them indefinitely in a clean prison where they get sunshine and fresh air, they take our men that they capture and commit unspeakable acts.


i can just see some of you lefties in battle. in the heat of a firefight if you see an enemy combatant carrying an ak-47 weapon across a field or a courtyard you wont shoot him because he isnt pointing his weapon directly at you, so you just wait and look until you see someone actually aiming at you before you fire - and you take a picture first so you can prove it justifiable homicide later in civilian court back home where the jury that has no clue about combat is going to judge your actions. and the rpg that just buzzed over your head and killed a fellow soldier behind you?? "well, i think it came from that bunker over there behind the guys with the guns, but i cant prove it, so i better not return fire just yet" [/B]:

Where do you get this stuff from? I am confident this scenario plays out everyday in Afghanistan :rolleyes:

:
now, finally three of your units better men storm the bunker where they find three enemy combatants with a cache of 30 rpgs. they are now captives, so the good guys march them out at gunpoint back to the base while under fire - but because they are overloaded with their own gear they cant carry out the 30 rpgs. ooops! no evidence! they have to be released or a jury of people that think like you would acquit them of all charges. :

Of course those three brave men would be conservatives.....................


:
this is why liberalism is a mental disorder.:

Didn't know you were a psychiatrist................

:rolleyes:

Most POW's in wars are released. Take for instance the first Iraq war. We took thousands of POW's into custody and when the war was over they were released. This is way different . If you don't see it, there is now way I can show you.

[JDogger]

this is war. the rules are different. does the geneva convention require we prove anything? we hold them indefinitely in a clean prison where they get sunshine and fresh air, they take our men that they capture and commit unspeakable acts.

i can just see some of you lefties in battle. in the heat of a firefight if you see an enemy combatant carrying an ak-47 weapon across a field or a courtyard you wont shoot him because he isnt pointing his weapon directly at you, so you just wait and look until you see someone actually aiming at you before you fire - and you take a picture first so you can prove it justifiable homicide later in civilian court back home where the jury that has no clue about combat is going to judge your actions. and the rpg that just buzzed over your head and killed a fellow soldier behind you?? "well, i think it came from that bunker over there behind the guys with the guns, but i cant prove it, so i better not return fire just yet"

now, finally three of your units better men storm the bunker where they find three enemy combatants with a cache of 30 rpgs. they are now captives, so the good guys march them out at gunpoint back to the base while under fire - but because they are overloaded with their own gear they cant carry out the 30 rpgs. ooops! no evidence! they have to be released or a jury of people that think like you would acquit them of all charges.

this is why liberalism is a mental disorder.

:rolleyes:

In contrast to the pathology of extreme conservatism. ;-)

[Buzz]

I think reading this thread has caused me to lose more brain cells than I can afford.

[BrianW]

Most POW's in wars are released. Take for instance the first Iraq war. We took thousands of POW's into custody and when the war was over they were released. This is way different . If you don't see it, there is no way I can show you.

I agree with you, this IS way different.
This is the pitfall when a "war" is declared on an idea or concept, instead of an entity or state. In the past, the representatives sign the armistice, terms of surrender, etc and the combatants go home. But this is a new frontier and the application of old concepts don't quite fit anymore. This guy is not an Iraqi or Afghani that fit into the terms of war as we've known it. Ghailani, a native of Tanzania, is part of a organization that crosses borders & cultures, wears no uniform & as a cleric on top of that, owes no allegiance except to being "an instrument of Allah". He's a square peg being pounded into the round hole.

As you point out, "when the war was over"... When the Iraqis were released, hostilities between the countries, per se, were over. But have you heard the jihadists declare an end to hostilities? I certainly haven't. On the contrary, there have been many statements that they will never be over as long as the Great Satan exists.

Despite what our leaders say about the "strong messages" & "serious convictions" , our enemies will still hold us in contempt. And if the detainees are released , it will demonstrate weakness and strengthen their resolve.
The topper, imo, is that if acquitted and still held, our due process of law, and by extension the Constitution, becomes moot. And that's where we really lose the war.

[Roger Perry]

First, I am not a yahoo, maybe a google, but not a yahoo. Second, this judge doesn't know his a$$ from yours, because it wouldn't have haunted a military trial at all, and the finality would have been death by firing squad or hanging.

As far as tainting the process, you are missing the big picture here Roger Rabbit, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN TRIED IN A UNITED STATES CIVILIAN COURT TO BEGIN WITH. The crimes he committed where not committed in the US, but africa and the middle east, so he should have been tried there. And he probably would have got the same thing your buddy Sadam got, which if I remember right was his neck stretched.

To reply, Ghailani was tried in the UNITED STATES (state of New York where 3,000 people died in the world trade center) The jury was made up of UNITED STATE CITIZENS probably half of which were REPUBLICIANS. Had he been tried in the middle east or africa, he would probably be walking the streets now. Now, if an AMERICAN jury found him not guilty on a number of charges because some administration decided that waterboarding was a good way to get a confession than that administration should admit it f___ed up.

This courtroom drawing shows Tanzanian Ahmed Ghailani (C) in court with his defense attorneys Peter Quijano (L) and Michael Bachrach (R) on November 17, 2010 in New York. Ghailiani faces a minimum sentence of 20 years after his November 17, 2010 conspiracy conviction in the first civilian trial of a former Guantanamo Bay inmate, prosecutors said. Ghailani, 36, was found not guilty on a slew of charges including conspiracy to plot with Al-Qaeda to kill US citizens in the attacks against the Tanzania and Kenya embassies, in which 224 people died. The jury, deliberating on the fifth day after a four-week trial, found him guilty only of conspiracy to destroy US property. But a spokeswoman for the prosecutors said he faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 20 years for this conviction and could get life. (Shirley Shepard - Afp/getty Images)

- AP)
http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/story/image/slideshow_bot.gif
(Elizabeth Williams - AP)

[Clay Rogers]

To reply, Ghailani was tried in the UNITED STATES (state of New York where 3,000 people died in the world trade center) The jury was made up of UNITED STATE CITIZENS probably half of which were REPUBLICIANS. Had he been tried in the middle east or africa, he would probably be walking the streets now. Now, if an AMERICAN jury found him not guilty on a number of charges because some administration decided that waterboarding was a good way to get a confession than that administration should admit it f___ed up.

This courtroom drawing shows Tanzanian Ahmed Ghailani (C) in court with his defense attorneys Peter Quijano (L) and Michael Bachrach (R) on November 17, 2010 in New York. Ghailiani faces a minimum sentence of 20 years after his November 17, 2010 conspiracy conviction in the first civilian trial of a former Guantanamo Bay inmate, prosecutors said. Ghailani, 36, was found not guilty on a slew of charges including conspiracy to plot with Al-Qaeda to kill US citizens in the attacks against the Tanzania and Kenya embassies, in which 224 people died. The jury, deliberating on the fifth day after a four-week trial, found him guilty only of conspiracy to destroy US property. But a spokeswoman for the prosecutors said he faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 20 years for this conviction and could get life. (Shirley Shepard - Afp/getty Images)

- AP)
http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/story/image/slideshow_bot.gif
(Elizabeth Williams - AP)



First, why in the world would you think that over half the jurors were republicans in New York? Where did you get that number, same place you get most of your dribble, from your fifth point of contact I'm sure.

Second, we have already established that since we didn't capture them, put them in the ritz motel and give them warm sponge baths, all the info we obtained from them can't be entered into evidence, so that's why he was only convicted on the one charge.

Third, if he had been tried in Africa, were he killed 284 people, they probably would have made him Lion food within about 30 minutes.

And lastly, as for the waterboarding goes, I bet if the truth were ever told, we get more good intel from that than we do bad intel. Sometimes it's not who your torturing you care about, it's about who's watching him get tortured.

[Buzz]

First, why in the world would you think that over half the jurors were republicans in New York? Where did you get that number, same place you get most of your dribble, from your fifth point of contact I'm sure.




Probably the same place that Gibson got the idea that the only people who have fought for this country (at least well anyhow) were conservatives. What a freak'in arse hat.

[depittydawg]

Third, if he had been tried in Africa, were he killed 284 people, they probably would have made him Lion food within about 30 minutes.



This is America. We do things a little differently than Africa, or Asia. It is what makes this country great. And we like it that way.

[depittydawg]

and i know exactly who in this forum i would trust in the foxhole next to me or even sharing one.

and ialso know exactly which ones i would NOT trust.

no names - just sayin'......

Well if I was in a foxhole, or any other critical situation, I would like clear headed good decision makers around me. Beyond that, they can think anything they want.

[Clay Rogers]

This is America. We do things a little differently than Africa, or Asia. It is what makes this country great. And we like it that way.

I know this is America, probably better than you. And I know this country is great, but it was much greater back in the day when right was right, wrong was wrong and political correctness was never heard of.

And I don't need a geography lesson from the you.

[Buzz]

I know this is America, probably better than you. And I know this country is great, but it was much greater back in the day when right was right, wrong was wrong and political correctness was never heard of.

And I don't need a geography lesson from the you.


And you know this how?

Also, curious, how far would you like to turn back the clock?

I heard my grandparents saying the same/similar things almost 50 years ago.

[dnf777]

and i know exactly who in this forum i would trust in the foxhole next to me or even sharing one....

If I were you, I would choose someone who's actually dug a foxhole and knows how to establish shooting lanes.

BTW....since you brought it up, how many foxholes have you actually dug?

[Clay Rogers]

And you know this how?

Also, curious, how far would you like to turn back the clock?

I heard my grandparents saying the same/similar things almost 50 years ago.


Cause I said so, and in my mind, that's all I need to know. Hooah?

About 1940 would be good, when people actually took pride in what they did, and this country. Back before the dope smoking, rainbow coalition, hippy generation changed us into where we are headed now.

Any more questions? I will have to answer later, because now I have to go be a productive member of society and help maintain this free healthcare system you guys want.

[depittydawg]

I know this is America, probably better than you. And I know this country is great, but it was much greater back in the day when right was right, wrong was wrong and political correctness was never heard of.

And I don't need a geography lesson from the you.

Why would you think you know more about America than I do? Regardless, answer this question, what is it do you think, that has made America a great nation?

[depittydawg]

And you know this how?

Also, curious, how far would you like to turn back the clock?

I heard my grandparents saying the same/similar things almost 50 years ago.

Funny thing about the past. It always looks good through rose colored glasses. But if you look deep, you find they were no beter or worse than we are today. They had different problems; but every generation has had its issues.

[road kill]

If I were you, I would choose someone who's actually dug a foxhole and knows how to establish shooting lanes.

BTW....since you brought it up, how many foxholes have you actually dug?

Never dug a single fox hole.
But I am qualified on a .50 cal and a TOW missle!!:D

RK

[Roger Perry]

First, why in the world would you think that over half the jurors were republicans in New York? Where did you get that number, same place you get most of your dribble, from your fifth point of contact I'm sure.

Second, we have already established that since we didn't capture them, put them in the ritz motel and give them warm sponge baths, all the info we obtained from them can't be entered into evidence, so that's why he was only convicted on the one charge.

Third, if he had been tried in Africa, were he killed 284 people, they probably would have made him Lion food within about 30 minutes.

And lastly, as for the waterboarding goes, I bet if the truth were ever told, we get more good intel from that than we do bad intel. Sometimes it's not who your torturing you care about, it's about who's watching him get tortured.

First of all, I never said more than half were republicans. I said probably half were republicans and that is just a guess as the country is made up of republicans and democrats with some independents thrown in and I don't think the defense or prosecution attorneys polled the jurors and eliminated just the republicans from the jury.

As far as waterboarding goes, I am willing to bet anyting that the CIA
could get anyone to confess to anything if they were being torchered so the confession would be meaningless as far as I am concerned.

[dnf777]

Never dug a single fox hole.
But I am qualified on a .50 cal and a TOW missle!!:D

RK

I've dug a few foxholes, but thank God I was only ducking MILES lasers and not FMJs. It was eye opening to hear a real combat NCO talking of the considerations for digging a good foxhole and coordinating shooting lanes.

And after all that, we make some awesome louisiana gumbo-clay domino sets in between swatting skeeters.