Pages: 1
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Finally (* 6 Gitmo detainees to face trial for 9/11)
intelLocoloki wrote:
why have we kept them alive this long?
why haven't they been charged earlier? Seems like a rather long time since they've been caught
once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.
damn, and i was thinking it was so we could torture themGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
intelLocoloki wrote:
why have we kept them alive this long?
how good is intel information after 6 months? let alone 6 years
because we are evil Americansmax wrote:
why haven't they been charged earlier? Seems like a rather long time since they've been caught
old intel is better than no intelLocoloki wrote:
how good is intel information after 6 months? let alone 6 years
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2008-02-11 06:33:55)
They should have just " let " them die of " natural causes ", one every few months.
Now there is going to be wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth over the death penalty.
Now there is going to be wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth over the death penalty.
If i had my way i would throw them into a vat of warm bacon grease and let them drownATG wrote:
They should have just " let " them die of " natural causes ", one every few months.
Now there is going to be wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth over the death penalty.
I guess everyone here is waiting for the first person to say something about the death penalty being wrong yada yada yada....
I wonder how they can be charged in before a military tribunal. They're civilians, aren't they ?
to be honest, I never understood the approach the US government has taken with gitmo. if you're planning to set up prison camps with questionable legal status and deny due process to its inmates, why even announce where they are and who is in there ?
Anyway, whatever crime they may be charged with, I still think they deserve due process, a fair defense, and the right to appeal.
to be honest, I never understood the approach the US government has taken with gitmo. if you're planning to set up prison camps with questionable legal status and deny due process to its inmates, why even announce where they are and who is in there ?
Anyway, whatever crime they may be charged with, I still think they deserve due process, a fair defense, and the right to appeal.
:cues crickets:GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
I guess everyone here is waiting for the first person to say something about the death penalty being wrong yada yada yada....
well, not really actually. Personally, I think there may be instances when death seems the "appropriate" punishment, as far as "fitting the crime" is concerned. It is also quite cost-effective, compared to long-term prison sentences, at the expense of the taxpayer.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
I guess everyone here is waiting for the first person to say something about the death penalty being wrong yada yada yada....
From a moral point of view, however, most western nations have moved away from capital punishment, germany being one of them.
mixed feelings here, I'd say.
Actually it is much more expensive to lethally inject a person.B.Schuss wrote:
well, not really actually. Personally, I think there may be instances when death seems the "appropriate" punishment, as far as "fitting the crime" is concerned. It is also quite cost-effective, compared to long-term prison sentences, at the expense of the taxpayer.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
I guess everyone here is waiting for the first person to say something about the death penalty being wrong yada yada yada....
From a moral point of view, however, most western nations have moved away from capital punishment, germany being one of them.
mixed feelings here, I'd say.
source: http://www.in.gov/ipdc/general/indianadpfactsheet.pdfDocument wrote:
A study conducted for Indiana Governor Frank O’Bannon in 2002 found that
a the cost of prosecuting and executing a murder defendant was 30 –
37.5% more expensive than the cost of a non-capital prosecution, appeals,
and lifetime incarceration. The cost of a death penalty trial and direct appeal
alone is more than five times the cost of a life without parole trial and direct
appeal.
thats because every case drags on forever, we just need to speed up the process and limit the life of these scumbags to the cost of a bulletceslayer23 wrote:
Actually it is much more expensive to lethally inject a person.B.Schuss wrote:
well, not really actually. Personally, I think there may be instances when death seems the "appropriate" punishment, as far as "fitting the crime" is concerned. It is also quite cost-effective, compared to long-term prison sentences, at the expense of the taxpayer.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
I guess everyone here is waiting for the first person to say something about the death penalty being wrong yada yada yada....
From a moral point of view, however, most western nations have moved away from capital punishment, germany being one of them.
mixed feelings here, I'd say.source: http://www.in.gov/ipdc/general/indianadpfactsheet.pdfDocument wrote:
A study conducted for Indiana Governor Frank O’Bannon in 2002 found that
a the cost of prosecuting and executing a murder defendant was 30 –
37.5% more expensive than the cost of a non-capital prosecution, appeals,
and lifetime incarceration. The cost of a death penalty trial and direct appeal
alone is more than five times the cost of a life without parole trial and direct
appeal.
I agree with you on that, but unfortunately thats not the way it works, and it will never be fixed because of all the human rights activists and the politicians that are to afraid to do anything about it.
Pfft, they should find and kill the hijackers first
w8
w8
damn there are six of them, wont even have to re-load
Last edited by Locoloki (2008-02-11 09:54:25)
I have a few problems with Gitmo and the processes captives are subjected to-
Coerced testimony cannot be used in our already in place judicial process. Why should/would it be allowed in the Military Tribunals (which to me is a euphemism for "alternative judicial process")? The amount of people that have been charged through Gitmo is so ridiculously small in relation to the amount of people still held and/or subsequently released. Despite the numerous federal court rulings, the Tribunals still lack many key fundamental aspects of our legal system. In general, the whole avenue the U.S. Department of Justice and high levels of government went about in creating an alternative judicial process (after designating them "enemy combatants", which is their excuse for the alternative system) to me seems morally dubious.
How do we win a global War on Terror when the state takes part in morally heinous actions? How can we support Gitmo as the "end of the road" for possible terror/insurgent suspects captured? They fight in a non-conventional way, so we need a non-conventional system to dish out justice? I really would like to know the conversations of those brainstorming sessions with high-level DoJ officers like Alberto Gonzalez, Ashcroft, et al. with regard to official policy on Gitmo and the legal language used to justify the Military Tribunals, legality of torture, and incarceration.
Coerced testimony cannot be used in our already in place judicial process. Why should/would it be allowed in the Military Tribunals (which to me is a euphemism for "alternative judicial process")? The amount of people that have been charged through Gitmo is so ridiculously small in relation to the amount of people still held and/or subsequently released. Despite the numerous federal court rulings, the Tribunals still lack many key fundamental aspects of our legal system. In general, the whole avenue the U.S. Department of Justice and high levels of government went about in creating an alternative judicial process (after designating them "enemy combatants", which is their excuse for the alternative system) to me seems morally dubious.
How do we win a global War on Terror when the state takes part in morally heinous actions? How can we support Gitmo as the "end of the road" for possible terror/insurgent suspects captured? They fight in a non-conventional way, so we need a non-conventional system to dish out justice? I really would like to know the conversations of those brainstorming sessions with high-level DoJ officers like Alberto Gonzalez, Ashcroft, et al. with regard to official policy on Gitmo and the legal language used to justify the Military Tribunals, legality of torture, and incarceration.
they have no civilian legal process, they are not civilians, they a enemy personnel/ combatants. The military will give them their "process". I hope they rot in prison. Its a 5 star facility I hear. You fight with the big dogs you're going to get bit or caught. These suckers are the latter. The other are hiding taking pot shots when they can the other die , or die.
Sad showing indeed. That long and this is what they got..out of how many aggregate years, torturings, and broken lives they have in there? Way to go cowboy Bush! You sure "smoked 'em out of their holes." Fricken loser piece of shit.
What's sad is, there's NO WAY to know if what we're reading/seeing in our press is accurate...and we'll never know if those guys are guilty of anything.
What's sad is, there's NO WAY to know if what we're reading/seeing in our press is accurate...and we'll never know if those guys are guilty of anything.
Im gonna call DHS
I'm gonna call your momma!GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Im gonna call DHS
Pages: 1
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Finally (* 6 Gitmo detainees to face trial for 9/11)