66 Months, Out in 5!

[saden1]

Originally Posted by firstdown

There are reasons why civilian courts are not used and I don't have the time to look them up.

The reason they don't want to use civilian courts is because secret evidence and hearsay are not admissible in civilian courts.

Originally Posted by firstdown

I do know one reason is because we are holding them as enemy combatants we have to use military tribunals (or what ever they are called).

That doesn't make sense at all. Do you mean "we are holding them as enemy combatant so we can use military tribunals."

Originally Posted by firstdown

I also think even after his 5 months are up Bush will hold him as an enemy combatant as long as he is president.

Do you feel justice is being served? What's the point of the trial then? What about double jeopardy? Or incarceration without a trial?

Originally Posted by firstdown

I agree what the judge said was weird and maybe he had his agenda. They may also use his words to call for a new trial as they maybe able to show the judge showed a bias attitude.

Hold it there!!! Aren't you jumping to conclusions? Maybe his intent was to mock him? Maybe his intent was to say "god willing we'll get ride of your ass?" You're not being fair. Also, there were 6 judges on the panel and you don't need a majority get a conviction.

Originally Posted by firstdown

I would call military courts a kangaroo court as most do a good job and these guys have served our country. I have seen plenty of kangaroo civilian courts.

What is a kangaroo court? Please define it.

[firstdown]

I really cannot debate this stuff because I do not know enough about what and why these trials are done the way they are doing them. I do know I have heard the arguments as to why they are doing it this way but I just cannot remember the details. I think you used the term kangeroo court and I don't think it was praising their work.

[70Chip]

I'm not sure why Bush is responsible for the verdict of a military tribunal. He's been accused of running a gulag at Guntanamo on the one hand, and now you are saying he's too soft? It seems a bit intellectually lazy to try to blame this leniency on The President.

BTW, if B.L.s driver been tried in a civilian court which is the direction the rest of the detainees seemed to be headed after the recent Supreme Court habeus ruling fiasco, he likely would have received no sentence at all. He probably would have gotten an apology and a big wet kiss.

I am surprised that a military tribunal failed to see that Bin Laden's driver would also likely be a trained killer. They seem to have been convinced that he was Morgan Freeman trying to take Osama to the Piggly Wiggly.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

I'm not sure why Bush is responsible for the verdict of a military tribunal. He's been accused of running a gulag at Guntanamo on the one hand, and now you are saying he's too soft? It seems a bit intellectually lazy to try to blame this leniency on The President.

BTW, if B.L.s driver been tried in a civilian court which is the direction the rest of the detainees seemed to be headed after the recent Supreme Court habeus ruling fiasco, he likely would have received no sentence at all. He probably would have gotten an apology and a big wet kiss.

I am surprised that a military tribunal failed to see that Bin Laden's driver would also likely be a trained killer. They seem to have been convinced that he was Morgan Freeman trying to take Osama to the Piggly Wiggly.

It makes about as much sense as blaming previous administrations.

[That Guy]

gitmo is jihadist U... takes in a lot of borderline cases for detention and turns them in hardened militants. The trials have had lots of problems with politicians trying to demand sentences and ignore due process. That whole thing is a mess, and infinite detention without need of any cause is a bit disturbing.

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by That Guy

gitmo is jihadist U... takes in a lot of borderline cases for detention and turns them in hardened militants. The trials have had lots of problems with politicians trying to demand sentences and ignore due process. That whole thing is a mess, and infinite detention without need of any cause is a bit disturbing.

It would be a lot less disturbing if it actually were infinite. It wouldn't be so bad if I thought the CIA were competent to track these people once they are let go, but it's The Three Stooges Hour with them these days. Scalia was right. People will almost certainly die as as a result of the Supreme Court's ruling in Boumediene.

[dmek25]

sometimes i wonder if these guys end up with more rights then i have. and i know they end up with better health care. what a f***ing joke

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by That Guy

gitmo is jihadist U... takes in a lot of borderline cases for detention and turns them in hardened militants. The trials have had lots of problems with politicians trying to demand sentences and ignore due process. That whole thing is a mess, and infinite detention without need of any cause is a bit disturbing.

Most of these people in Gitmo where captured while fighting against the us in Afganistan (spelling). I heard on guy defending one of the guys captured saying he just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and I guess thats what all of them are saying. Hey I was just walking by this terrorist camp when this battle broke out and before I knew what happened I was taking away to Gitmo.