Obama halts prosecution of alleged USS Cole bomber

Factor · 08-27-10, 02:10 PM

Are you f##king kidding me!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...606353_pf.html

Skybird · 08-27-10, 02:19 PM

Sounds like another of these precious, well-meaning, symbolic signals by which to reach out to the Islamic world: "Look, we do not wish to upset you."

08-27-10, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Factor

Are you f##king kidding me!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...606353_pf.html

I'm willing to look at this and shake my head. It is just one other thing eroding his presidency. If he cared it would not be the statement from his administration. Because who is he gaining politically? No one. The Gibbs' anointed professional left, epitimised by David Letterman. Who recently said he'd have plenty of time for vacation after his term is up. Independents are done with anything Democrat, Republicans, may be OK with it, but conservatives are not.

So why does he, and his administration openly go against the desires of the people?

Platapus · 08-27-10, 02:41 PM

But it appears that only the civilian trial has been suspended, the military trial will still go on.

So what's the big deal?

GoldenRivet · 08-27-10, 02:46 PM

What purpose would the head of the executive branch of government have with intervening with the affairs of the judicial branch? (aside from a full pardon, he should have no reasons)

thats the question you must ask yourself Platapus

What forces are at work which influence Obama to get involved here?

08-27-10, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

What purpose would the head of the executive branch of government have with intervening with the affairs of the judicial branch?

thats the question you must ask yourself Platapus

What forces are at work which influence Obama to get involved here?

The justice department is part of the executive branch. Like the EPA, DOE, NEA, etc.

GoldenRivet · 08-27-10, 02:53 PM

You misunderstand my point.

The president has the right to grant pardons... fine.

but why would he have any interest in halting a case against a terrorist... that is the question.

razark · 08-27-10, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man

The justice department is part of the executive branch. Like the EPA, DOE, NEA, etc.

But the Judicial Branch is not.

GoldenRivet · 08-27-10, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by razark

But the Judicial Branch is not.

correct - this was more what i was referring to.

Factor · 08-27-10, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

But it appears that only the civilian trial has been suspended, the military trial will still go on.

So what's the big deal?

Because this happened 10 years ago. Abd al-Rahim should have had justice (death) carried out on him earlier than now. (if guilty

) Give the famlies some closure since they were murdered in the name of an extremist religion.

08-27-10, 03:10 PM

Now I'm way confused as to what happened in this thread.

This is how I understand it.

The Judiciary is suposed to be an entity utno itself and part of the seperation of powers established in the US Constitution. The Justice Department, is part of the Executive Branch also part of the US Constitution.

The Justice Department, as part of its duties, are to submit criminal and civil, cases to the Judiciary for prosecution. It is upto the Judiciary to find wether or not to accept such submitted cases.

But the Justice Department is the law enforcement arm of the US government. Directed by the President.

So not to prosecute the individual is clearly a political decision by the Justice Department.

GoldenRivet · 08-27-10, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man

So not to prosecute the individual is clearly a political decision by the Justice Department.

ask yourself "Why".

08-27-10, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

ask yourself "Why".

The apology tour?

Platapus · 08-27-10, 03:23 PM

No where does it say that this was Obama's decision. The article only referred to the Obama Administration which would include the department of justice.

Probably the Attorney General decided that with the history of torture in this case, it would be difficult to get a conviction in a civilian court and decided to throw this into the military tribunal system. Probably a good decision as this is more a military matter anyway.

08-27-10, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

No where does it say that this was Obama's decision. The article only referred to the Obama Administration which would include the department of justice.

Probably the Attorney General decided that with the history of torture in this case, it would be difficult to get a conviction in a civilian court and decided to throw this into the military tribunal system. Probably a good decision as this is more a military matter anyway.

Please. R you saying Obama isn't in charge of the Obama administration?

Place them on trial. if you are correct no harm. We can send them to Germany.

08-27-10, 02:10 PM	#1
Factor Weps Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: North Carolina Posts: 356 Downloads: 180 Uploads: 0	Obama halts prosecution of alleged USS Cole bomber Are you f##king kidding me! http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...606353_pf.html

08-27-10, 02:19 PM	#2
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,602 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Sounds like another of these precious, well-meaning, symbolic signals by which to reach out to the Islamic world: "Look, we do not wish to upset you." __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

08-27-10, 02:41 PM	#4
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,360 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	But it appears that only the civilian trial has been suspended, the military trial will still go on. So what's the big deal? __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

08-27-10, 02:46 PM	#5
GoldenRivet Subsim Aviator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 8,726 Downloads: 146 Uploads: 0	What purpose would the head of the executive branch of government have with intervening with the affairs of the judicial branch? (aside from a full pardon, he should have no reasons) thats the question you must ask yourself Platapus What forces are at work which influence Obama to get involved here? __________________

08-27-10, 02:53 PM	#7
GoldenRivet Subsim Aviator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 8,726 Downloads: 146 Uploads: 0	You misunderstand my point. The president has the right to grant pardons... fine. but why would he have any interest in halting a case against a terrorist... that is the question. __________________

08-27-10, 03:10 PM	#11
The Third Man Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Now I'm way confused as to what happened in this thread. This is how I understand it. The Judiciary is suposed to be an entity utno itself and part of the seperation of powers established in the US Constitution. The Justice Department, is part of the Executive Branch also part of the US Constitution. The Justice Department, as part of its duties, are to submit criminal and civil, cases to the Judiciary for prosecution. It is upto the Judiciary to find wether or not to accept such submitted cases. But the Justice Department is the law enforcement arm of the US government. Directed by the President. So not to prosecute the individual is clearly a political decision by the Justice Department.

08-27-10, 03:23 PM	#14
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,360 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	No where does it say that this was Obama's decision. The article only referred to the Obama Administration which would include the department of justice. Probably the Attorney General decided that with the history of torture in this case, it would be difficult to get a conviction in a civilian court and decided to throw this into the military tribunal system. Probably a good decision as this is more a military matter anyway. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.