Why try the 'terrorist' in public courts?

[SteamWake]

The decision has been made to hold trials for the gittmor terrorists in public court.

This after the terrorists themselves have professed a 'guilty plea' and asked to be exicuted.

What is to be gained by doing this?

What are the motives?

To me I see two motives.

One... distraction, take the public eye of the healthcare, cap and trade, the economy and other issues.

Two... To put the Bush administration on trial.

[mookiemookie]

I'd say this about sums it up:

[Letum]

What's the point of public trials for any criminals when we know they did it?
If the police/army/etc have already found out they are guilty or they have confessed then why waste time and money with public trials?
Why not just lock them up/kill them.

What are the motives of people who support public trials?

Distraction from real issues?

Trying to set criminals free?

Earning lawyers money?

Public trials are unpatriotic.

- This message bought to you by the Ministry of Love

[SteamWake]

There NOT effin criminals for christs sakes there enemy combantants in a God Damn war.

Sorry but for cryin out loud it really tries my patience.

[SteamWake]

Now theres this

Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges, sources told FoxNews.com.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576646,00.html

What the hell... Im going to have to go vote on the "have you ever visited the US" thread.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

There NOT effin criminals for christs sakes there enemy combantants in a God Damn war.

Sorry but for cryin out loud it really tries my patience.

Either your in an army, in which case you are a POW or you are a civilian,
in which case you are a criminal.

"Enemy combatant" is just a euphemism for a member of a civilian
resistance or militia whom it is inconvenient to treat as a civilian.

[AVGWarhawk]

Two... To put the Bush administration on trial.

I would go with this one.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

There NOT effin criminals for christs sakes there enemy combantants in a God Damn war.

Sorry but for cryin out loud it really tries my patience.

So we throw out our principles of justice and a fair trial when its convenient?

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

So we throw out our principles of justice and a fair trial when its convenient?

Please explain to me ... how do you give a 'fair trial' to a plaintiff whom has already confessed to the crime?

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Please explain to me ... how do you give a 'fair trial' to a plaintiff whom has already confessed to the crime?

You missed one other important piece of information. Holder wants to hold these hearings in NY City. He got pasted about it a few days ago. Makes no sense to me either. Then again a lot of things Holder does and did makes no sense. Neither did his appointment by Obummer.

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

There NOT effin criminals for christs sakes there enemy combantants in a God Damn war.

Sorry but for cryin out loud it really tries my patience.

Great I decide to call a cat a dog so from now on all cats are dogs.

Terrorists are criminals plain and simple, just because your old president decide to invent a new definition so that he could go ahead and declare "war" on them doesn't mean that the new definition holds any weight.
You (the US) decided to transform Osama Bin Laden as a kind of evil lord mastermind, and his minions as a "real" army. Just for pure convinience nothing more nothing less. Reducing terrorists to "evil masterminds" forgetting about the political, economical realities of the phenomenon will mean the US will never understand and therefore deal correctly with such problems.

Has the US declared war on its internal dissidents ? You know the American Militia Movements (now isn't that a patriotic name ? ) that from time to time decide to bomb federal buildings for instance in oklahama city killing nearly 200 people.
Why don't we hear the american government declare war on "internal terrorists" ? Yep, two weights two mesures thats for sure. And in the end its terrorism, wether supported by american patriots or by foreigners. There is no good terrorism and bad terrorism. When the US will come to realise this it will be a great day. And maybe they'll stop declaring war on drugs too although I thnk thats also a lost cause. Have you been winning that war lately ?

Excellent post goldorak.
The whole problem that has arisen with the trials(and detention) lies with the misuse of legal definitions, avoiding applicable laws, using the wrong laws based on the wrong definitions and then the complications of attempting to make laws fit where they don't fit and were never intended to fit.
They have painted themselves into a corner and the only way out is to make a mess of themselves and their efforts to date

I say try them by military tribunal and then execute them

under what law?

[Subnuts]

This is madness.

If Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is acquitted, he'll be released into the streets of New York. Imagine, the mastermind of the worst terrorist attack in American history, let loose just blocks from where it happened, and surrounded by millions of angry New Yorkers out for revenge.

Problem solved.

[August]

nt not worth it

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by goldorak

Terrorists are criminals plain and simple,

Unbeleavable.