So is Obama a Muslim?

[ImWithStupid]

Incorrect. And Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured by the Pakistani ISI and our CIA not the military.

 

 

I guess you decided to ignore the rest of my post. KSM was not caught during law enforcement actions. He wasn't even caught by a law enforcement agency

 

No different than Nazi spies caught by the OSS in WWII. Non-uniformed enemy combatants don't even have rights covered by the Geneva Convention.

 

He went from CIA custody to the US Military custody. All of the ones you exampled were from law enforcement actions and should be in civilian criminal courts. KSM shouldn't.

[Chi]

I guess you decided to ignore the rest of my post. KSM was not caught during law enforcement actions. He wasn't even caught by a law enforcement agency

 

No different than Nazi spies caught by the OSS in WWII. Non-uniformed enemy combatants don't even have rights covered by the Geneva Convention.

 

He went from CIA custody to the US Military custody. All of the ones you exampled were from law enforcement actions and should be in civilian criminal courts. KSM shouldn't.

 

IWS - Please back up what you just claimed ("He went from CIA custody to the US Military custody.") First you said that the difference was that he was caught by the military. Now you are saying that he should be tried by the military courts because he was handed to the military by the CIA, when I pointed out that you were wrong in saying that he was caught by the military.

 

The CIA is a civilian agency, as are law enforcement agencies. And even beyond all of that, again, why do you, TJ and other alarmists care about which court that terrorist is tried at as long as he is prosecuted to the fullest extent??

[snafu]

He was also picked up in Pakistan. Hey shouldn't even set foot in Amercia.

[Chi]

He was also picked up in Pakistan. Hey shouldn't even set foot in Amercia.

 

How do you figure that? Didn't he do harm to us and our country's people? Don't criminals who harm a certain country's people get extradited to that country to be tried?

[snafu]

No thats why we got Gitmo and why we should keep it open.

If Obama's not a Muslim how come he's pandering to them so much? why would he want to give somone like KSM American judical rights? Obama is a wolf in sheeps clothing.

[Chi]

No thats why we got Gitmo and why we should keep it open.

If Obama's not a Muslim how come he's pandering to them so much? why would he want to give somone like KSM American judical rights? Obama is a wolf in sheeps clothing.

 

Agghhh...I HATE going in circles. Please keep in mind what has already been discussed. Again, the odds are better if this guy is tried in a civilian court. That should matter the most.

 

You and TJ and whoever else thinking Obama is a Muslim, pandering to Muslims, a wolf in sheep's clothing, etc. are not substantiated facts and just your opinions. Which you of course have a right to have, but are nothing more than that nor change the facts.

[snafu]

Agghhh...I HATE going in circles. Please keep in mind what has already been discussed. Again, the odds are better if this guy is tried in a civilian court. That should matter the most.

 

You and TJ and whoever else thinking Obama is a Muslim, pandering to Muslims, a wolf in sheep's clothing, etc. are not substantiated facts and just your opinions. Which you of course have a right to have, but are nothing more than that nor change the facts.

 

No the odds are not better if he's tried in a civilan court or federal court. He was going to be shot after the conviction in a tribunaral anyway. Now they can throw out his confession. They can also bring into court ways of interogation and how we collect intellagence. this is a threat to naitonal security bringing this into a federal court.

[snafu]

Now that he's being tried in a federal court Obama or nowbody else should not be able to say he's guity right? How can Obama guarantee a conviction if your innocent until proven guilty in a court of law? Just another Obama lie.

[ImWithStupid]

IWS - Please back up what you just claimed ("He went from CIA custody to the US Military custody.")

 

Well he went from the secret CIA prison, to Gitmo. Gitmo is a military base and controlled by the military.

 

First you said that the difference was that he was caught by the military. Now you are saying that he should be tried by the military courts because he was handed to the military by the CIA, when I pointed out that you were wrong in saying that he was caught by the military.

 

I never said he was caught by the military. I said none of your examples were, and went on to say they were caught by law enforcement agency action.

 

The CIA is a civilian agency, as are law enforcement agencies. And even beyond all of that, again, why do you, TJ and other alarmists care about which court that terrorist is tried at as long as he is prosecuted to the fullest extent??

 

The CIA is not a law enforcement agency of the Federal Government. In fact the part that participated in catching KSM was connected to the DoD.

 

None of these guys should set foot in an American prison. They are unlawful enemy combatants and should not qualify for the formal rules of evidence or discovery a civilian criminal court will allow them.

 

This will compel the government to turn over classified information to KSM's team.

 

Here is one very good reason...

 

Lynne Stewart Ordered To Prison For Passing Information Between Suspected Terrorists

 

 

This will help make my point...

 

http://www.pjtv.com/video/Afterburner_with_Bill_Whittle/Memo_to_Obama%3A_Detainees_Are_Not_Soldiers%2C_They_Are_the_Weapons_in_This_War/2716/

[timesjoke]

Chi, IWS is covering this very well, your trying to blur the difference between civilian law enforcement and military actions. KSM has always been kept in the DoD and military custody, he was never moved to the civilian sector or held by civilian law enforcement, there is your difference you were looking for.

 

There cannot be a "better" chance for conviction Chi, KSM has already admitted guilt, under a military trial, his admission of guilt is allowed and you have an instant guilt finding.

 

 

Under a civilian system, his admissions of guilt and everything that followed are not allowed.

 

 

Only in the civilian system is there a good possibility of these men being found innocent because most of the evidence could be tossed out as fruit of the tainted tree.

[Chi]

Alright, let's just see how this turns out. Just how we argued round and round that Obama had no snowballs chance of winning the presidency.

[ImWithStupid]

Alright, let's just see how this turns out. Just how we argued round and round that Obama had no snowballs chance of winning the presidency.

 

 

I don't remember that argument.

 

Pretty sure I wasn't involved.

 

I know I argued greatly about his agenda and qualifications, but I don't think I argued about his chance of being elected President (it's an election, not a contest, never mind in this case it was a popularity contest) kinda like how one does not "win" the Congressional Medal of Honor (not Medal of Freedom as some people cough Obama cough , don't know the difference)

[timesjoke]

IWS, that was just too funny my friend, and brutal too, lol.

 

 

Alright, let's just see how this turns out. Just how we argued round and round that Obama had no snowballs chance of winning the presidency.

 

I was most likely banned during that exchange because I had always said it was the Liberal's contest to loose with all the bad feelings Bush attached to any people who would carry the Republican nomination.

 

Even in the early days I said Hillary would win easily but when Obama started getting the "religious" following with people passing out just looking at him and such I knew he had a great chance to beat Hillary and once he had the nomination of his party, I knew he would win even though I hoped he would not.

 

 

 

 

What I "DID" say was he was faking.

 

I predicted he would turn his back on his centrist promises and become the radical liberal/socialist I knew he truly was but the people could not see because of the masterful "hollywood" campaign Obama ran.

 

Not even a full year in office and all the promises of transparancy and "change" are tossed in the garbage. Obama has become the purely partisan politician that he complained about during his campaign that was ruining Washington and he was going to work for eliminating.

 

Obama won because of the independents and centrists who believed he was going to be a completely different kind of politician, a different kind of President who would bring people together........suckers. Those same middle ground Americans who gave him the Presidency are now unhappy with him and Democrats in general because of their dashed hopes.

[eddo]

Again, the odds are better if this guy is tried in a civilian court. That should matter the most.

 

Odds are better than what?

 

He already confessed and asked to be executed. What more can they hope to accomplish by trying him in a civilian court?

[timesjoke]

Odds are better than what?

 

He already confessed and asked to be executed. What more can they hope to accomplish by trying him in a civilian court?

 

Exactly, in fact in a civilian court the confessions are not admissable so you have less evidence to use against him in a civilian court. The military court was a slam dunk, in a civilian court there is a real chance of them getting off.

[Chi]

Odds are better than what?

 

He already confessed and asked to be executed. What more can they hope to accomplish by trying him in a civilian court?

 

If it only were that easy. You know how many criminals ask for that (their victims wholly agree) and they still have to go through the whole process whether they want to or not?

 

Exactly, in fact in a civilian court the confessions are not admissable so you have less evidence to use against him in a civilian court. The military court was a slam dunk, in a civilian court there is a real chance of them getting off.

 

Again, we shall see.

[timesjoke]

If it only were that easy. You know how many criminals ask for that (their victims wholly agree) and they still have to go through the whole process whether they want to or not?

 

In a civilian court I agree, those statrements can be tossed out easily. But not in a military court. That is why c9onviction is guranteed in the military court due to being able to use his confessions.

 

A civilian court is not guranteed because most of the evidence against him was gathered without him being given miranda warnings or a lawyer. It is called coerced testimony and not admissable.

 

 

Again, we shall see.

 

I would rather save the 300 million dollars it will cost to have the trial and instead do it the easy way. And if we spend 300 million just to seem him found innocent, then what?

[ImWithStupid]

If it only were that easy. You know how many criminals ask for that (their victims wholly agree) and they still have to go through the whole process whether they want to or not?

 

 

That's in a civillian court, not military tribunal.

 

The German sabatours in WWII caught in the US, for example, from capture to execution, eight months.

 

And that's with a hang up for the Supreme Court to review the constitutionality, and it was deemed constitutional, almost unanimous. There was a slight dissenting opinion by a couple of the justices on minor details of the wording of the opinion written, not the constituionality of the tribunals.

[eddo]

If it only were that easy. You know how many criminals ask for that (their victims wholly agree) and they still have to go through the whole process whether they want to or not?

 

Those criminals are US citizens and thus entitled to due process- according to the laws of their country.

 

This dirtbag does not deserve any of that, and should be drawn and quartered by 5 pissed off pigs.