Holder: Osama bin Laden will never face U.S. trial

[finsuptx]

Holder: Osama bin Laden won't be taken alive | National | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

“Let's deal with reality,” Holder said. Bin Laden “will never appear in an American courtroom.”
Pressed further on that point, Holder said: “The possibility of catching him alive is infinitesimal."

No, he's going to die of old age or his dialysis machine will fall over on him.

I fail to see where terrorists have the same rights under the Constitution as an American citizen. First off, they are classified as enemy combatants, they are NOT citizens, they haven't paid taxes, they've committed heinous crimes against the masses.

Does Holder have a law degree? Charles Manson was at least a citizen, entitled to due process, etc. Also, regarding KSM; how often does a judge in a criminal court continue with a trial when there has been a confession? I'm really curious.

A person who had no rights before committing a crime should not be given the rights after the commission of the crime, and if that is the case, then the justice system has just lost something for me.

 

[B_starinvestor]

Holder: Osama bin Laden won't be taken alive | National | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

“Let's deal with reality,” Holder said. Bin Laden “will never appear in an American courtroom.”
Pressed further on that point, Holder said: “The possibility of catching him alive is infinitesimal."

No, he's going to die of old age or his dialysis machine will fall over on him.

I fail to see where terrorists have the same rights under the Constitution as an American citizen. First off, they are classified as enemy combatants, they are NOT citizens, they haven't paid taxes, they've committed heinous crimes against the masses.

Does Holder have a law degree? Charles Manson was at least a citizen, entitled to due process, etc. Also, regarding KSM; how often does a judge in a criminal court continue with a trial when there has been a confession? I'm really curious.

A person who had no rights before committing a crime should not be given the rights after the commission of the crime, and if that is the case, then the justice system has just lost something for me.

Note: please refer to my signature.:wink:

 

[B_spiker067]

Torture is a crime against humanity. It is anti-Christian. You can't be a TRUE conservative if you don't have a Christian faith to ameliorate the rather harsh effects of a conservative mindset.

At Abu Ghraib and Bagram they tortured a lot of INNOCENT people. Nothing more un-American has ever happened than that (or its equivalent that wasn't punished). It is as bad as it gets.

Bush-Cheney should have been begging for a Presidential pardon and Yoo should have been disbarred. CIA involved should have been anonymously pardoned.

Alleged terrorists have rights.

 

[B_starinvestor]

Torture is a crime against humanity. It is anti-Christian. You can't be a TRUE conservative if you don't have a Christian faith to ameliorate the rather harsh effects of a conservative mindset.

At Abu Ghraib and Bagram they tortured a lot of INNOCENT people. Nothing more un-American has ever happened than that (or its equivalent that wasn't punished). It is as bad as it gets.

Bush-Cheney should have been begging for a Presidential pardon and Yoo should have been disbarred. CIA involved should have been anonymously pardoned.

Alleged terrorists have rights.

Exodus 21:24,Leviticus 24:20,Deuteronomy 19:21 - PassageLookup - New American Standard Bible - BibleGateway.com

You can no more prove their innocence than I can prove their guilt.

Either way, the Bible has endorsed the requisite sentence for violence, and it is on the shoulders of 'Christians' to explain that virtue.

To me it is somewhat perplexing that a few 'Hail Mary's' can absolve any Christian of various sins, yet is acceptable to stand in judgment of anything anti-Christian in nature or context.

Perhaps 'Christians' can conquer the elusive enigma of their "Fathers" ass-ramming innocent young Christians - and once they've established a biblically-endorsed course of action with any substance - they can move on to appropriating ethical conduct and a moral code of standards for war crimes.

 

[justasimpleguy]

I'm just going to leave you guys to it.

 

[StormfrontFL]

Torture is a crime against humanity. It is anti-Christian. You can't be a TRUE conservative if you don't have a Christian faith to ameliorate the rather harsh effects of a conservative mindset.

At Abu Ghraib and Bagram they tortured a lot of INNOCENT people. Nothing more un-American has ever happened than that (or its equivalent that wasn't punished). It is as bad as it gets.

Bush-Cheney should have been begging for a Presidential pardon and Yoo should have been disbarred. CIA involved should have been anonymously pardoned.

Alleged terrorists have rights.

I can't believe it but I agree with Spiker on this.

 

[StormfrontFL]

Exodus 21:24,Leviticus 24:20,Deuteronomy 19:21 - PassageLookup - New American Standard Bible - BibleGateway.com

You can no more prove their innocence than I can prove their guilt.

Either way, the Bible has endorsed the requisite sentence for violence, and it is on the shoulders of 'Christians' to explain that virtue.

To me it is somewhat perplexing that a few 'Hail Mary's' can absolve any Christian of various sins, yet is acceptable to stand in judgment of anything anti-Christian in nature or context.

Perhaps 'Christians' can conquer the elusive enigma of their "Fathers" ass-ramming innocent young Christians - and once they've established a biblically-endorsed course of action with any substance - they can move on to appropriating ethical conduct and a moral code of standards for war crimes.

Star, Christians are supposed to follow the teachings of Christ so that would entail the New Testament. It would also be ironic that Christians would approve of torture considering the fact that Christ was tortured.

 

[B_starinvestor]

Star, Christians are supposed to follow the teachings of Christ so that would entail the New Testament. It would also be ironic that Christians would approve of torture considering the fact that Christ was tortured.

To each his own, I suppose.

The only thing that violent people understand, is violence. So a few folks go on upholding the rights of terrorists and violent killers.

In the meantime, I'm just glad those aren't he folks that are in charge of defending and protecting our country.

 

[Elmer Gantry]

Of course he won't stand trial, he's long dead.

YouTube - Frost over the World - Benazir Bhutto - 02 Nov 07
(The 30 second attention spanners can fast forward to about the 6 min mark for the bomb shell)

 

[HazelGod]

It's really depressing, the percentage of Americans who exhibit such a piss poor understanding of our nation's foundations. :no:

 

[maxcok]

The only thing that violent people understand, is violence.

"Hate begets hate; violence begets violence" - Martin Luther King from his "Dream" speech

 

[maxcok]

It's really depressing, the percentage of Americans who exhibit such a piss poor understanding of our nation's foundations. :no:

.........and dangerous

 

[B_spiker067]

Exodus 21:24,Leviticus 24:20,Deuteronomy 19:21 - PassageLookup - New American Standard Bible - BibleGateway.com

You can no more prove their innocence than I can prove their guilt.

Either way, the Bible has endorsed the requisite sentence for violence, and it is on the shoulders of 'Christians' to explain that virtue.

To me it is somewhat perplexing that a few 'Hail Mary's' can absolve any Christian of various sins, yet is acceptable to stand in judgment of anything anti-Christian in nature or context.

Perhaps 'Christians' can conquer the elusive enigma of their "Fathers" ass-ramming innocent young Christians - and once they've established a biblically-endorsed course of action with any substance - they can move on to appropriating ethical conduct and a moral code of standards for war crimes.

There is KSM on the one hand and on the other the hundreds if not thousands of ordinary Iraqi civilians who were tortured in Abu Ghraib, Bagram and elsewhere.

It is astonishing your lack of shame.

BTW, those were Jewish quotes. The New Testament trumps all of them.

"Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him." (1John 3:15, NKJV).

I hate plenty of people but I understand my shame, do you?

 

[B_starinvestor]

There is KSM on the one hand and on the other the hundreds if not thousands of ordinary Iraqi civilians who were tortured in Abu Ghraib, Bagram and elsewhere.

It is astonishing your lack of shame.

BTW, those were Jewish quotes. The New Testament trumps all of them.

"Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him." (1John 3:15, NKJV).

I hate plenty of people but I understand my shame, do you?

I agree that there were several instances of the misuse of torture.

I disagree that terrorists have rights in the U.S.

The founding fathers were not exposed to, nor were they familiar with, radical fundamentalist terrorists.

My hope is that we adopt a 'zero tolerance' policy with regard to terrorists.

Although I'm quite certain it will never happen.

Due to the actions of terrorists and fundamental extremists, there has been (unfortunately) a great deal of collateral damage. And much of that has been attributable to intelligence breakdowns, following bad leads, etc.

I remember the video clip of the radical who sawed off the American journalist's head like he was carving a turkey.

I believe that he should be tortured and terminated.

I remember the wholesale misery and horror inflicted by the acts of 9/11. The perpetrators of that event deserve to be tortured (to extract information) and terminated.

That's just what I believe.

 

[finsuptx]

Terrorists have the right to remain silent... for eternity... after they are executed, in a a humane and non-torturous way.

There should never be a need for a trial for bin Laden, he has admitted in tapes numerous times that he ordered 9/11, he has also vowed to strike again and again. KSM, same thing. Why do we need to go through a trial for someone who has gleefully admitted their guilt?

 

[D_Andreas Sukov]

It is impossible that America, with all thier resourses cant find him. If he exists that is.

 

[dreamer20]

I fail to see where terrorists have the same rights under the Constitution as an American citizen. First off, they are classified as enemy combatants, they are NOT citizens
Does Holder have a law degree?

Why can't you recognize that an American citizen can also be a terrorist finsuptx?

The matter of the classification "enemy combatant", which is not synonymous with terrorist, was addressed in the following thread:

http://www.lpsg.org/164830-granting-abdulmutallab-u-s-citizen-7.html


31


{QUOTE=Phil Ayesho;2530313}

We do not "give" people due process. A RIGHT is not something you are given... it is something you have.
Everyone already HAS civil right... even if it takes a court action to get the government or other citizens to agree.

Read Paine.Read Jefferson.Read Madison.

Let me walk you through this...
See, terrorism is a CRIME.
Waging war is not.
We can hold ( but not torture ) enemy combatants for as long as we have a declaration of war... and thereafter we HAVE TO RELEASE THEM. They can not be held indefinitely.

Secondly, we do NOT have a declaration of war, ergo, terrorists are NOT enemy combatants. ( no one to actually declare war on is a bit of impediment- you can not declare war on a tactic )

Third- classifying them as enemy not only legitimizes their actions, it exonerates them from accusations of Murder. An enemy combatant is NOT a murderer... he is waging a lawfully recognized war, defending his own side.

and here's the real kicker...

If you want to REALLY strip away a person's rights and hold them in prison for the rest of their lives, here in the US, you HAVE TO CONVICT THEM OF A CRIME.
The penalty for air piracy and terrorism is Life Imprisonment.

There is no such penalty allowed for in holding enemy combatants, unless you can convict them of a "war Crime" and - frankly killing or trying to kill the enemy is NOT a crime in war. Carrying out operations masterminded by your superiors is not a war crime either.

All those nazi and japanese fascist soldiers we captured in WWII?
WE LET THEM ALL GO.


So, please... wake up and bone up on some real law and real history and try to wrap your head around the fact that DUE PROCESS is the MEANS by which government denies a person the rights they already have.

And, seriously... given that he was caught red handed... what to you think is the likelihood of this guy being found innocent...

please, regale me with all the terrorists or hijackers ever caught ON THE PLANE who were found not guilty or let go on a technicality...


Stop listening to Fox News... it is literally eating your brain away.

You want to make SURE these guys NEVER walk the street again?
Convict them of a crime that has life imprisonment as penalty.{/QUOTE}


And the issue of rights for any persons held in U.S. custody was also addressed:

135

{QUOTE=dreamer20;2569900}

per the Supreme Court ruling Boumediene v. Bush of 2008: prisoners must be given the right to habeas corpus under the U.S. Constitution. .

Boumediene v. Bush - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

{QUOTE}

 

[Nova9]

At Abu Ghraib and Bagram they tortured a lot of INNOCENT people. Nothing more un-American has ever happened than that (or its equivalent that wasn't punished). It is as bad as it gets.
Alleged terrorists have rights.

Innocent?? You really need to open your eyes and take reality check.

 

[finsuptx]

An American terrorist would have protections from the Constitution.

 

[HazelGod]

An American terrorist would have protections from the Constitution.

I feel like a broken record having to repeat this over and over, but...

Our Constitution makes precious few references to citizens. Rights and freedoms are recognized and enumerated in most cases for all people, regardless of their citizenship status. Prominent among these is the right to the due process of law.

Please, spare yourself further embarrassment...familiarize yourself with the actual documents before again using them for any argumentative basis.