[lotuseclat79]

Int'l Herald Tribune article (2 pages) here.

-- Tom

[poochee]

Originally Posted by lotuseclat79

Int'l Herald Tribune article (2 pages) here.

-- Tom

Took a long time....

[lotuseclat79]

U.S. to seek execution for 9/11 detainees
Int'l Herald Tribune article (2 pages) here.

-- Tom

P.S. No doubt a Bush legacy thingy he wants to have on his resume!

[ChrisJones]

Originally Posted by poochee

Took a long time....

I was just thinking the same thing....

[Wino]

..............and Osama bin Laden is still free. Has been 2,338 days since George W. Bush made his infamous "Dead or Alive" statement. (for the brain dead wingers, 2338 days = 6.4 years). Come Septemebr 17, 2008, it will be seven years even.

[poochee]

Originally Posted by lotuseclat79

U.S. to seek execution for 9/11 detainees
Int'l Herald Tribune article (2 pages) here.

-- Tom

P.S. No doubt a Bush legacy thingy he wants to have on his resume!

[johnnyburst79]

You know what possibly "COULD" happen, the lawyer for Sheik-Mohammed could pull out the Army field manual where it states that waterboarding is torture and show that as the United States has engaged in torture by the admission of CIA agents, cruel and unusual punishment has occurred and the 8th Amendment has been violated.

[WarC]

Originally Posted by Wino

..............and Osama bin Laden is still free. Has been 2,338 days since George W. Bush made his infamous "Dead or Alive" statement. (for the brain dead wingers, 2338 days = 6.4 years). Come Septemebr 17, 2008, it will be seven years even.

So I can mark you a "yes" vote in the "Invade Pakistan" voting column?

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by Wino

..............and Osama bin Laden is still free. Has been 2,338 days since George W. Bush made his infamous "Dead or Alive" statement. (for the brain dead wingers, 2338 days = 6.4 years). Come Septemebr 17, 2008, it will be seven years even.

[jmosmith]

Originally Posted by WarC

So I can mark you a "yes" vote in the "Invade Pakistan" voting column?

Why? Did Pakistan sent terrorists to the US!?

[Wino]

Originally Posted by WarC

So I can mark you a "yes" vote in the "Invade Pakistan" voting column?

Yes! Absolutely! Have said so from the gitgo. Would have been a better choice than Iraq.

[johnnyburst79]

No, but neither did Afghanistan. That just happens to be where OBL was. If we invaded where the terrorists came from we would have invaded Saudi Arabia, and well, with the Bin Laden's and the Bush families being on such good terms, we couldn't DARE risk that friendship could we....

[ChrisJones]

Originally Posted by johnnyburst79

You know what possibly "COULD" happen, the lawyer for Sheik-Mohammed could pull out the Army field manual where it states that waterboarding is torture and show that as the United States has engaged in torture by the admission of CIA agents, cruel and unusual punishment has occurred and the 8th Amendment has been violated.

It would be a very sad situation if that did happen, and I would think it is quite likely that this will be one of the avanues explored by his legal team.

Heck, I'm not even a lawyer and I can see that! Why didn't anyone in the Bush administration see the problem? Answer: They had no intention at the time of allowing this piece of scum due legal process. I believe that due legal process is necessary no matter who the person is. If their crime is so terrible that you want to keep him locked up, indefinately, without trial, you must have something with which to charge the guy?

Another thing that confuses me slightly is that some of the charges include, "murder in violation of the laws of war", however the US has steadfastly maintained that they are not soldiers, but enemy combatants, and therefore not subject to the rules of the Geneva Convention, so how can you charge someone with a war crime on the one hand, while on the other saying they enjoy none of the protections of a soldier in a time of war? It's got to be one or the other surely? Either you're a soldier at war and subject to the rules of warfare, or you're not a soldier, not subject to the rules of war and therefore not chargeable with war crimes???

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by poochee

Took a long time....

You liberals are absolutely astonishing in your ignorance. Obviously you are not familiar with Federal prosecutions that involve complex schemes. Perhaps you should research how long the government took to make cases against organized crime that operated here in the US (imagne schemes that operate in other countries)--go watch the movie Donnie Brasco and maybe you'll have a clue (he spent 6 years undercover building a case against various mobsters). Do you want fast or do you want convictions? The irony is if they brought charges in 6 months and didn't get convictions, you liberals would blame Bush for his incompetence. I often wonder what it would be like to live in your world--a world where you just come up with whatever opinion satisfies your whim at the moment!

[Mulderator]

GB--working for a prosecuting arm of the federal government--would you please educate these moore-ons on how long a typical complex prosecution takes from start to finish.