PDA

View Full Version : Republican Irony



Ian McColgin
04-06-2011, 06:55 AM
The Republicans in Congress have prevented trying the suspected terrorists held in Guantanamo in civilian courts and forced it back to military tribunals.

So far the military tribunals have convicted 6 out of 779 cases. Civilian prosecutors and civilian courts have hundreds of convictions.

‘Nuff said.

Edited to add * Not quite enough. I can just here the cries of the clueless who want a document. Should have added from the start:
As of a DoJ letter to congress in March ’10, over 150 individuals have been convicted to terror crimes and another more than 390 were convicted of related crimes (obstruction, perjury etc) all leading to long sentences.

The letter points out that civilian prosecutors have the ability to look at terror-related crimes that military tribunals lack, to wit:

“The second category includes a variety of other statutes (like fraud, firearms offenses, false statements, or obstruction of justice) where the investigation involved an identified link to international terrorism. There have been more than 240 individuals charged in such cases since September 11, 2001. Examples of the international terrorism nexus identified in some of these cases have also been provided for your review.Prosecuting terror-related targets using these latter offenses is often an effective method—and sometimes the only available method—of deterring and disrupting potential terrorist planning and support activities. Indeed, one of the great strengths of the criminal justice system is the broad range of offenses that are available to arrest and convict individuals believed to be linked to terrorism, even if a terrorism offense cannot be established. Of course, an aggressive and wide-ranging terrorism investigation will net individuals with varying degrees of culpability and involvement in terrorist activity, as the NSD chart reflects. Arresting and convicting both major and minor operatives, supporters, and facilitators can have crippling effects on terrorists’ ability to carry out their plans.”
http://www.justice.gov/cjs/docs/terrorism-crimes-letter.html

Curtism
04-06-2011, 11:49 AM
I remember seeing similar reports back when the DOJ decided to have the trials in civilian court in NY. I wondered then, and still wonder, what the reason(s) could be that Republicans are pushing so hard for military trials. I didn't buy the reasons they threw out via the media/spin machine about lack of security, drawing possible future attacks to the city . . .

What is the endgame for them?
Opposing all that is Obama for political sport?
Making so GITMO stays open, thus breaking yet another of his campaign promises, to make more ammo for 2012 elections?
Or something other perhaps?

I'd like to hear some other takes on this.

BrianW
04-06-2011, 01:44 PM
January 2009...


This morning, President Barack Obama signed an executive order (http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/safefree/gitmo_draft_order.pdf) that will close down the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, within the year. He explained that he was "following through not just on a commitment I made during the campaign but an understanding that dates back to our Founding Fathers, that we are willing to observe core standards of conduct—not just when it's easy but also when it's hard."

Apparently the words "hard" and "commitment" don't mean the same thing to Obama, as they did to his supporters.

There's the irony.

Republicans, like them or not, did what we would expect. Obama on the other hand has not.

wardd
04-06-2011, 01:54 PM
January 2009...



Apparently the words "hard" and "commitment" don't mean the same thing to Obama, as they did to his supporters.

There's the irony.

Republicans, like them or not, did what we would expect. Obama on the other hand has not.

republicans hardly ever do what they say they will do during campaigning

Dr. Arthur Trollingson
04-06-2011, 04:00 PM
So far the military tribunals have convicted 6 out of 779 cases. Civilian prosecutors and civilian courts have hundreds of convictions.


That is an abysmal rate of conviction. These are terrorists we're talking about! If the military tribunals can't justify the continued imprisonment of more than 1% of those monsters, the system is broken. We need to change the rules or something so we can get these terrorists convicted.

wardd
04-06-2011, 04:07 PM
That is an abysmal rate of conviction. These are terrorists we're talking about! If the military tribunals can't justify the continued imprisonment of more than 1% of those monsters, the system is broken. We need to change the rules or something so we can get these terrorists convicted.

yea, first the trial then the hanging

hokiefan
04-06-2011, 04:20 PM
That is an abysmal rate of conviction. These are terrorists we're talking about! If the military tribunals can't justify the continued imprisonment of more than 1% of those monsters, the system is broken. We need to change the rules or something so we can get these terrorists convicted.

Accused terrorists.

Cheers,

Bobby

Ian McColgin
04-06-2011, 04:32 PM
In fairness to the military tribunals - a very large percentage of the prisoners rendered to Guantanamo were never terrorists and a good number have actually been sent home after a few years of degredation and torture. Civilian prosecutors make mistakes but they don't wholesale round-up and detain people against whom they have no case. So the poor success rate of the military courts is skewed down by the very large pool of irrelevancies they started with.

genglandoh
04-06-2011, 04:44 PM
I am very confused about the whole terrorists trials issue.

In a normal war you catch someone on the battle field you put them into a camp.
At the end of the war the loosing side gives up and their soldiers are released.

In the War in Iraq and Afghanistan I think we did the same think with Soldiers in uniform.
With terrorists who are not in uniform we arrest them and put then into the Military justice system.
So far so good.

But what I do not understand is why have they not gone to trial.

wardd
04-06-2011, 04:47 PM
In fairness to the military tribunals - a very large percentage of the prisoners rendered to Guantanamo were never terrorists and a good number have actually been sent home after a few years of degredation and torture. Civilian prosecutors make mistakes but they don't wholesale round-up and detain people against whom they have no case. So the poor success rate of the military courts is skewed down by the very large pool of irrelevancies they started with.

a lot were rounded up by local warlords and turned in for a bounty

not hard to figure out

Dr. Arthur Trollingson
04-06-2011, 04:50 PM
In the War in Iraq and Afghanistan I think we did the same think with Soldiers in uniform.
With terrorists who are not in uniform we arrest them and put then into the Military justice system.


Well, that's most of the story. We had extra room in the jails, so we paid warlords and poppy wholesalers to bring us guys they didn't like. It was a strategy to sweep the battlefield of terrorists before we fought the war. It worked great, the terrorists are gone, now there are only enemy fighters left.

Dr. Arthur Trollingson
04-06-2011, 04:51 PM
Accused terrorists.

Cheers,

Bobby

That's a mere technicality. See, the word terrorist is right there!