U.S. To seek death penalty for Guantanamo prisoners with 9-11 ties

reply to post by Bunch


I agree Bunch. If the USA hopes to have much of a meaningful diplomatic relationship with the rest of the world it is vital that this be conducted above board as much as possible while protecting our procedural and human assets.

This will very much be playing out on the world stage under a very juandiced electron microscope.

We won't get a second chance to attempt some redemption.

Or at least reluctant neutrality.



[edit on 12-2-2008 by kerontehe]

I wish so bad that one day I will come to ATS and see the exact same topic with one word changed:

"U.S. To seek death penalty for politicians with 9-11 ties"

Do you think they'd spill the beans then about what they knew?

Originally posted by BlueRaja

Since we don't know how the evidence was obtained, it's difficult to comment on whether it should be public knowledge. If sensitive means/methods/techniques, or intel is involved, then there's no way that'll be ok'd for public release.

I am certain they do not want those techniques publicly revealed. Which is why the CIA destroyed the torture techique tapes, or so they say, which is also illegal. Those tapes were made at taxpayer expense. The taxpayers are their employers. We employers have a right to know how our money is being used, particularly when laws are broken.

If those trials went public, those detainees would be freed because of using torture to extract "confessions". Depending on whether or not the federal judge is ethical or not. Then it depends on whether or not juries have no prejudices - positive or negative - held against the defendents prior to being seated.

reply to post by kerontehe


They do not mention why they have the "right to remain silent". Because if they complain about torture, they will be gagged by the panel hearing a farce of a case.

That is why the military only goes after the lower levels, private through low level officers. I cite the case of William Calley, Mi Lai, Vietnam, of going after only the lower levels with or without torture involved. His superiors, up to Westmoreland, should have gone down with him but did not.

That is why the detainees need public civilian trials not covered under the suffocating secrets act the Bush administration imposed on this nation.

Originally posted by BlueRaja

If evidence can be released without compromising techniques/sources, then I'm ok with that too.

The great part, for those holding secret pre-judged trials, is we, their employers, will never know what evidence, if any, they had. We will never hear from the defendents if they were tortured, and part of those on those CIA tapes, or not. Give the Bush administration another notch for human rights abuses and more illegal activities, only this time via the Patriot Act.

If people have nothing to hide, they do not conspire in secret. Which is what those tribunals are - conspiracies plotted in secret.

reply to post by BlueRaja


WTF, biggest bunch of hypocritical waste of life playing god I have ever seen!

The US government has already admitting to waterboarding 3 of these individuals. We tried and convicted (then killed by hanging) 6 Japanese interagators after WWII for performing waterboarding against US and other allies... So how in any way could they compromise their techniques, they have already admitted to torture induced so-confessions? Are they currently faking evidence (ie - fake passenger ID for flight 93) like at the Musilini (sp?) trial. We will never know because the tapes have been destroyed....to protect the interagators identities....HAHA..what a load of bs! Oh wait, there goes another month of internal White House emails out the window...no one cares or is going to do anything about it.

The cat is out of the bag...Bush and many other US government officals are war criminals no better than Saddam or Hitler...they should be hanged before they slip away to Paraguay where there are no extradiction laws...but it won't happen because the UN wouldn't even help the American people! Heck, we can't even follow through on the impeachment process unless the president had an affair! Maybe when martial law is introduced is when people will really start to think, wait a minute, this is so unfair and I am going TO FIGHT BACK FOR MY RIGHTS........

[edit on 12-2-2008 by percievedreality] - spelling corrections



[edit on 12-2-2008 by percievedreality]

reply to post by quintar


Of course seeing as how none have ties, I doubt you'll ever see that headline.

reply to post by percievedreality


When I was referring to techniques, I wasn't referring to getting information out of the defendants through interrogation. I was referring to ELINT, COMINT/SIGINT, IMINT, HUMINT, etc...and letting other would be terrorists know the vulnerabilities that they currently have, but don't know about, so they can change their SOPs.

reply to post by percievedreality


By the way, just be glad that it's folks like me that are defending the country, rather than you, who presuppose that the defendants are innocent, and that the threats to you are of local origin.

Maybe the tapes are destroyed and maybe not. They can easily be leverage for those wanting self-protection, and maybe a little greasing of the palms for job security, plus, a few added lucrative non-taxable perks. In addition to, non-taxable greasing the palms. It is the way the game of politics and high finance are played and has been for what seems to be an eternity.

Instead of engaging in the ethical act of whistleblower, those mindsets are out for themselves and no one else. Surely we all know such people. I certainly do, and they ended up becoming an overbundance of population, as the Yuppie generation took over in the late 1970s. They set the example for their children to be just like them, or far more selfish than themselves. Good example to define the heavy expanding atmosphere of that in the US: "Cats in the Cradle" by Harry and Sandy Chapin.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by percievedreality

 

When I was referring to techniques, I wasn't referring to getting information out of the defendants through interrogation. I was referring to ELINT, COMINT/SIGINT, IMINT, HUMINT, etc...and letting other would be terrorists know the vulnerabilities that they currently have, but don't know about, so they can change their SOPs.

I was fairly certain you were not, which is why I brought it up.

reply to post by OrionStars


Well you were fairly wrong then.

Let me ask you this guys, is Osama Bin Laden a guerrilla fighter or a civilian criminal?

Are we going to put trials for every fighter that we have capture in wars?

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by percievedreality

 

By the way, just be glad that it's folks like me that are defending the country, rather than you, who presuppose that the defendants are innocent, and that the threats to you are of local origin.

So you operate on the premise of guilty until proved innocent. The exact opposite of US Constitutional guarantees. So does the Bush administration.

Perhaps we are not pleased that people, with your opinions, are not defending this country, but instead are destroying this once soverign nation of people, in favor of a one world order global economy, autocratically controlled by David Rockefeller. I cite Trilateral Commission (D. Rockefeller baby) and Council of Foreign Relations (Rockefeller family baby), as being behind all that destruction of this once sovereign nation.

Patriot Act and the erosion of our rights has always been the first step in installing an autocratic regime. Hilter planned to make it global. The masses stopped him. Now the masses have to stop the Rockefeller autocratic global empire.

What is happening by the Bush administration is global erosion of human rights and civil liberties. This topic can define that very well in physical proof. The kangeroo court, called secret military tribunal, being the physical proof of a very real erosion of the human rights and civil liberties, of those foreign national detainees (global).

The Patriot Act has certainly eroded our human rights and civil liberties. We no longer have a right to privacy. People are paid high stakes money to tout accusations, true or not, against others declared, by the Bush administration, to be "enemies of the state". That is only for starters, on erosion of our domestic civil liberties and inalienable human rights, once guaranteed us by the very physical US Constitution.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by OrionStars

 

Well you were fairly wrong then.

How am I wrong? I was right. You were not referring to the brutal techniques used, to extract what can easily be highly false confessions just to stop the torture. You stated you wish to think people guilty until proved innocent. You further told us we should be pleased about that. Is that what you intended to mean? Because it is what you stated - intended or not.

reply to post by OrionStars


I fail to see how prisoners at Guantanemo and the erosion of your personal freedoms have any bearing on one another. These prisoners aren't being treated like criminals, and subject to the same standards as in a criminal trial. What is being established is how much guilt there is, not whether there is guilt or not. These are enemy combatants, not Suzy Chapstick, rounded up off the streets in Anytown, USA. Detainees who have been shown to be innocent have been released. I'm not a member of the NWO, the illuminati, the bilderbergs, bohemian grove, or the WCW.
I do take threats to national security seriously though, which you seem to brush off since you're certain that our threats are all internal.

Originally posted by deltaboy
Let me ask you this guys, is Osama Bin Laden a guerrilla fighter or a civilian criminal?

Are we going to put trials for every fighter that we have capture in wars?

Ronald Reagan publicly called bin Laden and his crew freedom fighters helping the US. What do you think when considering that? Who was telling the truth and who was lying? One cannot be a freedom fighter for the state and enemy of the state at the same time, can one?

reply to post by OrionStars


You stated that you were under the impression that I was talking about interogation techniques, that shouldn't be revealed. I corrected that assumption, through more specificity(the various means of gathering intel).
I said you were wrong, because of what you assumed I was saying.

Originally posted by OrionStars
Ronald Reagan publicly called bin Laden and his crew freedom fighters helping the US. What do you think when considering that? Who was telling the truth and who was lying? One cannot be a freedom fighter for the state and enemy of the state at the same time, can one?

No, Ronald Reagan was calling the Mujahadeen fighting against the Soviet MILITARY that was invading Afghanistan as freedom fighters. Might as well called the Taliban freedom fighters, even though they didn't exist till 94. Al Qaeda didn't exist till 88, long after the Soviet military was leaving. Osama had plans afterwards.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by OrionStars

 

I fail to see how prisoners at Guantanemo and the erosion of your personal freedoms have any bearing on one another.

If they can do that to international detainees, they can do the same to us any time they please, under that civil liberties eroding farce called Patriot Act. That is an erosion of our rights in this nation.

Pulling away constitutional guarantees of right to privacy in this country, is always an erosion of our constitutionally guaranteed rights. I thought I made that very clear in a prior post. Where was it not clear in that post?