I'm not exactly sure yet where I stand on this issue but it is quite humorous that now the Republicans are standing up against this. At what point do they try and stop looking like a bunch of idiots.. Ugh. Just a few tried in civilian and convicted. shoe bomber Richard Reid Zacharia Moussaoui Ramsi Youseff ose Padilla Not to mention:
I'd like to think we learned a lesson from that. You're right, it's more partisan stuff now but trying these guys in Manhattan is not a good idea.
Personally, I think that if we are fighting a war and capture participants in that war, and decide to give them a trial, it should be in a military court. It is fairly telling of both parties, particularly the elephants, that flip-flop based on who is in power.
Very misleading and you are comparing apples and oranges. Reid and Moussaoui where both taken into custody on US soil. Youseff was captured in Pakistan and extradicted to the US. He was convicted of the trade center bombings 3 years before Bush even took office. :lol: Padilla is a US citizen and therefor properly tried under US law. Bush and the Republicans are against the 9-11 trials being on US soil and against those kind of suspects having miranda rights and access to US courts. What the republicans are objecting to now is completely consistent with what they advocated under Bush. Axelrod is bending the truth a good bit. Furthermore, look at the polls. Americans are overwhelmingly against these scum bags having access to US courts. Brown campaigned heavily on this issue in Mass. These guys should be in military court with habeus corpus. They should not be in a US courtroom.
It's a pathetic waste of $, but of course Rex puts his brain on hold in order to slam republicans. It doesn't matter who thought of it, and who is against it. It's just stupid.
How about this brain on hold thought. How does an un-declared war garner war participants for military trials.
Now this is a reply I like and well thought out. Thank you for that. While I don't think I was mis-leading and I don't really care if they were caught on soil or not. I also never stated those people were under the Bush reign. In fact I didn't state any of that just provided a quote. I'm still not sure which side I am on the issue though. Part of me understands the ease of military court but the other side of me would rather send a message with our normal court system just to spite them. While I'm glad Brown won he's just another puppet Republican.
Red and I already had this conversation in another thread.:lol: Anyway It is wrong to have civilian trials for any of these terrorists in the USA unless they are American citizens. I prefer a military tribunal if anything for these ragheads. President Roosevelt did not wait for trials when we captured the enemy on American soils during WWII. They were executed, we Americans have become softies over the years, we want everyone to like us even if they don't. Another reason you don't want to have these guys in civilian court is that it will put our country on trial of sorts from classified information to these guys propaganda about their extremist beliefs. I do understand a US citizen has to be tried and has rights as such but there is no reason to give others the same rights. One more thing, Obama, Gibbs and Red have already said that some of these guys, I don't remember the names we discussed. These guys have said that some of these guys will be found guilty and executed. At least as far as Obama and Gibbs is concerned. How is it that any of these guys could have a fair and impartial trial when they have already been convicted by leaders and the media? Seems like a case for a mistrial to me. I don't buy this whole Republican vs Democrat conspiracy. Too much is made out of it, the Dems failed to get healthcare passed and yet Republicans are still blamed for not passing anything and saying no to everything.
This is easy. The ONLY reason civilian trials are even being considered is for political pandering to the ultra left base who wouldn't know the first thing about anything military because they are intellectually superior to that group of untouchables. If the uber-Liberals were distracted, nobody who knows anything about this (regardless of party affiliation) would choose to do this. And that's what we're finding out. Political pandering doesn't really work well when there are actual consequences to the pandering. Like trying terrorists like US citizens, or moving a military prison full of very dangerous POWs onto American soil. For being led by a supposedly bright guy, this is an incredibly dumb Administration. Beyond speeches, have they gotten anything right yet? I can't think of one thing.
The misleading part was Axelrod's statement. The names you listed vs the Kalled Sheikh Mohammed's of the world (those are who Republicans object to) is comparing apples to oranges. If you believe the polling most Americans are with the republicans on this issue. Kalled Sheikh Mohammed and these other combatants captured outside the US should be receiving military tribunals. To bring them here on purpose is the stupidest thing Obama and Holder are doing. They will make a mockery of the trials and attempt to empower their cohorts by openly professing their martyrdom and beating their chests. If thats not bad enough these trials are going to cost millions of tax payer dollars. Its a huge mistake and will come back and haunt the Dems. They will lose more seats over this issue and incumbent Dems will be running for cover from the $hit storm raining down on them.
