U.S. Seeks Death Penalty For 6 in Gitmo

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,059
73
91
Originally posted by: palehorse74

on the other hand, if any 9/11 terrorist is allowed to live, that is also "pretty fundamentally f'd up" -- is it not?

OTOH, if they get off because the Bushwhackos felt compelled to torture them, it will be the fault of those who couldn't respect the Constitution they swore to uphold.

Of course, when they're so willing to abuse our Constitution and our laws, we're stuck with the question of how we can trust them to uphold anyone elses rights... like mine.. or yours.

That's one good example of why the Bushwhackos are guilty of treason.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: sirjonk
So give them a trial and kill them. Most are not objecting to the second part.

The second part depends on the first.

Give them their trials.

It will, however, be a damn shame if these heartless bastards get off because of torture. Certainly, many have went free over far less dramatic "technicalities".
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Finally. I wish it was public hangings.

QFT. These are the worst of the worst.

So give them a trial and kill them. Most are not objecting to the second part.

No one is objecting to the second part that I have heard so far, but it isn't at all surprising to hear how some could give a shit if the first part is ignored.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
There should be a public trial, but I'm sure there won't be.
I am guessing that a lot of the evidence has to be protected, especially the means in which it was gathered.

The best we can hope for is outside observers to sit in and watch.

The only evidence being protected is government incompetence.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: sirjonk
So give them a trial and kill them. Most are not objecting to the second part.

The second part depends on the first.

Give them their trials.

It will, however, be a damn shame if these heartless bastards get off because of torture. Certainly, many have went free over far less dramatic "technicalities".

Chase your own tail much? If criminals go free because of "technicalities," that is the fault of incompetent officials, not our justice system.
 

cKGunslinger

Lifer
Nov 29, 1999
16,408
57
91
Originally posted by: Harvey
How are you brown nosed neocon Bushwhacko sycophants going to feel if they can't sentence or even convict Khalid Sheikh Mohammed because your Torturer in Chief and his cabal tortured him? :shocked:

TROLL! :thumbsdown:


Dammit Harvey, if you're going to respond to your own posts, there won't be anything left for us to do!
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
There should be a public trial, but I'm sure there won't be.

Yes, it'll be public.

There will be a panel of judges, IIRC 2/3's have to agree to guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

For the death penalty to apply it must be unanimous among the judges.

Rules of evidence are expected to apply. Thus info obtained by torture isn't likely to be introduced.

BTW: It's been noted that interogations (including "torture") are designed to elicit info about possible future events, not determine guilt for past deeds. So it's somewhat unlikely the question of "torture" is relevant in a trial to determine guilt for past deds.

Fern
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,059
73
91
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: Harvey
How are you brown nosed neocon Bushwhacko sycophants going to feel if they can't sentence or even convict Khalid Sheikh Mohammed because your Torturer in Chief and his cabal tortured him? :shocked:

TROLL! :thumbsdown:


Dammit Harvey, if you're going to respond to your own posts, there won't be anything left for us to do!

What? Do you need a translator? :roll:

brown nosed ne'-o-con Bush'-whack-o sy'-co-phants

n. pl.

Bush administration aplogists who, for seven years, have made excuse after excuse after excuse for the criminal acts of the administration of George W. Bush.

Torturer in Chief

n.

See George W. Bush.
 

Sinsear

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2007
6,439
80
91
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: Harvey
How are you brown nosed neocon Bushwhacko sycophants going to feel if they can't sentence or even convict Khalid Sheikh Mohammed because your Torturer in Chief and his cabal tortured him? :shocked:

TROLL! :thumbsdown:


Dammit Harvey, if you're going to respond to your own posts, there won't be anything left for us to do!

What? Do you need a translator? :roll:

brown nosed ne'-o-con Bush'-whack-o sy'-co-phants

n. pl.

Bush administration aplogists who, for seven years, have made excuse after excuse after excuse for the criminal acts of the administration of George W. Bush.

Torturer in Chief

n.

See George W. Bush.

I guess you took a funny pill today.

 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,925
2,908
136
Originally posted by: Harvey
How are you brown nosed neocon Bushwhacko sycophants going to feel if they can't sentence or even convict Khalid Sheikh Mohammed because your Torturer in Chief and his cabal tortured him? :shocked:

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

My bad, guess I should have said President Obama :)

TROLL! :thumbsdown:

Did you seriously just call someone else a troll when you're only contribution was "How are you brown nosed neocon Bushwhacko sycophants going to feel if they can't sentence or even convict Khalid Sheikh Mohammed because your Torturer in Chief and his cabal tortured him?"
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Wait, I thought OBL was the "mastermind"?
I suggest you read a book or two on the subject...

Don't have to go that far:

Bin Laden, Omar operating in Pakistan - U.S. official

Bin Laden, the suspected mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, and Mullah Omar are believed to have fled Afghanistan soon after the U.S.-led invasion that overthrew the Taliban government in late 2001.[/b]

Easy to be confused because there are multiple news stories that say so. Supposedly Khalid proposed the idea to OBL and he took him up the idea. Regardless, this is more BS to steer us away from OBL himself. As if somehow now he is less of a target. I personally think he is dead and thats why we don't pursue him. At least, Bhutto thought so.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,059
73
91
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Harvey
How are you brown nosed neocon Bushwhacko sycophants going to feel if they can't sentence or even convict Khalid Sheikh Mohammed because your Torturer in Chief and his cabal tortured him? :shocked:

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

My bad, guess I should have said President Obama :)

TROLL! :thumbsdown:

Did you seriously just call someone else a troll when you're only contribution was "How are you brown nosed neocon Bushwhacko sycophants going to feel if they can't sentence or even convict Khalid Sheikh Mohammed because your Torturer in Chief and his cabal tortured him?"

Did you seriously not understand the meaning of my words, even after I posted a direct translation for the reading challenged neocons on the forum?

Do you seriously not understand that torturing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others could jeopardize any prosecution against them, regardless of their guilt?

Do you seriously not understand that the Bushwhackos HAVE tortured him and others?

Do you seriously not consider PJ's reference to Obama as off topic trolling? :roll:

With all due respect (i.e. none)... :lips: my (_!_)
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
There should be a public trial, but I'm sure there won't be.
I am guessing that a lot of the evidence has to be protected, especially the means in which it was gathered.

The best we can hope for is outside observers to sit in and watch.

The only evidence being protected is government incompetence.

:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: sirjonk
So give them a trial and kill them. Most are not objecting to the second part.

The second part depends on the first.

Give them their trials.

It will, however, be a damn shame if these heartless bastards get off because of torture. Certainly, many have went free over far less dramatic "technicalities".

Chase your own tail much? If criminals go free because of "technicalities," that is the fault of incompetent officials, not our justice system.

:thumbsup:
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
From PJ-

I am guessing that a lot of the evidence has to be protected, especially the means in which it was gathered.

You must mean the waterboarding, and the field telephone generators lovingly attached to their nutsacks, a la El Salvador and Guatemala... That stuff is, why, it's National Security!

Maybe the govt will rely on Israeli translators- yeh, that's it, kinda like the translator in the Jim Carrey movie about the white bat in Africa...

Subject, In Arabic- "Why are you doing this to me?"

Israeli translation- "I'll kill you all, infidel dogs!"

From vic-

The only evidence being protected is government incompetence.

Amen. The very existence of the Gitmo prison resulted from that in the first place. It's a disgrace, a bit of domestic political puffery, a sop and a distraction for the weak minded cowards among us.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,059
73
91
Originally posted by: Vic

If criminals go free because of "technicalities," that is the fault of incompetent officials, not our justice system.

Yeah... Screw that old Constitution, anyhow. I'll wait to hear your whining protests about those "technicalities" when the jack booted thugs come for YOU. :shocked:

Don't give us any crap about not having to worry because you haven't done anything wrong. It doesn't matter when they don't give you your Constitutional right to prove it or they present your torture induced confession. :thumbsdown:

Originally posted by: Skoorb

It'll be hard to waterboard them if they're dead, though, won't it?

That's one good reason not to execute the Bushwhackos when they're convicted of treason.

THEY should be waterboarded. It isn't torture. They said so, themselves, and we can believe them... Right? :roll:
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Harvey
How are you brown nosed neocon Bushwhacko sycophants going to feel if they can't sentence or even convict Khalid Sheikh Mohammed because your Torturer in Chief and his cabal tortured him? :shocked:

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

My bad, guess I should have said President Obama :)

TROLL! :thumbsdown:

Did you seriously just call someone else a troll when you're only contribution was "How are you brown nosed neocon Bushwhacko sycophants going to feel if they can't sentence or even convict Khalid Sheikh Mohammed because your Torturer in Chief and his cabal tortured him?"


Do you seriously not understand that torturing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others could jeopardize any prosecution against them, regardless of their guilt?

Doesn't look like that will be the case

Link

The Bush administration announced yesterday that it intends to bring capital murder charges against half a dozen men allegedly linked to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, based partly on information the men disclosed to FBI and military questioners without the use of coercive interrogation tactics.

FBI and military interrogators who began work with the suspects in late 2006 called themselves the "Clean Team," and set as their goal collecting of virtually the same information the CIA had obtained from five of the six through duress at secret prisons.

To ensure that the data would not be tainted by allegations of torture or illegal coercion, the FBI and military team won the suspects' trust over the past 16 months by using time-tested rapport-building techniques, the officials said.

Fern
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,059
73
91
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Harvey

Do you seriously not understand that torturing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others could jeopardize any prosecution against them, regardless of their guilt?

Doesn't look like that will be the case

Link

The Bush administration announced yesterday that it intends to bring capital murder charges against half a dozen men allegedly linked to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, based partly on information the men disclosed to FBI and military questioners without the use of coercive interrogation tactics.

Nice of you to ignore the words, based partly on information the men disclosed to FBI and military questioners and bold the text FOLLOWING to make your questionable point

Do you think that excuses your Traitor in Chief and his gang of torturers, traitors and murderers from their crimes? :roll:
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Harvey
Doesn't look like that will be the case

Link

The Bush administration announced yesterday that it intends to bring capital murder charges against half a dozen men allegedly linked to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, based partly on information the men disclosed to FBI and military questioners without the use of coercive interrogation tactics.

FBI and military interrogators who began work with the suspects in late 2006 called themselves the "Clean Team," and set as their goal collecting of virtually the same information the CIA had obtained from five of the six through duress at secret prisons.

To ensure that the data would not be tainted by allegations of torture or illegal coercion, the FBI and military team won the suspects' trust over the past 16 months by using time-tested rapport-building techniques, the officials said.

Fern

Erm...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23140359/

After years of refusing public comment on a particularly harsh CIA interrogation method, top Bush administration officials have suddenly begun pressing a controversial argument that it was legal for the CIA to strap prisoners to a board and pour water over their face to make them believe they were being drowned.

The issue promises to play a role in the historic military prosecution of six al-Qaeda detainees for allegedly organizing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, in cases described by the Defense Department on Monday. One of the six detainees, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, was subjected to the technique known as waterboarding after his capture in 2003, and four of the others were subjected to different "enhanced interrogation" tactics by the CIA.
************

i.e. they tortured them before they didn't torture them. How can they say they got the same information later, after they'd already tortured them? If the men didn't "cooperate" they knew what would happen to them.

You're a POW in N. Korea. They torture you for a year, and you spill. Then 2 years later, ask you nicely the same questions, you spill again. They say you did it the 2nd time without duress. That doesn't hold water, no pun.

ED: Seems like I wasn't the only one on this track: http://www.time-blog.com/swamp...n-torture_someone.html
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: Vic

If criminals go free because of "technicalities," that is the fault of incompetent officials, not our justice system.

Yeah... Screw that old Constitution, anyhow. I'll wait to hear your whining protests about those "technicalities" when the jack booted thugs come for YOU. :shocked:

Don't give us any crap about not having to worry because you haven't done anything wrong. It doesn't matter when they don't give you your Constitutional right to prove it or they present your torture induced confession. :thumbsdown:

Are you retarded Harvey? Where in Vic's post did he indicate that he protests those technicalities? Apparently the Harveybot is on the fritz again, key words are triggering the wrong replies.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,059
73
91
Originally posted by: BoberFett

Are you retarded Harvey? Where in Vic's post did he indicate that he protests those technicalities? Apparently the Harveybot is on the fritz again, key words are triggering the wrong replies.

I guess I should have remembered that some like you are so mouse challenged and so hungry to bash me, personally, that you couldn't read Vic's original post for context. It was in response to Pabster's post:

Originally posted by: Pabster

It will, however, be a damn shame if these heartless bastards get off because of torture. Certainly, many have went free over far less dramatic "technicalities".

I read that as an attempt to minimize or to distract from Pabster's actual point. If you read it differently, that's the way it is. If all you wanted was another bogus reason to take a shot at me, :lips: my (_!_).
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: BoberFett

Are you retarded Harvey? Where in Vic's post did he indicate that he protests those technicalities? Apparently the Harveybot is on the fritz again, key words are triggering the wrong replies.

I guess I should have remembered that some like you are so mouse challenged and so hungry to bash me, personally, that you couldn't read Vic's original post for context. It was in response to Pabster's post:

Originally posted by: Pabster

It will, however, be a damn shame if these heartless bastards get off because of torture. Certainly, many have went free over far less dramatic "technicalities".

I read that as an attempt to minimize or to distract from Pabster's actual point. If you read it differently, that's the way it is. If all you wanted was another bogus reason to take a shot at me, :lips: my (_!_).

Then quote Pabster, not Vic, forum n00b.
 

GrGr

Diamond Member
Sep 25, 2003
3,204
1
76
Diplomats told to defend seeking death penalty for 9/11 detainees
U.S. justifies tribunal as similar to trials of Nazis

Link

If six suspected terrorists are sentenced to death at Guantanamo Bay for the Sept. 11 attacks, U.S. Army regulations that were quietly amended two years ago open the possibility of execution by injection at the military base in Cuba, experts said Tuesday.

Conducting the executions on U.S. soil could open the way for the detainees' lawyers to go to U.S. courts to fight the death sentences. But the updated regulations make it possible for the executions to be carried out at Guantanamo.

The condemned men could even be buried at Guantanamo. A Muslim section of the cemetery at Guantanamo has been dedicated by an Islamic cultural adviser, said Bruce Lloyd, spokesman for the Guantanamo Naval Station. Among those buried elsewhere at the cemetery are U.S. servicemen.

WASHINGTON ? The Bush administration has instructed U.S. diplomats abroad to defend its decision to seek the death penalty for six Guantanamo Bay detainees accused in the Sept. 11 terror attacks by recalling the executions of Nazi war criminals after World War II.

A four-page cable sent to U.S. embassies and obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press says that execution as punishment for extreme violations of the laws of war is internationally accepted and points to the 1945-46 International Military Tribunals as an example. Twelve of Adolf Hitler's senior aides were sentenced to death at the trials in Nuremberg, Germany, although not all were executed in the end.

The unclassified cable was sent by the State Department to all U.S. diplomatic missions worldwide late on Monday.

In it, the department advises American diplomats to refer to Nuremberg if asked by foreign governments or media about the legality of capital punishment in the 9/11 cases.

"International Humanitarian Law contemplates the use of the death penalty for serious violations of the laws of war," says the cable, which was written by the office of the department's legal adviser, John Bellinger.

"The most serious war criminals sentenced at Nuremberg were executed for their actions," it said.

The cable makes no link between the scale of the crimes perpetrated by the Nazis, which included the Holocaust that killed some 6 million European Jews and other minorities, and those allegedly committed by the Guantanamo detainees, who are accused of murder and war crimes in connection with 9/11, in which nearly 3,000 people died.

But it makes clear that the U.S. administration sees Nuremberg as a historic precedent in asking for the Sept. 11 defendants to be executed.

The cable is written in a question-and-answer format in anticipation of inquiries that diplomats may get from foreigners about the Pentagon's Monday announcement of the trial and charges.

"Posts are asked to draw from the points provided below in responding to foreign government and media requests regarding this announcement," it says in a one-paragraph summary under the subject heading: "Q and A ? Guantanamo Detainees Charged for 9/11."

Much of the cable describes the defendants and the allegations against them as well as assurances they will receive fair trials.

The Nuremberg reference is in the response offered to the sample question: "Doesn't the application of the death penalty to these defendants violate international law?"

The one-word answer provided before the explanation that invokes Nuremberg: "No."

The unprecedented proceeding will be the first capital trial under the terrorism-era U.S. military tribunal system.


The US has also decided that they can execute the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay after their Kangaroo Court is done with them.

What a mockery this administration is making of itself, the USA, and all the Americans killed in WWII fighting people of similar mentality to this administration. Once again this administration, representing all of the US, manages to sink lower than rock bottom. It will be interesting to see how much further down they can drag the US before they are kicked out. To think there is almost a whole year left...





 

Sinsear

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2007
6,439
80
91
Yes, because clearly people like Khalid Sheikh Mohamed deserve to live to old age.