Terrorist Trials

[Mighty Pirate]

I'm knee deep in an essay about democracy at the moment and reading lots of diverse and interesting things; some relevent, some not. And I've come across an item about a decision to try 9/11 terrorists in New York. As it happens I'm all for perpetrators being forced to confront their victims and it always annoys me when they shoot themselves first.

But from what little I can find on this issue, it appears to be one of rights and people seem to think America is too soft on prisoners and that a sharp lawyer will find all the loopholes and they'll get off with it.

So it's obvious the presumption of innocence is out the window already.....

It got me thinking - is this the real reason why Bush never found Bin Laden - because he knew he'd never prove his case in a court of law? Just thinking...

[NotSoFast]

Bin laden has claimed many dozens of terrorist attacks all over the globe. If your guess is correct, why has no other country taken him in for justice?

No offense, but this is the most rediculous theory on the subject I have ever heard of. If he were to be found, it would most likely be at the hands of our many thousands of soldiers in the area. If a fear of a court battle was the reason, I think it would be safe to assume that those well-armed men and women of our armed forces could make it impossible for Bin Laden to make it back over here for a trial.

As a former member of said armed forces, I find it completely absurd to even contemplate such reasoning for conveniently "not finding" this abomination of a human being.

[pcfreak]

That would then become murder, which would make those soldiers who were involved criminals. Bin Laden should face a trial in a court of law, and not be subject to a lynch party. I say this not to defend the rights of Bin Laden, but the public deserves to hear the facts of what exactly happened and who exactly was to blame. The only way we could ever hope to do so would be for the leaders of Al-Queda to be put to trial. Armies are supposed to act under the Geneva Convention when dealing with prisoners, and for any Army to act outside of these laws brings it's reputation into disrepute. Just because Al Queda are nothing but cowards and scum, this doesn't mean that we should act that way when dealing with them.

As for why he hasn't been caught, I seriously doubt it was anything to do with Bush. It would have done his political career a maissive boost to have brought Bin Laden to justice. He would have been a hero in some US peoples eyes for this. I think the reason he hasn't been caught, and is unlikely ever to be caught is the fact that he can jump borders with impunity, and he knows his neck of the woods like the back of his hands. The middle east has plenty of bolt holes where he would receive a warm welcome.

[Lou Cypher]

First, he would be tried in a military court, he doesn't have the right to be tried in a civilian court of law, and second, he's not protected under the Geneva Convention.


Lou :globe:

[juxtaposed]

i would only hope that any terrorist would be tried in a military court, but in a lot of cases it is seeming that they are trying to get into a criminal/civil trial rather than a tribunal. and in a similar way felons don't get the same rights as regular citizens, such people should also lose some basic rights. fine, fair trial and all that, but why should we go out of our way to treat them with dignity? many wanted to die for their god anyways, might we not oblige them on a fast track?

[Mikell]

Bin Ladin is a red herring.
:doa:It's about getting a foot hold in the Middle East.

[NotSoFast]

That would then become murder, which would make those soldiers who were involved criminals. Bin Laden should face a trial in a court of law, and not be subject to a lynch party. I say this not to defend the rights of Bin Laden, but the public deserves to hear the facts of what exactly happened and who exactly was to blame. The only way we could ever hope to do so would be for the leaders of Al-Queda to be put to trial. Armies are supposed to act under the Geneva Convention when dealing with prisoners, and for any Army to act outside of these laws brings it's reputation into disrepute. Just because Al Queda are nothing but cowards and scum, this doesn't mean that we should act that way when dealing with them.

As for why he hasn't been caught, I seriously doubt it was anything to do with Bush. It would have done his political career a maissive boost to have brought Bin Laden to justice. He would have been a hero in some US peoples eyes for this. I think the reason he hasn't been caught, and is unlikely ever to be caught is the fact that he can jump borders with impunity, and he knows his neck of the woods like the back of his hands. The middle east has plenty of bolt holes where he would receive a warm welcome.

So it's murder and not a military act when soldiers shoot each other on the battlefield? Bin Laden is the leader of a known and admitted terrorist organization who has committed atrocities in dozens of places around the world. That makes him a target of the military in the region. If they find him standing in line at the local market, then they could arrest him and take him in for trial. But if he's holed up in a mountain cave and a firefight is required to get to him, what should the soldiers do? Wait for him to walk out with his hands up? We both know that will never happen.

[Mighty Pirate]

From what I understand, it's legal warfare if you're both armed and shooting at each other but when one surrenders or is captured the rules change and you are not allowed to put a bullet into them or demean them. Abu Graib, anyone?

The issues about the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay was muddied because they weren't legally POWs as no war had been declared. There is considerable high level debate about Osama Bin Laden's legal standing regarding which court he could be tried in. Normally, terrorists are tried in a civil court.

The idea that Bush deliberately doesn't want Bin Laden isn't actually that far-fetched. Bush snr & jnr are in business with the Bin Laden family who just happen to be the builders who have exclusive license to develop Mecca. I watched a foreign documentary about them last week and they are incredibly influential. Let's not forget that America and the West are still dependent on Saudi oil.

Plus, Bush has spent a lot more energy and resources in capturing Saddam Hussein - who it must be said, although not a nice man, was hardly a threat to Americans that removing him justifies the results listed here. facts and figures (http://usliberals.about.com/od/homelandsecurit1/a/IraqNumbers.htm)

I'm an interested observer - I don't have any political bias either way in this issue but I also don't believe politicians ever tell us the truth about anything. I think to understand what was going on we need historic perspective and the willingness to look at what happened rather than what was said.

[juxtaposed]

i hate it when i write a nice long note and then it disappears when i go to another page after posting.

in short:

it doesn't bother me what happened in the terrorist prisons, they were treated better, even with what they call torture, than they deserved

the loop hole to not consider them pow's just because they aren't sponsored by a nation shouldn't even hold water. they are engaged in a war as much as any two nations fighting each other are

[OldsterHolster]

it doesn't bother me what happened in the terrorist prisons, they were treated better, even with what they call torture, than they deserved

Aha! There's the rub, though. If we don't adhere to our moral standards and beliefs in what is right and what is wrong, then we are no better than they are. The conflict between good and evil is never a level playing field. Edward.

[juxtaposed]

im fine with going down to their level then. its not a moral dilemma to me, but i can understand the thought process. 4 years of polysci as a major discussed this topic ad naseum

[Mighty Pirate]

But the unibomber was also a terrorist - and he was tried as a criminal. Britain's terrorist bombers have been tried in the criminal courts, not the military ones.

Wasn't that one of the main points of Magna Carta way back in 1215 - to force the government to adhere to its own laws. We tread a dangerous path when we start making exceptions to that rule.

Here we have a western nation (just happens to be USA) that markets itself as the bringer of Freedom, Liberty, Democracy, Human Rights, etc, etc, yet it blatantly breaks international laws that it is a signatory to. This really undermines the credibility of our western standards.

I am no sympathiser with terrorists and I was pleased that Adelaide's own home-grown wannabee gun-happy delusionist was locked up in Gitmo for 5 years. But.... it was without a trial and that's not right by anyone's standards.

Regarding Abu Graib prison - those prisoners were not given trials so how can we be sure they were guilty of anything? And let us not forget we invaded their country, then locked up citizens we accused of fighting us. Perhaps it's time the allies reconsidered what the invasion looked like from the ordinary Iraqi people's point of view?

Apart from those issues there is the question of whether invasion is the right way to enforce democracy onto anyone. I expect their country to fall apart like Yugoslavia when we all pull out.

[NotSoFast]

Umm, the unibomber wasn't found amid gun-wielding friends in an area of declared war. In a war zone you ARE allowed to shoot and kill the enemy if they are a threat to you. I highly doubt that Bin Laden will just be found traipsing across the desert one day, minding his own business, and waiving a white flag. Most likely, he will be found in a cave somewhere and an exchange of fire will be involved in getting to him. In this case, no soldier would ever be found at fault for lodging a .223 in his skull.

However, if he WERE ever found where he could be taken without resistance, then by all means, haul him back here for the 3 minute trial that I am sure would happen. You see what happened to Houssein who people say didn't do anything against the USA directly. I can only imagine Bin Laden's fate if he were "brought to justice".

And as for the "rights and wrongs" of the situation, they way I see it, you orchestrate dozens upon dozens of cowardly attacks on many different countries, killing well over 3,000 innocent people in a single day....well, you get what's coming to you. I know for a fact that if, when I was in the Army, I had found Bin Laden wandering aimlessly unarmed in the desert, there would be no hesitation and no remorse in my heart for my actions. I would be more than fine with any repercussions against me, too.

Would that make me a bad person? Maybe. But that's one name I think I could live with.

[juxtaposed]

i completely understand your points mp, i really do. i just don't think this falls anywhere in line with the way things use to be. for example, as an american i believe whole heartedly in the words that were written. but it is also outdated and needs to be altered in some very important ways. to me this whole situation with terrorists and their right to civilian trial is completely absurd.

[OldsterHolster]

"Brought to justice" is the key phrase. We've decided on a system that is supposed to be just for all, so we must act accordingly or lose face, like Caroline said. It's not a matter of how evil Bin Laden might be, or even what he deserves, it's a matter of following our own rules, lest we become as evil as our enemies. If that happens, our system fails, and they ultimately win. It wasn't that long ago that innocent people were "brought to justice" by burning them at the stake because they were thought to be witches, so due process is about important as it gets.

As Caroline also touches on, Americans, especially, are a cocky bunch, and we just might be getting a little too big for our britches. Might does not make right, and I, for one, sure do question a lot of what our government does. Got this in an E-mail, the other day, and it made me laugh, even though it points out some of the self-rightousness that is not a good thing, at all. Edward.

http://i376.photobucket.com/albums/oo206/OldsterHolster/Miscellaneous/pic24135.gif

[pcfreak]

And that is what I was trying to point out too. If we start bending our own rules, or even breaking them, then we start losing the right to claim the moral high ground. It seems that some people are so hell bent on claiming retribution from those responsible for terrorist actions, that they are prepared to overlook or ignore the laws that their own country was built on in doing so.

As for whether Bin Laden et al should be given POW status, I find that chain of thought disturbing. By doing this we are elevating their status to some form of legitimacy. We should be treating them as common criminals, guilty of the most henious crimes against our people. Why do you think those incarcerated in the Maze prison in Northern Ireland were so desperate to have themselves seen as prisoners of war, and not as common criminals? The label POW gives an instant message that people classed as such are better than the scum we have locked up within our own prison systems.

It also bugs the hell out of me when US citizens think they are the only ones who have experienced the horrors of terrorist attacks on their own soil. Some people seem to think that this is something new, and that only the US have suffered. In some perverse way too, some seem to think that only they have a right to say how it should be tackled. Al Queda are responsible for much more than the deaths of just Americans, but most Americans seem to ignore this fact when making statements on what should or should not be done.

I say they should face civilian courts of law, let them be exposed for what they are, criminals and cowards, and let Big Joe Convict have his fun every night with them in their little love pad cells every single night:p: Let's not lose sight of the fact that our troops are supposed to be out there, fighting for what is right, and not stooping to new lows just to even the score a little.

[Mighty Pirate]

There is a problem with Bin Laden being a pow simply because he's an individual and USA being a nation cannot declare war against a single person. His followers are not an army in any recognisable legal sense. We'd probably stand a better chance of finding him if we sent individual agents instead of battalions.

There's a woman in Australia who claims he offered to marry her. Perhaps if we bait the hook properly? :rolleyes:

[OldsterHolster]

Bin Laden might already be dead, or at least in very poor health. He's no spring chicken, and I've heard suspected, serious, medical issues mentioned in the past. Hiding out in mountain caves can't be the healthiest environment, either. If he did die, it would be a fairly easy secret to keep in order to perserve his influence, so people could praise him for avoiding capture by the infidels.

Another thought is that the rest of the world might be better off to just let him die off all by himself, especially since his power seems extremely curtailed in his present situation. A capture, and for sure a trial in any country, would most likely whip the terrorists into a frenzy and just worsen the overall, worldwide, problem.

It's hard to know what the people with power are thinking at any given time. I have a hard time believing we can't find Bin Laden, if we want to. Even the surveillance technology we are aware of is truly awesome, and we don't know what they really have, these days, so it's just not logical. Most likely, there's a cloned, chip-imbedded, camel tied up outside his cave, now, and our guys are watching his every move. Big Brother is no fool, and he knows total control is better served without public awareness in many instances. Who knows what is really going on? Edward.

[Terry Penrod]

.

I'm not convinced that anyone on earth really knows what's going on, Edward.

I am however convinced that there are armies of idiots following various corrupt government, military, relgious and business leaders whose shared main interest is keeping the power they have and getting more of it.

What's damned so frustrating is that most of those followers have CHOSEN to close their minds and many are just WAY too gung ho.

That leaves us with LOTS of conflicting factions in every area of civilization with very few people actually practicing the arts of compromise and cooperation.

If the situation was reversed, we could solve EVERY manmade problem on earth and quite a few naturally occurring ones.

Until we learn that simple lesson and put it into effect globally, the cycle of prejudice, ignorance, fanaticism, violence (and overreaction to it) will continue.

Regarding the terrorist trials, it is time for those we have accused and imprisoned to be PROVEN guilty in a legitimate court of law with FULL TRANSPARENCY for all the world to see.

No closed tribunals, no secret military courts - mankind NEEDS to watch, listen and learn what really happened leading up to September 11, 2001 and beyond.

Cheers, Terry

[OldsterHolster]

I'm not convinced that anyone on earth really knows what's going on, Edward.

Heh, heh. I suspect they don't really know what the hell they are doing, but I know somebody is pulling the strings. You've heard my favorite saying from my hippie days, "Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean there's NOT a conspiracy."

Your torment, and mine, and that of most of the world, is that we are not a part of the conspiracy. We can see what's wrong, and so much of it seems easily fixed, but we don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of ever doing anything about it all, because of the sheer power and control of those pulling on the aforementioned strings behind the scenes.

You gotta be careful or it will drive you crazy. There's always the chance that, as the Desiderata says, "The Universe is unfolding as it should," and we're just stuck looking at one tiny, ugly, part. Although troubling, the idea that good and evil must always exist, together, is also a player. What is either without the other to compare it to? In a perfect world without evil, would we feel Godlike and in heaven, or would be wither from the boredom, and feel like it was hell? We are a strange species.

Anyway, you can't let the bastards wear you down. Things do have a habit of changing in ways you never dreamed of, so nourish the positive and just file away those exquisite perceptions of the negative for future reference. Edward.

[Mighty Pirate]

You have a nice turn of phrase Edward. 'exquisite perceptions of the negative' indeed. :):

Sometimes I feel proud that society manages to progress despite its politicians. Long may it continue.

[OldsterHolster]

Well thank you, Caroline. Some would say I'm just full of it. Heh, heh. Edward.

[juxtaposed]

that map was hilarious. when considering what to do with these people sometimes it scares me to think that some of the worst intentioned of those captured as terrorists will be let go due to legal loop holes and more will die because of it. its not about borders and who has had more damage done to them through terrorism. on one hand terrorism within the united states, especially the continental u.s. has been not only rare but fairly ineffective up until 9/11. so yea i can see how this fairly fresh carnage would insight feelings of retribution.

at what point do our own laws become the problem in resolving conflict when they betray the spirit of justice if not the letter? in my heart of hearts i understand why the law can't just simply be adjusted for one set of circumstances, but it is too bad that moderation is sometimes so woefully inadequate as to disallow the complete protection of those that we love

[Mighty Pirate]

It's such a slow and inadequate response but I do believe that education is the only solution. A lot of people are raised in societies where they hear only one set of opinions and where considered debate is never experienced.

I have seen footage of village schools high in these mountainous countries where they only teach boys, and the ONLY reading material is the Koran. Their societies have rigid power hierarchies that stifle individuality. Dissent is forbidden. Punishments are severe. And absolutely every aspect of life is dictated by religion. Opting out isn't an option. In these circumstances, it's not surprising that resentment and contempt for the west is easily fostered. The population themselves are terrorised.

I don't think the west should simply respond to terrorism with aggression. As the saying goes, it takes the light of only one small match to vanquish the dark. We have to set the agenda for the future - a peaceful future.

And to do this, we need to have the strength of our own convictions and support the ideologies that our societies are built on. We also need to promote and defend our values and our way of life especially feedom of speech and gender equality.

[juxtaposed]

i think education is absolutely the key to the solution. i dont think that is an inadequate response in any sense. it is in fact, i believe, the only way peace will have a chance to flourish. but you hit the nail on the head when you noted the cultural difference in the fact that they are still stuck in the culture of oppression of anything non-muslim.

my cousin recently got back from a tour in iraq, and his sentiment on the whole occupation is one i feel may be the closest to my own opinion. he really feels that the whole thing is fairly useless. they have been warring against each other for so long and so many thousands of years that a short occupation of even a couple hundred years would do little to change the way things have been done in that part of the world. it must be an internal change, possibly influenced by outsiders in the right way to facilitate the best type of growth.

this said, the possibility of ignoring something that could possibly cost more american lives because of the very large target we have on our backs right now isn't something i am willing to do. so though i may not support the way the occupation has gone, i think a firm hand is still required to protect our own. there is a much better way for that to get done i think than the way it has been carried out. in addition, we have worn out whatever welcome we may have ever had there and it's time to wrap it up.

[Gary V.]

Caroline, it seems like half of your posts are veiled attempts to expose the suckishness of America and the other half are to expose the idiocy of Christians.

[Mighty Pirate]

Caroline, it seems like half of your posts are veiled attempts to expose the suckishness of America and the other half are to expose the idiocy of Christians.

I don't think you've been counting those comments I've made pointing out the stupidity that exists in Britain or Australia. I'm fairly even-handed.

I actually like Americans quite a lot, have several friends there as well as wonderful relatives so please acquit me of any anti-American hatred.

However, America's behaviour affects everyone in ways you, as a stateside resident, wouldn't begin to appreciate, so naturally, everyone has an opinion about what goes on in America. You'd be astonished how often your news is on our TV.

Now for your other accusation...... hmm..... I did say a while ago that I can't accept the claims of any of Earth's religions to have the monopoly on the truth and what god really wants. So all faiths are equally untrue in my eyes. I think christianity and islam and scientology are all equally unbelievable.

But instead of just making a general broad-sweeping accusation, why don't you pick one particular statement that you think is unfair, biased and generally wrong and we can discuss it? You're quite a sensitive chap sometimes so it's possible you've mistaken my intent. :):

[OldsterHolster]

Yeah, Gary, ease up. After all, we are mighty Americans, and poor Caroline is just a kangeroo. (check map) Heh, heh, heh.

Personally, I am always interested in what people in the rest of the world think of America, and, unfortunately, I usually have to agree when they point out what really does suck about our country. As far as God is concerned, I feel the same way. I don't think christians are idiots, but I profoundly believe that no religion has it just right, and I prefer to keep an open mind. I'd love to be proven wrong, but questioning the beliefs of other humans, no matter how strong those beliefs are, is just the way my mind works. I always liked the road signs that say, "Jesus is coming, and boy is he pissed!" I reserve the right to change my mind, since The Rapture sounds like a lot of fun, but I'm not holding my breath. Edward.

[Gary V.]

Definitely easing up. Last night I was doped up on cold medicine and must have been feeling ornery. I'm sure when we die we're gonna find out a lot is different than what we think.

[Mighty Pirate]

Hope your cold is getting better Gary. :):

[Gary V.]

Thanks. It's a chest cold and only bothers me when I try to sleep. Had it for 3 weeks now. Last night I took double the dosage so I would be comatose and actually sleep.

[Mighty Pirate]

Well three weeks is enough to wear down anyone's good mood. Sometimes I get a dry cough that lingers. Last time the doctor gave me a puffer like asthmatics use. It really stopped the cough.

[juxtaposed]

thats what i have right now...lingering ever ready cough every time i want to say something

[Mighty Pirate]

My cough was always worse immediately after I'd eaten. As I said, the puffer worked a miracle. It broke the cycle of irritation. Also, hot water, spoon of honey and squirt of lemon juice just before bedtime also soothes the coughing. Oh, and don't sleep in a cold room. Warm air is more soothing.

[chip5541]

My wife's has gotten worse over the past 2 days. She is afraid it has or is developing into pneumonia. The doctor was afraid my 6 year old was going to have to go into the hospital but between medicines and a nebulizer we got his lungs to open up and there was no fluid so thank God for that. Now everyone is on the nebulizer except me. For once in 20+ years I have not been the first one o get sick from this bug going around.

On topic having a civial trial for these people is a bad idea. Just look what happened with the trial of the blind sheik for a perfect example why not or better yet, look at the OJ trial. Bad idea that will just lead to these animals that will give them a podium to spout their hate. What about security and all on the dime of tax payers. Let us also consider that Holder has ties to the law firms defending these people. can someone say conflict of interest.