quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Those issues have been addressed Nihilus...a little late in the day....but addressed.

Fine. Just pop my balloon. I didn't want to play anyway! *kicks sand*

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

Politesub, that's correct, the I.R.A. was never a signatory to the G.C's and the Brits could have done with them what they would.

...not without breaking our own laws....and that's an important issue.

quote:

I think they executed three of them at a petrol station in broad daylight if I'm not mistaken on their way to blow something up!
Is there a problem with that?

...i assume you're talking about Gibralter. There was an inquiry over that issue. Because it was very, very close to the line in light of our own laws.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8292470.stm
Even now it is a hugely controversial issue in the UK. Not because we shot some terrorists, but because we may have broken our own laws of engagement in doing so. If a country genuinely believes in the rule of law this sort of thing is a real issue. Only if a country has abandoned absolute ethics in favour of situational ethics can it be justified.


The UK and the US are nations governed by law. Those laws don't just apply to wrong doers, or those suspected of such. They apply to our own actions too.

quote:


Is America at war, or not?

For if we are at war, why is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed headed for trial in federal court in the Southern District of New York? Why is he entitled to a presumption of innocence and all of the constitutional protections of a U.S. citizen?

Is it possible we have done an injustice to this man by keeping him locked up all these years without trial? For that is what this trial implies – that he may not be guilty.

And if we must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that KSM was complicit in mass murder, by what right do we send Predators and Special Forces to kill his al-Qaida comrades wherever we find them? For none of them has been granted a fair trial.

...

What do we do if the case against KSM is thrown out because the government refuses to reveal sources or methods, or if he gets a hung jury, or is acquitted, or has his conviction overturned?

In America, trials often become games, where the prosecution, though it has truth on its side, loses because it inadvertently breaks one of the rules.

The Obamaites had best pray that does not happen, for they may be betting his presidency on the outcome of the game about to begin.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=116268

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Pat Buchanan:

quote:


Is America at war, or not?

For if we are at war, why is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed headed for trial in federal court in the Southern District of New York? Why is he entitled to a presumption of innocence and all of the constitutional protections of a U.S. citizen?

Is it possible we have done an injustice to this man by keeping him locked up all these years without trial? For that is what this trial implies – that he may not be guilty.

And if we must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that KSM was complicit in mass murder, by what right do we send Predators and Special Forces to kill his al-Qaida comrades wherever we find them? For none of them has been granted a fair trial.

...

What do we do if the case against KSM is thrown out because the government refuses to reveal sources or methods, or if he gets a hung jury, or is acquitted, or has his conviction overturned?

In America, trials often become games, where the prosecution, though it has truth on its side, loses because it inadvertently breaks one of the rules.

The Obamaites had best pray that does not happen, for they may be betting his presidency on the outcome of the game about to begin.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=116268

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Pat Buchanan:
Is America at war, or not?

For if we are at war, why is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed headed for trial in federal court in the Southern District of New York? Why is he entitled to a presumption of innocence and all of the constitutional protections of a U.S. citizen?

Is it possible we have done an injustice to this man by keeping him locked up all these years without trial? For that is what this trial implies – that he may not be guilty.

And if we must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that KSM was complicit in mass murder, by what right do we send Predators and Special Forces to kill his al-Qaida comrades wherever we find them? For none of them has been granted a fair trial.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

No, too bad, because Bush couldn't make it stick. I don't remember YouTube videos of folks cutting off americans heads when Billy was gittin his dick sucked. But I do remember them when George was choking his pretzels.

So in the last three interchanges we had you have sat on all sides of the argument regarding the Geneva Conventions, but stood nowhere.

Ron

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg

No Buchanon is pointing out that Obama is killing KSMs associates along with thier famillies) with no trials.

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

No, too bad, because Bush couldn't make it stick. I don't remember YouTube videos of folks cutting off americans heads when Billy was gittin his dick sucked. But I do remember them when George was choking his pretzels.

So in the last three interchanges we had you have sat on all sides of the argument regarding the Geneva Conventions, but stood nowhere.

Ron

Mnot, that is because durring Clintons term they had safe training camps where thousands of terrorist commandos were trained, funded, and deployed to cause violence against us. That and the embassies and navy ships being blown up. But that stuff doesn't matter.

Can you at least get creative with the insults you will use to not adress the point I made this time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

One easy way around Buchanan's argument is to state that all actions against the US AFTER we declared war on Afghanistan and invaded were acts of war, and the 9/11attacks were acts of war AND also actions against US civilians. If that argument is made, then KSM and colleagues are liable for both civilian and military courts. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

we are not at war. lets be clear about that, the argument is moot.