Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

About Time--Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by 105 View Post
    Did you miss the point, or are you intentionally setting up a straw man? Or both?

    "Transparency of the judicial process". Learn it. Live it. Love it.
    Let me spell it out for you....

    This man is not entitled to be tried in our civilian courts.

    Call it a strawman, I don't care. So again, are you advocating eliminating all military courts? Certainly our military personnel are entitled to this transparency....
    I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

    "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

    "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by DeputyChiefGonzo View Post
      More than likely an hour or two at most...
      You are right. Too many folks that want to abide by in the beltway says!

      That is what is wrong with this country now.

      Screw him, should have been dead years back. Send back in parts. Head first!
      Stay Safe and Well Out There....

      Always remembering 9-11-2001 and 343+ Brothers

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by ChiefKN View Post
        Let me spell it out for you....

        This man is not entitled to be tried in our civilian courts.

        Call it a strawman, I don't care. So again, are you advocating eliminating all military courts? Certainly our military personnel are entitled to this transparency....
        It is a strawman. Which invalidates your entire argument.

        Well done. But please, feel free to embrace fascism if it helps you sleep at night. Personally, I think a teddy bear is a better idea.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by 105 View Post
          It is a strawman. Which invalidates your entire argument.

          Well done. But please, feel free to embrace fascism if it helps you sleep at night. Personally, I think a teddy bear is a better idea.
          Your refusing to answer a pretty direct question, related to the topic at hand merely shows how weak your position is.

          I sleep well in the company of the fascists like George Washington and FDR. Both of whom embraced the use of military tribunals.

          I would recommend that you balance your Huffington Post and NY Times with some history books.
          I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

          "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

          "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by ChiefKN View Post
            Your refusing to answer a pretty direct question, related to the topic at hand merely shows how weak your position is.

            I sleep well in the company of the fascists like George Washington and FDR. Both of whom embraced the use of military tribunals.

            I would recommend that you balance your Huffington Post and NY Times with some history books.
            Ok - let's address your red herring of a military tribunal. Members of the military sign up for military courts marshall as part of their enrollment to the service. By it's very definition, a military tribunal is a closed process in which evidence against the defense may be kept from the defense. You would be very hard pressed to find a single civilian in the world want to be tried via a military tribunal.

            Military tribunals are not set up to try criminal cases. Would you advocate trying Julian Assange in a military tribunal? He's a foreign national who broke American laws... however, if he was extradited, he would be tried in civilian court, not a military court. This is simply how it works.

            Now, as far as your wrapping yourself in the founding fathers, let's take a look here:
            you advocate trying someone in a secretive, closed door tribunal in which they may not have access to evidence against them.
            I advocate trying them in a transparent courtroom where evidence is weighed and admitted/dismissed according to laws of jurisprudence. And all evidence is available to the accused to defend themselves.

            Which do you think the founding fathers would support? Which sounds fascist to you? And would you be tried by a military tribunal if you were on trial?

            Really, just admit you want vengeance, not justice. You don't really give a damn about the process - just want to see the sonofabitch hang. And that's fine - but don't pretend to be advocating justice when you're advocating the exact opposite of justice.

            Now if you'll excuse me, I'll hang out with the left-wing whackos who believe the integrity of the justice system is more important than any one man being tried.

            Comment


            • #21
              ALL GAVE SOME BUT SOME GAVE ALL
              NEVER FORGET 9-11-01
              343
              CAPT. Frank Callahan Ladder 35 *
              LT. John Ginley Engine 40
              FF. Bruce Gary Engine 40
              FF. Jimmy Giberson Ladder 35
              FF. Michael Otten Ladder 35 *
              FF. Steve Mercado Engine 40 *
              FF. Kevin Bracken Engine 40 *
              FF. Vincent Morello Ladder 35
              FF. Michael Roberts Ladder 35 *
              FF. Michael Lynch Engine 40
              FF. Michael Dauria Engine 40

              Charleston 9
              "If my job was easy a cop would be doing it."
              *******************CLICK HERE*****************

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by E40FDNYL35 View Post
                That would be too quick an end.
                How about a set of stocks in Manhattan and the use of the cat o nine ?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by 105 View Post
                  Ok - let's address your red herring of a military tribunal. Members of the military sign up for military courts marshall as part of their enrollment to the service. By it's very definition, a military tribunal is a closed process in which evidence against the defense may be kept from the defense. You would be very hard pressed to find a single civilian in the world want to be tried via a military tribunal.

                  Military tribunals are not set up to try criminal cases. Would you advocate trying Julian Assange in a military tribunal? He's a foreign national who broke American laws... however, if he was extradited, he would be tried in civilian court, not a military court. This is simply how it works.

                  Now, as far as your wrapping yourself in the founding fathers, let's take a look here:
                  you advocate trying someone in a secretive, closed door tribunal in which they may not have access to evidence against them.
                  I advocate trying them in a transparent courtroom where evidence is weighed and admitted/dismissed according to laws of jurisprudence. And all evidence is available to the accused to defend themselves.

                  Which do you think the founding fathers would support? Which sounds fascist to you? And would you be tried by a military tribunal if you were on trial?

                  Really, just admit you want vengeance, not justice. You don't really give a damn about the process - just want to see the sonofabitch hang. And that's fine - but don't pretend to be advocating justice when you're advocating the exact opposite of justice.

                  Now if you'll excuse me, I'll hang out with the left-wing whackos who believe the integrity of the justice system is more important than any one man being tried.



                  It is "Military Courts-Martial"


                  Stay Safe and Well Out There....

                  Always remembering 9-11-2001 and 343+ Brothers

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by CaptOldTimer View Post
                    It is "Military Courts-Martial"


                    Dammit - all this time I was tried by a speaker stack - I feel railroaded

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Valve amps forever!
                      (I had a 100 watt Marshall bass amp back in the day...)
                      ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
                      Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by 105 View Post
                        Ok - let's address your red herring of a military tribunal. Members of the military sign up for military courts marshall as part of their enrollment to the service. By it's very definition, a military tribunal is a closed process in which evidence against the defense may be kept from the defense. You would be very hard pressed to find a single civilian in the world want to be tried via a military tribunal.
                        How does "want to be tried" enter into the equation?

                        Still didn't answer my red herring. Its cool... I get it, it's okay to be tried in the military system if you are a US soldier, but not if you are a terrorist scumbag.

                        Originally posted by 105
                        Military tribunals are not set up to try criminal cases. Would you advocate trying Julian Assange in a military tribunal? He's a foreign national who broke American laws... however, if he was extradited, he would be tried in civilian court, not a military court. This is simply how it works.
                        This isn't a criminal case. What happens when the civilian courts have to deal with top secret information, searches and arrests without a warrant, torture, etc..

                        I'll tell you what could happen. They would toss the majority of the evidence out. If we wanted to deal with this like a criminal case, the FBI would've arrested the guy, not the infantry.

                        Do a little reading about Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani.

                        The defendant, Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, 36, was convicted of one count of conspiracy to destroy government buildings and property. He was acquitted of six counts of conspiracy, including conspiring to kill Americans and use weapons of mass destruction.

                        When the judge’s clerk asked how the jury found on counts 11 to 223, which were all counts of murder, the jury foreman replied, “Not guilty.”

                        Mr. Ghailani faces a sentence of 20 years to life in prison…

                        He helped to buy the Nissan Atlas truck that was used to carry the bomb, and gas tanks that were placed inside the truck to intensify the blast, the evidence showed. He also stored an explosive detonator in an armoire he used, and his cellphone became the “operational phone” for the plotters in the weeks leading up to the attacks, prosecutors said.
                        Originally posted by 105
                        Now, as far as your wrapping yourself in the founding fathers, let's take a look here:
                        you advocate trying someone in a secretive, closed door tribunal in which they may not have access to evidence against them.
                        I advocate trying them in a transparent courtroom where evidence is weighed and admitted/dismissed according to laws of jurisprudence. And all evidence is available to the accused to defend themselves.
                        Again, do a little research into how George Washington tried people during the revolutionary war using a military tribunal, President Jackson, FDR, and many others also used this method.

                        Originally posted by 105
                        Which do you think the founding fathers would support? Which sounds fascist to you? And would you be tried by a military tribunal if you were on trial?
                        Seriously? Accusing our military of fascism??? Bizarre.

                        I'm a citizen, on US Soil and if I committed an act of war against this country, then so be it.

                        Would I care? Sure, I'd rather get the case thrown out in civilian court. Its great that you are so thoughtful of these terrorists.

                        Originally posted by 105
                        Really, just admit you want vengeance, not justice. You don't really give a damn about the process - just want to see the sonofabitch hang. And that's fine - but don't pretend to be advocating justice when you're advocating the exact opposite of justice.
                        How about justice for the victims? Putting this case in front of a civilian court is a mismatch of crime/suspect and process.

                        Originally posted by 105
                        Now if you'll excuse me, I'll hang out with the left-wing whackos who believe the integrity of the justice system is more important than any one man being tried.
                        I'll hang out with Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, Johnson, and FDR. All approved of this method in the past.
                        Last edited by ChiefKN; 04-05-2011, 07:52 PM.
                        I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

                        "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

                        "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          [flame removed]

                          You're entitled to your opinion, me to mine. I think you're wrong, you think the same about me.

                          C'est la vie.
                          Last edited by 105; 04-06-2011, 07:23 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I'm thinking a couple gallons of JP-4 and a M2A1-7, should do the job quite nicely when convicted.

                            But that's just me.

                            FM1
                            I'm the one Fire and Rescue calls, when they need to be Rescued.

                            Originally posted by EastKyFF
                            "Firemens gets antsies. Theys wants to goes to fires. Sometimeses they haves to waits."

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by E40FDNYL35 View Post
                              before this happens they need to dip all the bullets in pigs blood right in front of him!!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Doesn't apply to Khalid, but most of Gitmo's current residents were non-uniformed combatants captured in a combat zone. It would have been 100% legal to declare them spies and execute them on the spot.

                                Stick that in your ACLU pipe and smoke it.

                                Comment

                                300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

                                Collapse

                                Upper 300x250

                                Collapse

                                Taboola

                                Collapse

                                Leader

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X