Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
9/11 conspirators
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="The Other Side" data-source="post: 641373" data-attributes="member: 17969"><p>9five,</p><p></p><p>As per our conversation, I will keep this to the facts.</p><p></p><p>It appears you want both an <strong><span style="font-size: 12px">unfair</span></strong> and <strong><span style="font-size: 12px">fair</span></strong> trial for these defendants.</p><p></p><p>As you know, you cant have it both ways, and thats the problem with conservatives who dont fully understand this argument.</p><p></p><p>On one hand, you dont want the trials in Federal courts because of the claim of sensitive information being disclosed (even though thats not the case in Article 3 federal trials)</p><p></p><p><strong><span style="color: darkred">Article 3-section 2:</span></strong></p><p><strong>Section 2.</strong> The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, <span style="color: red"><strong><span style="font-size: 12px">and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.</span></strong></span></p><p></p><p>In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.</p><p></p><p><span style="color: red"><strong>Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed;</strong></span> but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.</p><p></p><p>You and others claim that sensitive information will be disclosed and that will harm national security even though thats just a pile of hogwash.</p><p></p><p>However, if you dont want them to have this information, you then are making an argument of WITHOLDING EVIDENCE to protect national security. If these defendants are not allowed to see all evidence collected and the methods used to collect it, then obviously they cannot get a fair trial.</p><p></p><p>On the other hand, you and the others want the trials to be held at gitmo in a military tribunal where evidence CAN be withheld, and the defendants, no matter what they are charged with, are doomed for a conviction by never having a chance to truly defend themselves.</p><p></p><p>This is called a "kangaroo court".</p><p></p><p>A <strong>kangaroo court</strong> or <strong>kangaroo trial</strong>, sometimes likened to a <u><span style="color: #0066cc">drumhead court-martial</span></u>, refers to a sham <u><span style="color: #0066cc">legal</span></u> proceeding or <u><span style="color: #0066cc">court</span></u>. The colloquial phrase "kangaroo court" is used to describe judicial proceedings that deny <u><span style="color: #0066cc">due process</span></u> rights in the name of expediency. Such rights include the right to summon witnesses, the right of cross-examination, the right not to incriminate oneself, the right not to be tried on secret evidence, the right to control one's own defense, the right to exclude evidence that is improperly obtained, irrelevant or inherently inadmissible, <em>e.g.</em>, <u><span style="color: #0066cc">hearsay</span></u>, the right to exclude judges or jurors on the grounds of partiality or conflict of interest, and the right of appeal. The outcome of a trial by "kangaroo court" is essentially determined in advance, usually for the purpose of providing a conviction, either by going through the motions of manipulated procedure or by allowing no defense at all.</p><p></p><p>By placing them thru a kangaroo court, this gives the republicans some comfort by convicting these defendants and justifying BUSH's internment of these men for 7 years without trial.</p><p></p><p>The republican's biggest fear is showing the world that these men were tortured and forced to confess to crimes they may not have committed.</p><p></p><p>The "mastermind" of 911, was tortured for years before claiming ownership of the 911 plan.</p><p></p><p>In a kangaroo court, this would be allowed, in a federal court, it may not stand the test of american jurisprudence.</p><p></p><p>Your question in your post says: <strong>Then doesn't that suggest that he can't have a fair trial? (if he is prevented from having the information he requires to defend himself?</strong></p><p></p><p>But isnt that what you are promoting by saying the trial should be at Gitmo?</p><p></p><p>In a federal trial, there is evidence protection, a level of secrecy and closed door sessions. NOT everything is for public consumption.</p><p></p><p>There can be no "platform" if the trials arent televised and the public is NOT allowed in.</p><p></p><p>For our country, we have a responsibility to the world to show we are better than the NAZI's, and that we dont just snatch up people around the world, hold them in secret prisons, torture them, place them in a holding center for years without a trial or attorney, and then place them in a kangaroo court where a conviction is assured, then the men executed.</p><p></p><p>We have a responsibility as a nation to demonstrate to the world that we are NOT above international law, and a country that respects the judicial process.</p><p></p><p>Merely having military tribunals without fairness only shows the world we were wrong................ Again.</p><p></p><p>Of the hundreds of prisoners held at GITMO for years under bush, 85% were let go and returned to other countries WITHOUT a trial or conviction. ALL were beaten, tortured and denied due process.</p><p></p><p>This is, and will always be, one of BUSH's biggest failures.</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/emoticons/surprise.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":surprise:" title="Surprise :surprise:" data-shortname=":surprise:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="The Other Side, post: 641373, member: 17969"] 9five, As per our conversation, I will keep this to the facts. It appears you want both an [B][SIZE=3]unfair[/SIZE][/B] and [B][SIZE=3]fair[/SIZE][/B] trial for these defendants. As you know, you cant have it both ways, and thats the problem with conservatives who dont fully understand this argument. On one hand, you dont want the trials in Federal courts because of the claim of sensitive information being disclosed (even though thats not the case in Article 3 federal trials) [B][COLOR=darkred]Article 3-section 2:[/COLOR] Section 2.[/B] The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, [COLOR=red][B][SIZE=3]and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.[/SIZE][/B][/COLOR] In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. [COLOR=red][B]Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed;[/B][/COLOR] but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed. You and others claim that sensitive information will be disclosed and that will harm national security even though thats just a pile of hogwash. However, if you dont want them to have this information, you then are making an argument of WITHOLDING EVIDENCE to protect national security. If these defendants are not allowed to see all evidence collected and the methods used to collect it, then obviously they cannot get a fair trial. On the other hand, you and the others want the trials to be held at gitmo in a military tribunal where evidence CAN be withheld, and the defendants, no matter what they are charged with, are doomed for a conviction by never having a chance to truly defend themselves. This is called a "kangaroo court". A [B]kangaroo court[/B] or [B]kangaroo trial[/B], sometimes likened to a [U][COLOR=#0066cc]drumhead court-martial[/COLOR][/U], refers to a sham [U][COLOR=#0066cc]legal[/COLOR][/U] proceeding or [U][COLOR=#0066cc]court[/COLOR][/U]. The colloquial phrase "kangaroo court" is used to describe judicial proceedings that deny [U][COLOR=#0066cc]due process[/COLOR][/U] rights in the name of expediency. Such rights include the right to summon witnesses, the right of cross-examination, the right not to incriminate oneself, the right not to be tried on secret evidence, the right to control one's own defense, the right to exclude evidence that is improperly obtained, irrelevant or inherently inadmissible, [I]e.g.[/I], [U][COLOR=#0066cc]hearsay[/COLOR][/U], the right to exclude judges or jurors on the grounds of partiality or conflict of interest, and the right of appeal. The outcome of a trial by "kangaroo court" is essentially determined in advance, usually for the purpose of providing a conviction, either by going through the motions of manipulated procedure or by allowing no defense at all. By placing them thru a kangaroo court, this gives the republicans some comfort by convicting these defendants and justifying BUSH's internment of these men for 7 years without trial. The republican's biggest fear is showing the world that these men were tortured and forced to confess to crimes they may not have committed. The "mastermind" of 911, was tortured for years before claiming ownership of the 911 plan. In a kangaroo court, this would be allowed, in a federal court, it may not stand the test of american jurisprudence. Your question in your post says: [B]Then doesn't that suggest that he can't have a fair trial? (if he is prevented from having the information he requires to defend himself?[/B] But isnt that what you are promoting by saying the trial should be at Gitmo? In a federal trial, there is evidence protection, a level of secrecy and closed door sessions. NOT everything is for public consumption. There can be no "platform" if the trials arent televised and the public is NOT allowed in. For our country, we have a responsibility to the world to show we are better than the NAZI's, and that we dont just snatch up people around the world, hold them in secret prisons, torture them, place them in a holding center for years without a trial or attorney, and then place them in a kangaroo court where a conviction is assured, then the men executed. We have a responsibility as a nation to demonstrate to the world that we are NOT above international law, and a country that respects the judicial process. Merely having military tribunals without fairness only shows the world we were wrong................ Again. Of the hundreds of prisoners held at GITMO for years under bush, 85% were let go and returned to other countries WITHOUT a trial or conviction. ALL were beaten, tortured and denied due process. This is, and will always be, one of BUSH's biggest failures. :surprise: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
9/11 conspirators
Top