Why accused terrorists should have rights.

[SpidermanTuba]

Because not all accussed terrorists are actual terrorists.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1110AP_Sept_11_Aviation_Radio.html

If this guy had been classified as an "enemy combatant", he would at best just now be getting out of Guantanamo and at worse have been tortured, er, I mean, alternatively interrogated.

Fortunately for him, there appeared to be damning evidence at the time of his detention. They way it seems to me, if they have a lot of evidence against you, you get your rights, if they have little to no evidence, they just throw you away into a secret prison.

 

[Stephanie]

In his zeal to fight terror, Ferry twisted the truth about the radio - capable of contacting commercial pilots from the ground - and triggered an investigation that needlessly landed Higazy in jail for a month.

Ferry, who pleaded guilty on Feb. 27, 2002, to lying to the FBI about the radio, served his sentence of weekends in jail for six months, then faded back into obscurity. His motives remain murky as well.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/nation...ion_Radio.html

:tears1:

 

[SpidermanTuba]

In his zeal to fight terror, Ferry twisted the truth about the radio - capable of contacting commercial pilots from the ground - and triggered an investigation that needlessly landed Higazy in jail for a month.

Ferry, who pleaded guilty on Feb. 27, 2002, to lying to the FBI about the radio, served his sentence of weekends in jail for six months, then faded back into obscurity. His motives remain murky as well.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/nation...ion_Radio.html

:tears1:

? I have no idea what your statement means. Are you saying you would have prefered this guy have been thrown in a secret prison and "alternatively interrogated" for a few years, or are you saying that when we give an accused terrorists his due rights, if that accused terrorist is really innocent, his arrest will wind up being only a minor inconvenience?


Incidently - try this. Sit in your house for 1 month and don't go anywhere. See how it affects your life.

6 months of weekends? Yeah, that's a fair sentence for a guy who intentionally framed someone else. "Zeal to fight terrorism" BS. He just wanted a leg up in life that turning in a terrorist might provide, so he coldly framed an innocent man. He ought to be doing 10 to 20 years of hard labor and have to give all his assets to the Egyptian guy. And the FBI agent who coerced a false confession should lose his job be doing at least a couple years.

 

[Stephanie]

? I have no idea what your statement means. Are you saying you would have prefered this guy have been thrown in a secret prison and "alternatively interrogated" for a few years, or are you saying that when we give an accused terrorists his due rights, if that accused terrorist is really innocent, his arrest will wind up being only a minor inconvenience?


Incidentally - try this. Sit in your house for 1 month and don't go anywhere. See how it affects your life.

6 months of weekends? Yeah, that's a fair sentence for a guy who intentionally framed someone else. "Zeal to fight terrorism" BS. He just wanted a leg up in life that turning in a terrorist might provide, so he coldly framed an innocent man. He ought to be doing 10 to 20 years of hard labor and have to give all his assets to the Egyptian guy. And the FBI agent who coerced a false confession should lose his job be doing at least a couple years.

Are you saying you would have prefered this guy have been thrown in a secret prison and "alternatively interrogated" for a few years,

Wow...such an imagination....:bong420:
I read the article, and I didn't see anything about secret prisons, or that he was tortured.....

Six months of weekends.
That must of been HELL, TOTAL HELL I SAY......
And of course the kid was framed, what criminal hasn't been????

All the kid had to do, was tell the truth....He chose not to, so he paid for it...

Their is a thing as committing perjury.. It's been around for yrs and yrs..
Maybe you don't find anything wrong with lying, but tuff, that's the law......

And here's what I feel for someone who commits perjury and gets caught.

And here's what I feel for a terrorist.....:2guns:

Sheeeesh....

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Wow...such an imagination....:bong420:
I read the article, and I didn't see anything about secret prisons, or that he was tortured.....

Six months of weekends.
That must of been HELL, TOTAL HELL I SAY......

You read the article? Apparently not, either that or you have severe reading comprehension problems.

Here, I'll shout it at you if that helps.

THE PERSON WHO WAS SENTENCED TO SIX MONTHS OF WEEKENDS WAS THE GUY WHO ADMITTED TO FRAMING THE EGYPTIAN.

And I would say that 6 months of weekends for cold heartedley framing someone else is pretty light, wouldn't you?

And of course the kid was framed, what criminal hasn't been????

You're amazing, you know? You seem like you refuse to believe he was framed, even though the cop who framed him ADMITTED IT AND DID TIME FOR IT.

All the kid had to do, was tell the truth....He chose not to, so he paid for it...

HE PASSED A POLYGRAPH TELLING THE TRUTH. The guy F'ing TOLD THE TRUTH, but the FBI didn't believe him.

Their is a thing as committing perjury.. It's been around for yrs and yrs..
Maybe you don't find anything wrong with lying, but tuff, that's the law......

Maybe you can tell me why someone would falsely confess to a crime he didn't committ without being coerced. You think this guy, halfway through his interrogation, after telling them the truth in a polygraph examination, just decided he wanted to be famous and started lying?

And here's what I feel for a terrorist.....

Listen, go and actually read the entire article. The ex-cop who framed this innocent man has admitted to his crime, and the original owner of the radio claimed it. Yet, you still insist on calling this poor man a terrorist. The FBI arrests him, he VOLUNTEERS TO TAKE A POLYGRAPH and PASSES, and the person who frames him ADMITS TO IT - and you still insist he is a terrorist? What is wrong with you?

So, go and read it, and then come back and answer the question posed in my last post - if you are capable of understanding it, that is.

 

[dmp]

blah blah blah

Dude, you are a big pussy.

 

[theHawk]

Because not all accussed terrorists are actual terrorists.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1110AP_Sept_11_Aviation_Radio.html

If this guy had been classified as an "enemy combatant", he would at best just now be getting out of Guantanamo and at worse have been tortured, er, I mean, alternatively interrogated.

Fortunately for him, there appeared to be damning evidence at the time of his detention. They way it seems to me, if they have a lot of evidence against you, you get your rights, if they have little to no evidence, they just throw you away into a secret prison.

Sounds to me like he did and does have rights. He was cleared wasn't he? The man who framed him was caught wasn't he? Was he ever declared an "enemy combatant"? ....nope.
What secret prison? When have any US citizens been thrown in a secret prison? You are paranoid, seek help.

 

[Mr. P]

Sounds to me like he did and does have rights. He was cleared wasn't he? The man who framed him was caught wasn't he? Was he ever declared an "enemy combatant"? ....nope.
What secret prison? When have any US citizens been thrown in a secret prison? You are paranoid, seek help.

No, he's just an asshole looking to stir shit anyway he can.

 

[insein]

On the topic heading and not the article, I can see giving rights to suspected terrorists ONLY if they are American citizens by some fault of our system. If they became citizens, they get the rights of citizens. If they are foreigners here on VISAs, illegal immigrants, enemy combatants from the battlefield, they are NOT permitted to have the same rights as citizens.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

On the topic heading and not the article, I can see giving rights to suspected terrorists ONLY if they are American citizens by some fault of our system. If they became citizens, they get the rights of citizens. If they are foreigners here on VISAs, illegal immigrants, enemy combatants from the battlefield, they are NOT permitted to have the same rights as citizens.

I think he's talking about geneva conventions rights, not citizen rights. :huh:

 

[Avatar4321]

I think he's talking about geneva conventions rights, not citizen rights. :huh:

Maybe but The Geneva convention is an agreement between nations. And like all conventions, parties to the convention are not bound by the convention to parties who are not. Al Qaida is not bound by the Geneva convention. They arent states. They arent protected by the Geneva Convention and could never be such.

So the Geneva Convention is irrelevant when it comes to Al Qaida.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Maybe but The Geneva convention is an agreement between nations. And like all conventions, parties to the convention are not bound by the convention to parties who are not. Al Qaida is not bound by the Geneva convention. They arent states. They arent protected by the Geneva Convention and could never be such.

So the Geneva Convention is irrelevant when it comes to Al Qaida.

I agree but don't underestimate the Arab world. Technically Hezbollah isn't a state either but they sure as heck act like a state. I don't see very many Arab protests against the evils of Al-Qaeda. I do see protests against the US. I can totally imagine a scenario in which we, the US, "liberates" some Arab country--a "democracy" is set up and those savages "vote" Al-Qaeda into office. Those savages are completely capable of that mess.

 

[Mr. P]

I agree but don't underestimate the Arab world. Technically Hezbollah isn't a state either but they sure as heck act like a state. I don't see very many Arab protests against the evils of Al-Qaeda. I do see protests against the US. I can totally imagine a scenario in which we, the US, "liberates" some Arab country--a "democracy" is set up and those savages "vote" Al-Qaeda into office. Those savages are completely capable of that mess.

Sure they are, hell, even we elected Clinton TWICE!:shocked1:

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Sure they are, hell, even we elected Clinton TWICE!:shocked1:

Yeah! Haha, a clear majority of the country electing an Ivy-league educated Rhodes Scholar into office is the same thing as Arabs electing terrorist savages into office. I see your point!

 

[Mr. P]

Yeah! Haha, a clear majority of the country electing an Ivy-league educated Rhodes Scholar into office is the same thing as Arabs electing terrorist savages into office. I see your point!

I see you have a picture of the typical Clinton voter...COOL!:rotflmao:

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Dude, you are a big pussy.

Dude, you're a big retard

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Sounds to me like he did and does have rights. He was cleared wasn't he? The man who framed him was caught wasn't he? Was he ever declared an "enemy combatant"? ....nope.

Exactly. I'm glad that you agree that if we give accused terrorists their rights, the innocents ones will not be punished.

What secret prison? When have any US citizens been thrown in a secret prison?

What's the point of your question? The man is question wasn't a citizen.According to rightwingers, this means he shouldn't have been given his rights. Which obviously means rightwingers want to punish innocent people.


Furthermore, how would you know that there aren't U.S. citizens in secret prisons?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

On the topic heading and not the article, I can see giving rights to suspected terrorists ONLY if they are American citizens by some fault of our system.

So then, in your opinion, this Egyptian man deserves and should be in Guanatanamo Bay, even though he didn't do anything wrong??

If they became citizens, they get the rights of citizens. If they are foreigners here on VISAs, illegal immigrants, enemy combatants from the battlefield, they are NOT permitted to have the same rights as citizens.

Guess that answers my question.

Would you mind pointing me to the place in the Constitution where it says the 4th amendment only applies to citizens?

 

[Mr. P]

....

Furthermore, how would you know that there aren't U.S. citizens in secret prisons?

How would you know there are? Oh wait, you don't, it's just all in the stir crap book, right?

 

[Annie]

So then, in your opinion, this Egyptian man deserves and should be in Guanatanamo Bay, even though he didn't do anything wrong??



Guess that answers my question.

Would you mind pointing me to the place in the Constitution where it says the 4th amendment only applies to citizens?

The Preamble:

The Constitution of the United States of America

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

BTW, non-citizens whether legal or not, are protected by our trial system. They operate under the same laws as citizens.

Those at Gitmo, etc., were picked up somewhere else. See US v Padilla.