Lawyers are nicer than sharks

OSfllwrb

Rookie
Joined
Jan 21, 2007
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Pentagon shamefully backed away from the very reasonable condemnation of the US law firms representing Guantanamo detainees. American lawyers undo the injustices inflicted by the American soldiers who fight and die in Afghanistan. Only a handful out of the thousands of detainees was rendered from Afghanistan to Guantanamo; they are not a random crowd. Many of them are not guilty beyond the basic affiliation with Taliban, but guilt of others could not be proven. What evidence of terrorist activity, acceptable in the court of law, could be found in Afghanistan? In the absence of documents or wiretaps, evidence is reduced to testimonies of dubious witnesses.

The image of selfless American attorneys - people of great moral integrity - engaged in pro bono defense of Afghan peasants is hilarious. In the pro bono affair, leftist lawyers sabotage the American war effort, and other attorneys shamelessly use it for self-promotion.
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
84,493
Reaction score
16,384
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
And if you get charged with a crime you didn't commit, you not entitled to a defense?

Better hope you don't end up in that situation one day. :cuckoo:
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,122
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
Since when do people innocent when they get picked up in the battle field as terrorsts?

And why are you insulting sharks? They are nice creatures for the most part.
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
84,493
Reaction score
16,384
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
Since when do people innocent when they get picked up in the battle field as terrorsts?

And why are you insulting sharks? They are nice creatures for the most part.
Prove they were even picked up on the battlefield. They've already released people after months and years of being held without charges.

Try again.
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
32,437
Reaction score
17,444
Points
1,905
Location
Arizona
Soldiers are not police, they do not gather and collect evidence against everyone they kill or capture in order to prove their guilt in some kind of court. These are not American citizens on American soil being captured, and no constitutional rights extend to them. We are at war, so we take the word of our troops. If you would rather believe captured terrorists over your own country's troops in a time of war, then maybe that says something about where your loyalties are...
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,122
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
Prove they were even picked up on the battlefield. They've already released people after months and years of being held without charges.

Try again.
The fact that they are enemy combatants rather than simply being arrested proves they were on a battlefield.
 

sitarro

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2003
Messages
5,186
Reaction score
1,028
Points
153
Location
USA
Er...no. A lot of them were ratted out by neighbors who got paid for the information.
Ya know Jillian.... lawyers have argued Manson was innocent, O.J. is innocent, Son Of Sam.....innocent. Lawyers would defend Satan himself if it meant that they made a dollar or could get some self promotion out of it. In many circles they would be refered to as the ultimate whores.
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
84,493
Reaction score
16,384
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
Ya know Jillian.... lawyers have argued Manson was innocent, O.J. is innocent, Son Of Sam.....innocent. Lawyers would defend Satan himself if it meant that they made a dollar or could get some self promotion out of it. In many circles they would be refered to as the ultimate whores.
You do know that the job of a defense attorney is to make the prosecution prove their case, right? Or should we just do away with the right to a defense, get rid of the presumption of innocence and just let the filing of charges be proof of guilt?

Yep... that works. :eusa_think:
 

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
Since when do people innocent when they get picked up in the battle field as terrorsts?
Your assertion is misguided. Most of the detainees at GITMO were NOT picked up by US troops on the battlefields in Afghanistan. They were picked up, for a bounty, by Afghan forces opposed to the Taliban and Pakistani forces.

Many of those who have SOME affiliation with the Taliban and Al Qaeda but only the most tenuous link, having lived with someone SUSPECTED of being a member of the Taliban or Al Qaeda.

For a detailed examination of this issue, go <a href=http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2006/0203nj2.htm#>HERE</a>.
 

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
You do know that the job of a defense attorney is to make the prosecution prove their case, right? Or should we just do away with the right to a defense, get rid of the presumption of innocence and just let the filing of charges be proof of guilt?

Yep... that works. :eusa_think:
That's the Military Commissions Act in a nutshell.
 

Hobbit

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
5,099
Reaction score
421
Points
48
Location
Near Atlanta, GA
Ok, for the last frickin' time, you nutjobs. Guantanamo Bay is NOT Riker's Island. The USMC is NOT the NYPD. And these people are not convicts, as that would imply being convicted of something. These people are PRISONERS OF WAR. We do not have to prove their guilt or innocence. We do not have to give them access to lawyers. We're treating them far better than the Geneva Convention requires, and we will release them when it is determined that they no longer pose a significant threat to the United States or her allies. We have obtained these prisoners in much the same way as we captured Germans and Japanese back in the early 40s, you know, back when they were shooting at us.

Once again, this is not a criminal prison. The people held there are not criminals to be tried and either convicted or acquitted. No, they are enemy fighters who were captured abroad and are being held for the sole purpose of preventing them from shooting anybody.
 

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
Ok, for the last frickin' time, you nutjobs. Guantanamo Bay is NOT Riker's Island. The USMC is NOT the NYPD. And these people are not convicts, as that would imply being convicted of something. These people are PRISONERS OF WAR. We do not have to prove their guilt or innocence. We do not have to give them access to lawyers. We're treating them far better than the Geneva Convention requires, and we will release them when it is determined that they no longer pose a significant threat to the United States or her allies. We have obtained these prisoners in much the same way as we captured Germans and Japanese back in the early 40s, you know, back when they were shooting at us.

Once again, this is not a criminal prison. The people held there are not criminals to be tried and either convicted or acquitted. No, they are enemy fighters who were captured abroad and are being held for the sole purpose of preventing them from shooting anybody.
Since most of them WEREN'T picked up on the battlefield...by US forces...They aren't POW's. Most of them have no discernible links to either the Taliban OR Al Qaeda, and were not even participating in any action against US or any other forces. There is, then, no justification for their continued detention. But don't let reality interfere with your assertions.
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
32,437
Reaction score
17,444
Points
1,905
Location
Arizona
Your assertion is misguided. Most of the detainees at GITMO were NOT picked up by US troops on the battlefields in Afghanistan. They were picked up, for a bounty, by Afghan forces opposed to the Taliban and Pakistani forces.

Many of those who have SOME affiliation with the Taliban and Al Qaeda but only the most tenuous link, having lived with someone SUSPECTED of being a member of the Taliban or Al Qaeda.

For a detailed examination of this issue, go <a href=http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2006/0203nj2.htm#>HERE</a>.

You're a lunatic if you actually think that people who admitted to attending jihadist trainning camps and have ambitions to terrorized should be released just because they never got the chance to carry out their dreams. These people should be mass executed, instead you want them to get a lawyer and be freed because they never actually got a chance to do anything bad. You need to look past your utter hatred of Bush and accept the fact that there are these people out there with the intent to kill innocent Americans. We can't always wait until there is enough evidence to convict in a court, because if there is that means there is usually already dead victims. You'd rather see dead victims and a court conviction, but the rest of us would rather prevent such killings in the first place.
 

Hobbit

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
5,099
Reaction score
421
Points
48
Location
Near Atlanta, GA
Since most of them WEREN'T picked up on the battlefield...by US forces...They aren't POW's. Most of them have no discernible links to either the Taliban OR Al Qaeda, and were not even participating in any action against US or any other forces. There is, then, no justification for their continued detention. But don't let reality interfere with your assertions.
And not all Germans and Japanese picked up in war zones were picked up on battlefields by U.S. soldiers. This isn't some nice little OCD world where all ducks march in single file. This is the chaos of war. Get used to it.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top