The John Adams Project

[Intense]

Most Americans are not filled with hate - its obvious you are; I pity you.

call me whatever, but you asswipe liberals will fight to the death for the right to murder innoncent infants and fight to the death to free terrorists who also murdered innocents.. and you call me full of hate.. well more power to ya bud

YOU SAID THAT SCOTUS IS RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT AND WHAT THEY SAY GOES.

Quote: Originally Posted by WillowTree

anti american because the SCOTUS already ruled in favor of the military tribunal,, you are trampling all over the rights of AMERICANS by thumbing your ass at the SCOTUS that's what marxists do

YOU SAID THAT SCOTUS IS RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT AND WHAT THEY SAY GOES. There is no other way to interpret your words. What SCOTUS RULES IS RIGHT!!!


That means that by your own words, you believe in abortion, that it is a right, and that it cannot be changed. YOU then are a supporter of killing the pre-born.

Now, are YOU anti-american, a hypocrite, or a marxist? Or all three at once? Why are you "thumbing your ass at the SCOTUS"?

I guess it is hard to make up your mind since you don't really seem to have one.

SCOTUS is not Imperial, there is Nothing that It Decrees that It can't Undo. You nneed to work on that perception.

 

[Intense]

Yes...that is why they are called defense lawyers

Its all part of the judicial system in civilized societies. Which system do you advocate?

The Taliban?

The obligation of Defense Lawyers is to, in Their role, maintain the Integrity of the Court, the Process, in Criminal Proceedings. These are acts of War, in Violation of International Law, and Our Law.

If you watched the OJ trial you learned once and for all, defense lawyers don't give a shit about truth or justice, defense lawyers want their clients freed and screw the American people and the victims of 9-11 and that's what the left wing is celebrating today the possibility their terrorist friends will be free finally. FREE.

Is that what that was? A Trial? You are kidding Right?

Was it held in the community where the Crime took place? Did the Jury pay attention to more than 1% of what was going on or presented as evidence? Were Their Minds made up before The Prosecution Opened? Was the Judge Competent? That was a Show. The Show to come in NYC will dwarf every measure against that debacle.

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

Ten Guilty Men​

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

call me whatever, but you asswipe liberals will fight to the death for the right to murder innoncent infants and fight to the death to free terrorists who also murdered innocents.. and you call me full of hate.. well more power to ya bud

YOU SAID THAT SCOTUS IS RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT AND WHAT THEY SAY GOES.

Quote: Originally Posted by WillowTree

anti american because the SCOTUS already ruled in favor of the military tribunal,, you are trampling all over the rights of AMERICANS by thumbing your ass at the SCOTUS that's what marxists do

YOU SAID THAT SCOTUS IS RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT AND WHAT THEY SAY GOES. There is no other way to interpret your words. What SCOTUS RULES IS RIGHT!!!


That means that by your own words, you believe in abortion, that it is a right, and that it cannot be changed. YOU then are a supporter of killing the pre-born.

Now, are YOU anti-american, a hypocrite, or a marxist? Or all three at once? Why are you "thumbing your ass at the SCOTUS"?

I guess it is hard to make up your mind since you don't really seem to have one.

SCOTUS is not Imperial, there is Nothing that It Decrees that It can't Undo. You need to work on that perception.

It was willow that said it, not me. I am just questioning that lack of logic on the issue, and how the declarations suit the whim of the moment.

My position is that if we as a country are going to do things we should be willing to stand behind those decisions, rather than quibbling, dissembling and equivocating.

 

[Navy1960]

Article 4
A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfill the following conditions:
(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) That of carrying arms openly;
(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.


Article 5
...
Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.
Unlawful combatant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

{Executive Chamber Washington City, May 1, 1865.}

WHEREAS, the Attorney-General of the United States hath given his opinion:

That the persons implicated in the murder of the late President, Abraham Lincoln, and the attempted assassination of the Honorable William H. Seward, Secretary of State, and in an alleged conspiracy to assassinate other officers of the Federal Government at Washington City, and their aiders and abettors, are subject to the jurisdiction of, and lawfully triable before, a Military Commission;

It is ordered: 1st That the Assistant Adjutant-General detail nine competent military officers to serve as a Commission for the trail of said parties, and that the Judge Advocate General proceed to prefer charges against said parties for their alleged offenses, and bring them to trial before said Military Commission; that said trial or trials be conducted by the said Judge Advocate General, and as recorder thereof, in person, aided by such Assistant and Special Judge Advocates as he may designate; and that said trials be conducted with all diligence consistent with the ends of justice: the said Commission to sit without regard to hours.

Presidential Order Establishing a Military Commission to Try the Lincoln Assassination Conspirators and Opinion of the Attorney General Concerning such Order

Military Tribunals are not something new in this nations history for acts like these. Again, I will say, if the Acts of the USS Cole Mastermind were subject to American civilian jurisdiction, then that would assume that every single attack on any American Military Unit is a civilian matter. I have yet to see an warrant issued for the arrest of any North Korean officials for the taking of USS Pueblo or those sailors on the Iranians for the mine that struck the USS Samuel B. Roberts. While I understand that some wish these individuals to be tried in civilian courts and perhaps there are instances that some of them may qualify for it, but let's not forget how most of these individuals got here in the first place.

 

[The T]

call me whatever, but you asswipe liberals will fight to the death for the right to murder innoncent infants and fight to the death to free terrorists who also murdered innocents.. and you call me full of hate.. well more power to ya bud

YOU SAID THAT SCOTUS IS RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT AND WHAT THEY SAY GOES.

Quote: Originally Posted by WillowTree

anti american because the SCOTUS already ruled in favor of the military tribunal,, you are trampling all over the rights of AMERICANS by thumbing your ass at the SCOTUS that's what marxists do

YOU SAID THAT SCOTUS IS RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT AND WHAT THEY SAY GOES. There is no other way to interpret your words. What SCOTUS RULES IS RIGHT!!!


That means that by your own words, you believe in abortion, that it is a right, and that it cannot be changed. YOU then are a supporter of killing the pre-born.

Now, are YOU anti-american, a hypocrite, or a marxist? Or all three at once? Why are you "thumbing your ass at the SCOTUS"?

I guess it is hard to make up your mind since you don't really seem to have one.

SCOTUS is not Imperial, there is Nothing that It Decrees that It can't Undo. You nneed to work on that perception.

Nor is there anything that says that Congress may not Check the Courts as well. Remember? We have three Equal but separate branches.

The Court is NOT the final arbitor IMHO. (Just sayin' )

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

Government Misconduct


Some wrongful convictions are caused by honest mistakes. In some cases, however, officials take steps to ensure that a defendant is convicted despite weak evidence or even clear proof of innocence.

The cases of wrongful convictions uncovered by DNA testing are replete with evidence of fraud or misconduct by prosecutors or police departments.

A few bad apples
Most law enforcement officers and prosecutors are honest and trustworthy. But criminal justice is a human endeavor and the possibility for corruption exists. Even if one officer of every thousand is dishonest, wrongful convictions will continue to occur.


DNA exonerations have exposed official misconduct at every level and stage of a criminal investigation. This misconduct has included:

• deliberate suggestiveness in identification procedures
• the withholding of evidence from defense
• the deliberate mishandling, mistreatment or destruction of evidence
• the coercion of false confessions
• the use of unreliable government informants or snitches

What should be of concern in this is the "he said she said" against so-called "enemy combatants."

Chalabi lied, Karzai lied, people who have personal vendettas have lied, others, for whatever reasons, have lied, too...

"Many of the freed detainees express bewilderment at why they were held; even the U.S. commander who oversees Bucca, Col. Austin Schmidt, 55, of Fairfax, estimated that one in four prisoners "perhaps were just snagged in a dragnet-type operation" or were victims of personal vendettas. "

This above little bit was buried in the midst of an article, easy to miss if one is not specifically searching....

Then:

Twenty-four of the former detainees interviewed said they had not been mistreated. In several cases, detainees reported developing friendly relationships with their US interrogators after their captors acknowledged in private conversations that these detainees were innocent and did not belong in detention. The detention of innocent people has been a problem in Guantanamo and elsewhere, the result of hefty bounties offered by US forces in Afghanistan for Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters. Hundreds of innocents were caught up in dragnets, the victims of greed or personal vendettas. Of the 770 people imprisoned at Guantanamo since 2002, all but 255 have been released. Just 23 detainees have been charged with crimes, and of those only 2 have been convicted.

Grappling With Gitmo | Mother Jones

This Is Why We Have The Word Kafkaesque — Crooked Timber


We SAY we are against certain things, but apparently not....

Some SAY they want transparency, but not really.

PLAME set a precedent. Beware of unintended consequences.

If gov, FBI, and CIA are doing nothing wrong, why are they afraid to own their actions?

For the "believers" the "LAW" says THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS...

Why are some so opposed to the truth coming out?

 

[Intense]

Government Misconduct


Some wrongful convictions are caused by honest mistakes. In some cases, however, officials take steps to ensure that a defendant is convicted despite weak evidence or even clear proof of innocence.

The cases of wrongful convictions uncovered by DNA testing are replete with evidence of fraud or misconduct by prosecutors or police departments.

A few bad apples
Most law enforcement officers and prosecutors are honest and trustworthy. But criminal justice is a human endeavor and the possibility for corruption exists. Even if one officer of every thousand is dishonest, wrongful convictions will continue to occur.


DNA exonerations have exposed official misconduct at every level and stage of a criminal investigation. This misconduct has included:

• deliberate suggestiveness in identification procedures
• the withholding of evidence from defense
• the deliberate mishandling, mistreatment or destruction of evidence
• the coercion of false confessions
• the use of unreliable government informants or snitches

What should be of concern in this is the "he said she said" against so-called "enemy combatants."

Chalabi lied, Karzai lied, people who have personal vendettas have lied, others, for whatever reasons, have lied, too...

"Many of the freed detainees express bewilderment at why they were held; even the U.S. commander who oversees Bucca, Col. Austin Schmidt, 55, of Fairfax, estimated that one in four prisoners "perhaps were just snagged in a dragnet-type operation" or were victims of personal vendettas. "

This above little bit was buried in the midst of an article, easy to miss if one is not specifically searching....

Then:

Twenty-four of the former detainees interviewed said they had not been mistreated. In several cases, detainees reported developing friendly relationships with their US interrogators after their captors acknowledged in private conversations that these detainees were innocent and did not belong in detention. The detention of innocent people has been a problem in Guantanamo and elsewhere, the result of hefty bounties offered by US forces in Afghanistan for Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters. Hundreds of innocents were caught up in dragnets, the victims of greed or personal vendettas. Of the 770 people imprisoned at Guantanamo since 2002, all but 255 have been released. Just 23 detainees have been charged with crimes, and of those only 2 have been convicted.

Grappling With Gitmo | Mother Jones

This Is Why We Have The Word Kafkaesque — Crooked Timber


We SAY we are against certain things, but apparently not....

Some SAY they want transparency, but not really.

PLAME set a precedent. Beware of unintended consequences.

If gov, FBI, and CIA are doing nothing wrong, why are they afraid to own their actions?

For the "believers" the "LAW" says THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS...

Why are some so opposed to the truth coming out?

Let's distinguish between Transparency, and The Inmates Running The Asylum!!!

Outing Covert Agents is Not Transparency, It is a Felony. There is a Rule of Law in Regards to Covert Agents. There is a Chain of Command and Accountability, that Neither You or I am privy to, as it should be. You might want to cut back on the caffeine?

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

Let's distinguish between Transparency, and The Inmates Running The Asylum!!!

Outing Covert Agents is Not Transparency, It is a Felony. There is a Rule of Law in Regards to Covert Agents. There is a Chain of Command and Accountability, that Neither You or I am privy to, as it should be. You might want to cut back on the caffeine?

It is a felony, except when it is a joke and a big fat "gotcha" as it was with Plame.

Now there are unintended consequences because the joke/gotcha set a precedent.

however, in both state and federal courts there are ways where "coverts" (DEA, for example) and confidential informants can both testify.

Surely our government can manage something.

The Chain of Command would start with the POTUS, and the AG under that, and if that is part of the chain, and the AG decides to handle certain things in a certain way, perhaps there are things "that Neither You or I am privy to, as it should be."

As for who's running things, the people are supposed to be, and if the majority of the people want it in the open.......

About caffeine, when my insurance pays you for medical advice on caffeine, then I may or may not take it. Until then, why not stick to the discussion, rather than wandering off into that sort of bullshit?

 

[Intense]

Let's distinguish between Transparency, and The Inmates Running The Asylum!!!

Outing Covert Agents is Not Transparency, It is a Felony. There is a Rule of Law in Regards to Covert Agents. There is a Chain of Command and Accountability, that Neither You or I am privy to, as it should be. You might want to cut back on the caffeine?

It is a felony, except when it is a joke and a big fat "gotcha" as it was with Plame.

Now there are unintended consequences because the joke/gotcha set a precedent.

however, in both state and federal courts there are ways where "coverts" (DEA, for example) and confidential informants can both testify.

Surely our government can manage something.

The Chain of Command would start with the POTUS, and the AG under that, and if that is part of the chain, and the AG decides to handle certain things in a certain way, perhaps there are things "that Neither You or I am privy to, as it should be."

As for who's running things, the people are supposed to be, and if the majority of the people want it in the open.......

About caffeine, when my insurance pays you for medical advice on caffeine, then I may or may not take it. Until then, why not stick to the discussion, rather than wandering off into that sort of bullshit?

It is a felony, except when it is a joke and a big fat "gotcha" as it was with Plame.
First, She was not Covert, though still a CIA employee, which makes it Punishable. Second, Scooter Libby did not out her. The person that did was not charged.



Now there are unintended consequences because the joke/gotcha set a precedent.

Total Bullshit. Creative Reasoning? Meaningless.



however, in both state and federal courts there are ways where "coverts" (DEA, for example) and confidential informants can both testify.

And what if anything does this point have to do with the John Adams Project? Nothing. There is no connection.



Surely our government can manage something.

The Chain of Command would start with the POTUS, and the AG under that, and if that is part of the chain, and the AG decides to handle certain things in a certain way, perhaps there are things "that Neither You or I am privy to, as it should be."

Off Point.



As for who's running things, the people are supposed to be, and if the majority of the people want it in the open.......

Then The People will make it that way. Good luck Recruiting Undercover and Covert. Violate the current trust and that puts the blood on every responsible voice. I personally would condemn Anyone involved with that.

 

[Intense]

Government Misconduct


Some wrongful convictions are caused by honest mistakes. In some cases, however, officials take steps to ensure that a defendant is convicted despite weak evidence or even clear proof of innocence.

The cases of wrongful convictions uncovered by DNA testing are replete with evidence of fraud or misconduct by prosecutors or police departments.

A few bad apples
Most law enforcement officers and prosecutors are honest and trustworthy. But criminal justice is a human endeavor and the possibility for corruption exists. Even if one officer of every thousand is dishonest, wrongful convictions will continue to occur.


DNA exonerations have exposed official misconduct at every level and stage of a criminal investigation. This misconduct has included:

• deliberate suggestiveness in identification procedures
• the withholding of evidence from defense
• the deliberate mishandling, mistreatment or destruction of evidence
• the coercion of false confessions
• the use of unreliable government informants or snitches

What should be of concern in this is the "he said she said" against so-called "enemy combatants."

Chalabi lied, Karzai lied, people who have personal vendettas have lied, others, for whatever reasons, have lied, too...

"Many of the freed detainees express bewilderment at why they were held; even the U.S. commander who oversees Bucca, Col. Austin Schmidt, 55, of Fairfax, estimated that one in four prisoners "perhaps were just snagged in a dragnet-type operation" or were victims of personal vendettas. "

This above little bit was buried in the midst of an article, easy to miss if one is not specifically searching....

Then:

Twenty-four of the former detainees interviewed said they had not been mistreated. In several cases, detainees reported developing friendly relationships with their US interrogators after their captors acknowledged in private conversations that these detainees were innocent and did not belong in detention. The detention of innocent people has been a problem in Guantanamo and elsewhere, the result of hefty bounties offered by US forces in Afghanistan for Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters. Hundreds of innocents were caught up in dragnets, the victims of greed or personal vendettas. Of the 770 people imprisoned at Guantanamo since 2002, all but 255 have been released. Just 23 detainees have been charged with crimes, and of those only 2 have been convicted.

Grappling With Gitmo | Mother Jones

This Is Why We Have The Word Kafkaesque — Crooked Timber


We SAY we are against certain things, but apparently not....

Some SAY they want transparency, but not really.

PLAME set a precedent. Beware of unintended consequences.

If gov, FBI, and CIA are doing nothing wrong, why are they afraid to own their actions?

For the "believers" the "LAW" says THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS...

Why are some so opposed to the truth coming out?

What is this Marxism 101????? Knee deep in shit!!!

 

[kyzr]

Funny how we can do some of everything but aren't brave enough to man up and actually OWN what we do! How CHICKENSHIT IS THAT!!!!!

1. Like letting a self-proclaimed "soldier of allah" kill 13 US soldiers because its "politically correct'?

2. Or like waterboarding the shit out of terrorists to capture more of them, prevent terror attacks, and save innocent lives?

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

Government Misconduct


Some wrongful convictions are caused by honest mistakes. In some cases, however, officials take steps to ensure that a defendant is convicted despite weak evidence or even clear proof of innocence.

The cases of wrongful convictions uncovered by DNA testing are replete with evidence of fraud or misconduct by prosecutors or police departments.

A few bad apples
Most law enforcement officers and prosecutors are honest and trustworthy. But criminal justice is a human endeavor and the possibility for corruption exists. Even if one officer of every thousand is dishonest, wrongful convictions will continue to occur.



DNA exonerations have exposed official misconduct at every level and stage of a criminal investigation. This misconduct has included:

• deliberate suggestiveness in identification procedures
• the withholding of evidence from defense
• the deliberate mishandling, mistreatment or destruction of evidence
• the coercion of false confessions
• the use of unreliable government informants or snitches

What should be of concern in this is the "he said she said" against so-called "enemy combatants."

Chalabi lied, Karzai lied, people who have personal vendettas have lied, others, for whatever reasons, have lied, too...

"Many of the freed detainees express bewilderment at why they were held; even the U.S. commander who oversees Bucca, Col. Austin Schmidt, 55, of Fairfax, estimated that one in four prisoners "perhaps were just snagged in a dragnet-type operation" or were victims of personal vendettas. "

This above little bit was buried in the midst of an article, easy to miss if one is not specifically searching....

Then:

Twenty-four of the former detainees interviewed said they had not been mistreated. In several cases, detainees reported developing friendly relationships with their US interrogators after their captors acknowledged in private conversations that these detainees were innocent and did not belong in detention. The detention of innocent people has been a problem in Guantanamo and elsewhere, the result of hefty bounties offered by US forces in Afghanistan for Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters. Hundreds of innocents were caught up in dragnets, the victims of greed or personal vendettas. Of the 770 people imprisoned at Guantanamo since 2002, all but 255 have been released. Just 23 detainees have been charged with crimes, and of those only 2 have been convicted.

Grappling With Gitmo | Mother Jones

This Is Why We Have The Word Kafkaesque — Crooked Timber


We SAY we are against certain things, but apparently not....

Some SAY they want transparency, but not really.

PLAME set a precedent. Beware of unintended consequences.

If gov, FBI, and CIA are doing nothing wrong, why are they afraid to own their actions?

For the "believers" the "LAW" says THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS...

Why are some so opposed to the truth coming out?

What is this Marxism 101????? Knee deep in shit!!!

Well, we certainly get that you are neither Christian, nor Jewish in any religious sense.... LOL, nor is truth of any importance to you, nor actually following the principles the US has tried to base itself upon.

But if the very best you can do when at a loss for real reasoning is start the "you're a marxist" chant this is a waste of time. I don't find you in the least intimidating.

The xenophobic jingoistic rants from truly trite and silly mindsets are what makes it possible for some in government to waste billions on stupid wars, waste lives on faked "causes," and the bovine and the ovine do go along with all the whatever, opting to be obtuse.

 

[Intense]

Government Misconduct


Some wrongful convictions are caused by honest mistakes. In some cases, however, officials take steps to ensure that a defendant is convicted despite weak evidence or even clear proof of innocence.

The cases of wrongful convictions uncovered by DNA testing are replete with evidence of fraud or misconduct by prosecutors or police departments.

A few bad apples
Most law enforcement officers and prosecutors are honest and trustworthy. But criminal justice is a human endeavor and the possibility for corruption exists. Even if one officer of every thousand is dishonest, wrongful convictions will continue to occur.



DNA exonerations have exposed official misconduct at every level and stage of a criminal investigation. This misconduct has included:

• deliberate suggestiveness in identification procedures
• the withholding of evidence from defense
• the deliberate mishandling, mistreatment or destruction of evidence
• the coercion of false confessions
• the use of unreliable government informants or snitches

What should be of concern in this is the "he said she said" against so-called "enemy combatants."

Chalabi lied, Karzai lied, people who have personal vendettas have lied, others, for whatever reasons, have lied, too...

"Many of the freed detainees express bewilderment at why they were held; even the U.S. commander who oversees Bucca, Col. Austin Schmidt, 55, of Fairfax, estimated that one in four prisoners "perhaps were just snagged in a dragnet-type operation" or were victims of personal vendettas. "

This above little bit was buried in the midst of an article, easy to miss if one is not specifically searching....

Then:

Twenty-four of the former detainees interviewed said they had not been mistreated. In several cases, detainees reported developing friendly relationships with their US interrogators after their captors acknowledged in private conversations that these detainees were innocent and did not belong in detention. The detention of innocent people has been a problem in Guantanamo and elsewhere, the result of hefty bounties offered by US forces in Afghanistan for Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters. Hundreds of innocents were caught up in dragnets, the victims of greed or personal vendettas. Of the 770 people imprisoned at Guantanamo since 2002, all but 255 have been released. Just 23 detainees have been charged with crimes, and of those only 2 have been convicted.

Grappling With Gitmo | Mother Jones

This Is Why We Have The Word Kafkaesque — Crooked Timber


We SAY we are against certain things, but apparently not....

Some SAY they want transparency, but not really.

PLAME set a precedent. Beware of unintended consequences.

If gov, FBI, and CIA are doing nothing wrong, why are they afraid to own their actions?

For the "believers" the "LAW" says THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS...

Why are some so opposed to the truth coming out?

What is this Marxism 101????? Knee deep in shit!!!

Well, we certainly get that you are neither Christian, nor Jewish in any religious sense.... LOL, nor is truth of any importance to you, nor actually following the principles the US has tried to base itself upon.

But if the very best you can do when at a loss for real reasoning is start the "you're a marxist" chant this is a waste of time. I don't find you in the least intimidating.

The xenophobic jingoistic rants from truly trite and silly mindsets are what makes it possible for some in government to waste billions on stupid wars, waste lives on faked "causes," and the bovine and the ovine do go along with all the whatever, opting to be obtuse.

You presume I am Unchristian because I pass on your Kool-Aid. You are the one labeling while blind folded. Intellectually Corrupted, destroying the minds of all who drink from your cup. You respond by not responding, but making new accusations. LOL The one ability you have the moral right to limit or amend is your own. That is a great place to start.

 

[Charles Stucker]

I root for the Military tribunal same way the SCOTUS does, I never root for the terrorists the way you America haters do. never.

A military court has specific advantages over a civilian court, while the civilian has an advantage of the military.
A military court, in my (second hand) experience is less likely to convict someone on partial or shoddy evidence - the innocent defendant is apt to be shown innocent. The military court is less apt to be influenced by vague threats or innuendo by guilty defendants. The jurors in a military court are (on the whole) better educated and more cautious in their deliberations than civilian jurors who are often dumbed down by the selection process wherein the Lawyers on both side seek to eliminate the smartest jurors.
The military court gives every appearance of the proper place to try these defendants.

A civilian court is apt to be seen as more fair by foreign nationals.

If the goal is to prevent an innocent suspect being convicted, the military court is the way to go. If the goal is to give the general appearance of fairness before the defendants are sentenced to death then a civilian court is the way to go.

A secondary issue in favor of military courts - they typically cost less than civilian ones.

 

[Intense]

I root for the Military tribunal same way the SCOTUS does, I never root for the terrorists the way you America haters do. never.

A military court has specific advantages over a civilian court, while the civilian has an advantage of the military.
A military court, in my (second hand) experience is less likely to convict someone on partial or shoddy evidence - the innocent defendant is apt to be shown innocent. The military court is less apt to be influenced by vague threats or innuendo by guilty defendants. The jurors in a military court are (on the whole) better educated and more cautious in their deliberations than civilian jurors who are often dumbed down by the selection process wherein the Lawyers on both side seek to eliminate the smartest jurors.
The military court gives every appearance of the proper place to try these defendants.

A civilian court is apt to be seen as more fair by foreign nationals.

If the goal is to prevent an innocent suspect being convicted, the military court is the way to go. If the goal is to give the general appearance of fairness before the defendants are sentenced to death then a civilian court is the way to go.

A secondary issue in favor of military courts - they typically cost less than civilian ones.

I wonder if C-Span could get an exemption to cover a Military Court. It would be nice to see the preceding's without spin or a commentator holding your hand.

The Civilian Court will depend on the Integrity of the Judge, What He will allow, and not allow. Tangents and diversions V.S. Staying on Point. It is not going to be easy.

 

[Navy1960]

I am going to just point this out, let's forget KSM for just one moment here , I would like specifically for someone to show me in law, where the Justice Department has the authority under US civilian law to bring a person captured on a battlefield in armed conflict against US Military forces that is accused of plotting, planning, and then carrying out an attack against a US Navy Vessel in a foreign nation. If the civilian authority logic is applied in this case then they have zero authority because the attack was carried out in Yemen and therefor their laws were broken. If the logic is used that a US Navy vessel is by law sovereign US territory then it is attack on the United States and therefor a military matter. So again, where does the Federal Law apply here?

Did the Justice Department bring to trial, Iran for mining the Straight of Hormuz causing damage to the USS Sam Roberts and injuring US Military personnel. Or perhaps, the Govt. of Iraq for firing on US Military aircraft that were enforcing the no-fly zone during the 1990's. These individuals who performed these acts belong in a Military court and not in a US criminal court, if these are indeed criminal matters then perhaps the State of NY should take it's proper jurisdiction and send it's officers to Afghanistan to arrest those who plotted, planned, and carried out these attacks.

 

[Intense]

I am going to just point this out, let's forget KSM for just one moment here , I would like specifically for someone to show me in law, where the Justice Department has the authority under US civilian law to bring a person captured on a battlefield in armed conflict against US Military forces that is accused of plotting, planning, and then carrying out an attack against a US Navy Vessel in a foreign nation. If the civilian authority logic is applied in this case then they have zero authority because the attack was carried out in Yemen and therefor their laws were broken. If the logic is used that a US Navy vessel is by law sovereign US territory then it is attack on the United States and therefor a military matter. So again, where does the Federal Law apply here?

Did the Justice Department bring to trial, Iran for mining the Straight of Hormuz causing damage to the USS Sam Roberts and injuring US Military personnel. Or perhaps, the Govt. of Iraq for firing on US Military aircraft that were enforcing the no-fly zone during the 1990's. These individuals who performed these acts belong in a Military court and not in a US criminal court, if these are indeed criminal matters then perhaps the State of NY should take it's proper jurisdiction and send it's officers to Afghanistan to arrest those who plotted, planned, and carried out these attacks.

My only guess is that The CIC being Civilian Overrides the Command Structure? I say this in Mourning. The Strongest Argument for Enumerated Powers, still does not account for the likes of Obama in The White House.

What would be the Legal Rights of an Illegal Combatant as opposed to those of a Terrorist in a Criminal Trial?