So much for Obama's promise of tough civilian trials of terrorists

[De Selby]

He was found guilty of conspiring to blow up two embassies. How could he be not guilty of conspiring in the deaths that resulted?

Intent and knowledge, or lack of knowledge, of what his co-conspirators were doing.

Most troubling about this is the presumption that because the Government said so, all of these Guantanamo detainees are guilty.  All of the facts we have on them come from the Government.  If there's no independent review of those facts, there's no way to tell if the Government did its homework. 

[MicroBalrog]

How many hours of interrogation before it's "coerced"?

I do not know. I am not a physician. I do know that there are laws regulating how many hours of sleep suspects must receive, how they may be interrogated, etc. These laws exist for a very good reason.

I've been sleep deprived. In fact, I was for many years. Did I torture myself?

If you do not understand why depriving an individual of sleep is torture, there's little I can do for you.

[Monkeyleg]

If you do not understand why depriving an individual of sleep is torture, there's little I can do for you.

I've gone as long as a month on just a couple dozen hours sleep. It didn't feel anything like having bamboo stuck under my fingernails.

We're drifting away from the original complaint in this thread, which was the decision to try terrorists in civilian court rather than military tribunals. It was an unprecedented decision, a purely political decision, and it's going to backfire in a purely political fashion.

And now I'm going to sleep. Maybe.

[KD5NRH]

Most troubling about this is the presumption that because the Government said so, all of these Guantanamo detainees are guilty.  All of the facts we have on them come from the Government.

But if you can't trust the government, who can you trust?   

[MicroBalrog]

I've gone as long as a month on just a couple dozen hours sleep. It didn't feel anything like having bamboo stuck under my fingernails.

Fact: People who go for extended periods without sleep often begin to hallucinate. Do you think a man who is hallucinating can sign a confession? Do you think such a confession would fly in a court of law? Should it?

Fact: Being punched in the face also is not as bad as having bamboo stuck under your fingernails. Do you think a confession drawn by means of punching a man in the face should fly in court?

[KD5NRH]

Fact: Being punched in the face also is not as bad as having bamboo stuck under your fingernails. Do you think a confession drawn by means of punching a man in the face should fly in court?

Can I volunteer to test the method on Rangel?

[De Selby]

Fact: People who go for extended periods without sleep often begin to hallucinate. Do you think a man who is hallucinating can sign a confession? Do you think such a confession would fly in a court of law? Should it?

Fact: Being punched in the face also is not as bad as having bamboo stuck under your fingernails. Do you think a confession drawn by means of punching a man in the face should fly in court?

This is part of the problem with the torture debate - finding something that's worse doesn't mean what you're discussing is not torture.  Ironically, water-torture (waterboarding is a word that apparently never existed until the .gov started doing it to people) is by many accounts one of the most painful things you can do to a person short of ripping off body parts.

[seeker_two]

This is why I've said that foreign nationals caught doing terrorist acts overseas should be interrogated in theater and then summarily executed in same....

[Monkeyleg]

This is why I've said that foreign nationals caught doing terrorist acts overseas should be interrogated in theater and then summarily executed in same....

Ah, but Obama is doing that, too. Except for the interrogation part. And that he's executing them with drones. And their neighbors and families, too.

But the waterboarding of those three terrorists. Man, that's really cruel.

MicroBalrog, De Selby, do either of you know what "coercive techniques" were used in the interrogation of the terrorist in this trial? It wasn't waterboarding, since he wasn't one of the three. Was it being barked at by dogs?

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

i don't  but a judge who did tossed the evidence.  and hes not a complete leftist whackjob.  same judge allows indefinite confinement

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Lumping terrorists in with criminals is just plain dumb.  It's willfully ignorant.  And it's dangerous.

You cannot build good policy on a foundation of lies and falsehoods.  That's what Obama did when he kicked these guys into civilian courts, saying that civvie courts would be able to deliver justice in matters of terrorism and war.  It seems he's beginning to see the error inherent in this, but it's too late.  The genie is out of the bottle.  He now has to either abide by the decision of the civilian courts, or refuse to honor their decision.  Neither option will result in true justice.

The really painful thing is that all this was perfectly foreseeable.  Anyone with a room temperature IQ should be able to understand that foreign terrorists are not at all similar to domestic criminals, and that whatever is appropriate for one isn't going to be appropriate for the other.

[TommyGunn]

This is part of the problem with the torture debate - finding something that's worse doesn't mean what you're discussing is not torture.  Ironically, water-torture (waterboarding is a word that apparently never existed until the .gov started doing it to people) is by many accounts one of the most painful things you can do to a person short of ripping off body parts.

And what accounts would those be?  I am not aware we've drawn and quartered anyone recently.  I don't doubt that's painful. 
Waterboarding makes people "think" they're drowning.   I should imagine it's uncomfortable and probably disturbing, more than painful.
I can't really say I believe it's anywhere near "ripping off body parts."

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

the accounts of our own service men after ww2 might work.  you know the ones we used to convict those japanese of war crimes.  the guys we executed for those same crimes

[MicroBalrog]

And what accounts would those be?  I am not aware we've drawn and quartered anyone recently.  I don't doubt that's painful. 
Waterboarding makes people "think" they're drowning.   I should imagine it's uncomfortable and probably disturbing, more than painful.
I can't really say I believe it's anywhere near "ripping off body parts."

Please look up the psychological and physical effects of oxygen deprivation and drowning.

If this is done to you, you WILL be in great physical pain. You also WILL be feeling intense fear, even if you're are you're safe. This is your body's reaction to drowning.

[MillCreek]

The really painful thing is that all this was perfectly foreseeable.  Anyone with a room temperature IQ should be able to understand that foreign terrorists are not at all similar to domestic criminals, and that whatever is appropriate for one isn't going to be appropriate for the other.

If I recall correctly, weren't the majority of IRA terrorists tried in British or Irish civilian courts? Did the UK resort to military tribunals in those cases?

[KD5NRH]

the accounts of our own service men after ww2 might work.

That's it!  We let a bunch of old guys sit around and tell them war stories; I'd confess to being the shooter on the grassy knoll after a few hours with the right crowd.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

If I recall correctly, weren't the majority of IRA terrorists tried in British or Irish civilian courts? Did the UK resort to military tribunals in those cases?

dpn't get me started on the "special laws" the brits used against the irish   look up "supergrass" for just one example


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guildford_Four_and_Maguire_Seven

[TommyGunn]

the accounts of our own service men after ww2 might work.  you know the ones we used to convict those japanese of war crimes.  the guys we executed for those same crimes

Okay...now, accounts of people whose bodies have been torn apart ....??   

[De Selby]

The really painful thing is that all this was perfectly foreseeable.  Anyone with a room temperature IQ should be able to understand that foreign terrorists are not at all similar to domestic criminals, and that whatever is appropriate for one isn't going to be appropriate for the other.

Well, take a shot at explaining - what about the criminal trial (whose job is to ensure the government doesn't imprison people arbitrarily) isn't appropriate for a foreign terrorist?

Those criminal protections aren't there because the courts and government over the years were interested in a series of gifts to criminals.  They exist because they're proven methods of stopping the government from willy nilly imprisoning people it doesn't like, and leaving them no option to challenge it, even when they've done nothing wrong.

[De Selby]

This is why I've said that foreign nationals caught doing terrorist acts overseas should be interrogated in theater and then summarily executed in same....

That's homicide under military law, international convention, and US law. 

The idea that you could ever "summarily" (in modern parlance) execute people is myth.  A "summary offence" at common law is one where you get a trial, but not by jury.  This is what used to happen to spies and irregular forces; they got trials.

Monkeyleg,

We only know for certain that a judge decided it was sufficiently close to torture to throw it out.  He would be making that decision on the same standard as a military commission.

The real issue here isn't military commission versus civilian trial - the reality is that the outcomes will be the same for both if either is properly constituted.  Most who advocate commissions seem to do so on the basis that they believe a commission will rubber stamp the government's accusations; that is a serious problem.

[TommyGunn]

.... Most who advocate commissions seem to do so on the basis that they believe a commission will rubber stamp the government's accusations; that is a serious problem.

I don't believe that's the case.  I think many believe a military commission or tribunal will eliminate a lot of the excessive hoopla and garbage that defense attorneys throw up in civilian trials.  In that way, they're more efficient.
They may not come to different verdicts, but they would likely be more efficient. 

[De Selby]

I don't believe that's the case.  I think many believe a military commission or tribunal will eliminate a lot of the excessive hoopla and garbage that defense attorneys throw up in civilian trials.  In that way, they're more efficient.
They may not come to different verdicts, but they would likely be more efficient. 

If efficiency is the only difference, why the outrage? 

[TommyGunn]

     You never get outraged when politicians do screwball things for political reasons? 

[MicroBalrog]

You may be outraged by all the 'hoopla' attorneys 'throw up', but the rules aren't there at random. They're there to protect the police from accidentally railroading an innocent man who was looking very  suspicious. Maintaining a fair system is far more important than executing every single terrorist.

[seeker_two]

That's homicide under military law, international convention, and US law. 

So is beheading hostages...don't think that the other side is respecting the law much....

The idea that you could ever "summarily" (in modern parlance) execute people is myth.  A "summary offence" at common law is one where you get a trial, but not by jury.  This is what used to happen to spies and irregular forces; they got trials.

And a trial in-theater is a problem why?.....I'm sure there's plenty of JAG officers who can pronounce sentence....

Keep it simple....interrogate and execute....no muss, no fuss.....