• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Terrorist found not guilty

liblady said:
On Wednesday, Ahmed Ghailani was found not guilty of all but one charge by a federal jury in New York. Ghailani was found guilty for only one charge of conspiracy to destroy government buildings. Ghailani dodged the over 280 charges of murder and terrorism, when several witnesses and evidence collected had to be denied admission in the trial. Evidence collected on the battlefield or in the intelligence gathering process was not permitted in the Ghailani trial.

why was evidence denied?
Click to expand...

Because the Judge was a Clinton appointee and the bombings and interrogations took place under CLINTON.
 
repeter said:
Its funny how you say that right after a moderator backs him up by saying "stick to the topic"

This Article actually goes to show that because harsh interrogation techniques were used on Ghailani, a witness which might've altered the decision, was prevented from testifying, ie the prosecution lost their ace in the hole because of waterboarding, or something like it.
Click to expand...

Can you describe what happened to Ghailani and how it constituted "waterboarding, or something like it"?
 
RightinNYC said:
Can you describe what happened to Ghailani and how it constituted "waterboarding, or something like it"?
Click to expand...

"Harsh interrogation techniques"

Thats the something like that part. I can't conclusively show that it was waterboarding, simply because that information, to my knowledge, isn't out there, and I'd rather not file an FOIO request for an online debate.
 
repeter said:
"Harsh interrogation techniques"

Thats the something like that part. I can't conclusively show that it was waterboarding, simply because that information, to my knowledge, isn't out there, and I'd rather not file an FOIO request for an online debate.
Click to expand...

What constitutes a "harsh interrogation technique" and what makes you think it's anything remotely like waterboarding?

You can't just lump everything that you find objectionable into the category of "waterboarding or something like it."
 
RightinNYC said:
What constitutes a "harsh interrogation technique" and what makes you think it's anything remotely like waterboarding?

You can't just lump everything that you find objectionable into the category of "waterboarding or something like it."
Click to expand...

Absolutely! I read the article that this poster thought himself so clever for posting FOXNews, then thought that he could just get away with making the statement that it proved his point. When questioned on it, he got all snarky with you....Brilliant argument!

What I found interesting about the article was this part....

The anonymous federal jury deliberated over seven days, with a juror writing a note to the judge saying she felt threatened by other jurors.
Click to expand...

Was this a Muslim woman? if so how many Muslims were on the jury? And threatened by whom? This is a sad day when the murders of those people can't be successfully prosecuted by America because of our own loopholes, and that there are those right here in this country that cheer that very fact.

j-mac
 
RightinNYC said:
What constitutes a "harsh interrogation technique" and what makes you think it's anything remotely like waterboarding?

You can't just lump everything that you find objectionable into the category of "waterboarding or something like it."
Click to expand...

I don't find it objectionable, but the star witness couldn't be admitted to the case to testify because his name was revealed during "harsh interrogation techniques." It doesn't specifically matter whether it was waterboarding, but what matters is that it has a place in getting this guy off charges of murder.
 
repeter said:
I don't find it objectionable, but the star witness couldn't be admitted to the case to testify because his name was revealed during "harsh interrogation techniques." It doesn't specifically matter whether it was waterboarding, but what matters is that it has a place in getting this guy off charges of murder.
Click to expand...


Yep, and that is what happens when you grant rights to people that shouldn't have them. Good going libs. Kiss trying KSM in America good bye.

j-mac
 
RightinNYC said:
What constitutes a "harsh interrogation technique" and what makes you think it's anything remotely like waterboarding?

You can't just lump everything that you find objectionable into the category of "waterboarding or something like it."
Click to expand...

Neither can you handwave away something foul because it makes your side look bad.

"Harsh interrogation technique" is a euphemistic phrase describing various degrees of torture up to and including waterboarding. A turd by any other name stinks as badly.


"According to ABC News,[10] former and current CIA officials have come forward to reveal details of interrogation techniques authorized in the CIA. These include:
Attention Grab: The interrogator forcefully grabs the shirt front of the prisoner and shakes them
Attention Slap: An open-handed slap to the face aimed at causing pain and triggering fear
Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to the abdomen. The aim is to cause pain, but not internal injury. Doctors consulted advised against using a punch, which could cause lasting internal damage
Long Time Standing: This technique is described as among the most effective. Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor, for more than 40 hours
Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees Fahrenheit (10 degrees Celsius), while being regularly doused with cold water.
Waterboarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Material is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over them. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt"


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_interrogation_techniques
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
why does the WHITE HOUSE see this verdict as such a loss?
Click to expand...
Because it exposes the incompetence of this administration?

The Prof said:
both holder AND obama have declared repeatedly that even if one of the terrorists walks outta civil court free he will still be detained
Click to expand...
Show trials, kinda like Stalin back in the thirties...

Deuce said:
I could get you to confess to raping and murdering your own (actually still living) mother if I waterboarded you long enough.

Confessions obtained under torture are not acceptable in any civilized justice system, because there's a pretty high liklihood they aren't even accurate. People will do anything to get the torture to stop. If you want a system where torturing you to get you to confess is considered ok, I suggest moving to North Korea.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. Waterboarding is not torture, and Ghailani didn't confess; he only gave up a witness who was not allowed to testify. That is *not* the same as a forced confession.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Neither can you handwave away something foul because it makes your side look bad.

"Harsh interrogation technique" is a euphemistic phrase describing various degrees of torture up to and including waterboarding. A turd by any other name stinks as badly.


"According to ABC News,[10] former and current CIA officials have come forward to reveal details of interrogation techniques authorized in the CIA. These include:
Attention Grab: The interrogator forcefully grabs the shirt front of the prisoner and shakes them
Attention Slap: An open-handed slap to the face aimed at causing pain and triggering fear
Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to the abdomen. The aim is to cause pain, but not internal injury. Doctors consulted advised against using a punch, which could cause lasting internal damage
Long Time Standing: This technique is described as among the most effective. Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor, for more than 40 hours
Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees Fahrenheit (10 degrees Celsius), while being regularly doused with cold water.
Waterboarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Material is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over them. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt"


Enhanced interrogation techniques - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


So are grabbing the shirt and shaking, face slapping with an open hand, or slapping the belly torture in your estimation?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Yep, and that is what happens when you grant rights to people that shouldn't have them. Good going libs. Kiss trying KSM in America good bye.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought this country was built on the idea that all men are created equal. Granted we didn't really start out that way, we're slowly but surely progressing towards it.
 
repeter said:
Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought this country was built on the idea that all men are created equal. Granted we didn't really start out that way, we're slowly but surely progressing towards it.
Click to expand...

No, what you seem to want to progress toward is a society without borders. That is not a country my friend.

j-mac
 
repeter said:
I don't find it objectionable, but the star witness couldn't be admitted to the case to testify because his name was revealed during "harsh interrogation techniques." It doesn't specifically matter whether it was waterboarding, but what matters is that it has a place in getting this guy off charges of murder.
Click to expand...

All of which is just more evidence that the civilian legal system is not suited for these unlawful combatants.

Manc Skipper said:
Neither can you handwave away something foul because it makes your side look bad.

"Harsh interrogation technique" is a euphemistic phrase describing various degrees of torture up to and including waterboarding. A turd by any other name stinks as badly.
Click to expand...

So you're arguing that if this guy was given a few belly slaps, we should just call it "torture up to and including waterboarding" and pretend like that's not disingenuous as ****?

A guy pushed me while we were on the subway yesterday. I guess that means he's guilty of "assault up to and including rape."

repeter said:
Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought this country was built on the idea that all men are created equal. Granted we didn't really start out that way, we're slowly but surely progressing towards it.
Click to expand...

The country was in no way built on the idea that unlawful combatants were entitled to civilian trials.

Ex parte Quirin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Last edited:
RealClearPolitics - Terrorists Don't Belong in Civilian Courts

civil court the wrong venue: jim combat boots webb, once superstar senator from virginia, who defeated george allen for the job he's in great danger of losing, son of the hof coach of the redskins...

have you met virginia?

mcdonnell won by EIGHTEEN a year ago, on tsunami tuesday we took THREE house seats, came within 500 of a 4th (gerald connolly, fairfax, N VA, dc burbs, probably the most important house district in the nation), we dominate the commonwealth's house (oldest parliamentary body in the western hemisphere), 59 to 39...

the white house is gonna have to back down on this, just like the mosque (remember the mosque?), just like moving ksm to manhattan, just like closing gitmo, just like the fox news war, comprehensive immigration reform, global warming, cap and trade, ending rendition and detention and dadt, taxing the rich, pulling out of afghanistan next july, cutting the deficit in half, capping unemployment at 8%...

just a buncha lame ducks
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
So are grabbing the shirt and shaking, face slapping with an open hand, or slapping the belly torture in your estimation?


j-mac
Click to expand...

You can add playing music too loudly or touching the Koran without wearing clean white gloves.

When people feel that loud music is "torture" you know they have trivialized the process to such an extent that few terrorists will ever be found guilty. Millions of Americans will die as a result but it will all be for a noble cause.
 
repeter said:
Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought this country was built on the idea that all men are created equal. Granted we didn't really start out that way, we're slowly but surely progressing towards it.
Click to expand...

They may be created equally but that idea runs out of steam shortly thereafter.

Terrorists might have been born equal but, following their religious indoctrination and homicidal tendencies, they are not even human beings.
 
The reason he was found innocent on so many charges was because the vast majority of the charges brought against him were for murder. He was found innocent because he did not directly kill anyone, if the prosecution had decided to charge him with 200 or so counts of conspiracy to murder instead of murder itself he probably would have been found guilty.
 
OscarB63 said:
I have always found the whole "inadmissible evidence" to be a crock.

are you any less of a drug dealer just because the cops didn't have a search warrant when they found 8 million $$$ of drugs in your house?

are you any less guilty of murder because the cop forgot to read you your rights before you confessed?

are you any less of a terrorist because they poured some water over your head to get you to confess?

people alway whine and cry about how the system sucks because sometimes an innocent person is convicted. how about all those times where some guilty POS is released due to some bull**** technicality?
Click to expand...

It's my opinion, and the opinion of the legal system that letting a guilty person go is better than punishing an innocent one. Are you suggesting that police should just be able to do as they please? The restrictions are there for our protection, conservatives say they want smaller government but then they want to let the police or military invade our privacy and our homes. Also no one actually gets let go because you didn't get your rights read that's a myth kind of like the whole "you have to tell me if you're a cop" thing.
 
Grant said:
You can add playing music too loudly or touching the Koran without wearing clean white gloves.

When people feel that loud music is "torture" you know they have trivialized the process to such an extent that few terrorists will ever be found guilty. Millions of Americans will die as a result but it will all be for a noble cause.
Click to expand...

Millions, maybe billions!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom