Page 1 of 2
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:14 pm
by thibodeaux
Discuss
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:24 pm
by GORDON
I'll answer after it has already happened.
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 8:02 pm
by Malcolm
If this were in the hands of a competent gov't, one that could capitalize off capturing & indicting someone like this, then I'd say, yeah, it's a great idea. You'd be able to strengthen your case that folk o' his ilk are psychos that are embarrassments to the species.
Unfortunately, this is the U.S. gov't. The guilty verdict seems certain. Only question is whether or not he dies. What are the outcomes ....
(A) found guilty, sentenced to death ... He becomes a martyr for other psychos around the world. If the gov't were competent, they'd be able to tear him down in the courtroom.
(B) found guilty, sentenced to life in prison ... We're effectively saying that participating in the premeditated murder of hundreds or thousands of people isn't quite enough to warrant your death. Then what the fuck is?
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:04 pm
by GORDON
Obama is giving him his fair trial, but has already decided his punishment:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29661.html
During a round of network television interviews conducted during Obama’s visit to China, the president was asked about those who find it offensive that Mohammed will receive all the rights normally accorded to U.S. citizens when they are charged with a crime.
“I don't think it will be offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him,” Obama told NBC’s Chuck Todd.
So.............
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:14 pm
by TPRJones
Bad idea. It would perhaps be a good idea (or at least a less bad one) to give him a real trial. That would mean moving the venue away from New York, and trying to find an actually impartial jury. But it is definitely a bad idea to give lip service to the process, while pushing him through a show trial. We're supposed to be better than that.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:17 pm
by GORDON
Yeah. It would probably be a good idea for our lawyer President to not suggest in a hostile foreign country that our legal system is just window dressing.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:43 pm
by Malcolm
You'd think w\ all the fucking lawyers this country pumps out, we wouldn't NEED to stack the deck this badly.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:43 pm
by Troy
Probably a mistake, but at least we finally decided one way or the other what to do with the guy.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:47 pm
by Malcolm
It would perhaps be a good idea (or at least a less bad one) to give him a real trial.
I'll go less bad. There's no way this fucker gets off. He's either going to be caged for the rest of his days or dead. His going on living in the outside world for anything more than a few days borders on unacceptable risk.
That would mean moving the venue away from New York, and trying to find an actually impartial jury.
While New York's definitely not a place that's going to be objective, where the hell, in this country, will you find an impartial jury?
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:52 pm
by GORDON
Malcolm wrote:That would mean moving the venue away from New York, and trying to find an actually impartial jury.
While New York's definitely not a place that's going to be objective, where the hell, in this country, will you find an impartial jury?
In San Francisco they are biased int he other direction. He'd get off faster than OJ in LA and without Johnny Cochrane.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:41 pm
by Malcolm
GORDON wrote:Malcolm wrote:That would mean moving the venue away from New York, and trying to find an actually impartial jury.
While New York's definitely not a place that's going to be objective, where the hell, in this country, will you find an impartial jury?
In San Francisco they are biased int he other direction. He'd get off faster than OJ in LA and without Johnny Cochrane.
I want to see some hard numbers on that. Any polls? New York is either Mecca or Medina for hippies. Whichever Frisco ain't.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:50 pm
by GORDON
This is the city that fought to not have the USS Missouri (That's the one on which Japan surrendered, right?) parked in one of their many, gigantic bays.
This is the city that has a massive statue dedicated to protesters looming over I-90.
This is the city of Nancy Pelosi.
There's your facts.
Of course, Pelosi is Obama's (Peace Be Unto Him) lapdog, soif he states that KSM will get a fair trial then a gas chamber, Pelosi and the city might fall in line.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:26 pm
by Malcolm
Hippies in Frisco still had hippie friends out in NYC.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:39 pm
by GORDON
But... NYC is still looking at a big hole in the ground where there used to be buildings.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:01 pm
by TPRJones
If we really want to give him a real trial, we should probably hand him over to an ally country. Someone we trust to do it up right and give a well reasoned case. Then if he's guilty someone we can trust to hand him back over to us for sentencing.
Not sure of the legality of that, or who to trust to do it, though.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:43 pm
by Malcolm
TPRJones wrote:If we really want to give him a real trial, we should probably hand him over to an ally country. Someone we trust to do it up right and give a well reasoned case. Then if he's guilty someone we can trust to hand him back over to us for sentencing.
Not sure of the legality of that, or who to trust to do it, though.
Japan would do it.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:45 pm
by Malcolm
GORDON wrote:But... NYC is still looking at a big hole in the ground where there used to be buildings.
& Cali's still run by a Republican governor.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:47 pm
by GORDON
Malcolm wrote:GORDON wrote:But... NYC is still looking at a big hole in the ground where there used to be buildings.
& Cali's still run by a Republican governor.
Not really. They elected a movie star, not a republican.
Anyway... hey... remember how Obama had snarky things to say about the white cop and the black college prof, before he knew all the facts? Remember how Obama had an opinion about that attempted central american coup, and the side he chose was actually the side with the anti-American ideals (I'm forgetting the actual details)?
I am seeing a trend.
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:15 pm
by Malcolm
GORDON wrote:I am seeing a trend.
Politicians having uninformed opinions? The hell you say.
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:23 am
by GORDON
Decisions based on bad intel is one thing, but Obama just shoots from the hip and sounds like a complete dumbass.
The man doesn't even know enough to shut the fuck up and not have to have a verbal opinion about everything. That's huge.
Edited By GORDON on 1258626286