Seat 19A

[grandma]

There is much talk/articles written about this fellow being allowed to fly tho being on a watch list. Will there ever be a single event, or even now that we have had several in the past few weeks, that will force the Administration & the Media to finally take an about-face & acknowledge that so-called Profiling may have its benefits? The honest and discerning
mid-easterner will recognize the need for following stricter rules. If only, because they see the caucasian having to go thru the same thing. I can change my hair, my eye color with contacts, my weight with padding, my posture, but I cannot change my skin color ....well, I guess I Have heard there is such a thing as Body Paint -
....Will the guys & gals along the chain of command be able to bring forth the charge that They Have Not Been Allowed to make/take decisive motions/actions that could be perceived as anit something or other?? (see the Ft Hood documents.)

 

[James48843]

Show-me, it is clear you don't have the same understanding of what a military is that the rest of us do. A military is the formal, legal entity under international law, that engages in brute force to exercise political will. In order to be recognized as legal, it has to be the official force of some nation, or, in the case of civil war military, it has to be a participant with a goal of taking power in that nation. Civil war militaries are not protected under the laws of war the same way international fighting forces of a nation are.

Bottom line, if you were to kill a combatant after they were in custody, that would be considered murder. Under military law of war, you have an obligation to safeguard the prisoner until the end of hostilities, and then you have the obligation to release them.

Why would you want to safeguard and release "the testicle bomber"?

Under criminal prosecution, I anticipate he won't ever see the light of day again. This is a criminal matter under Title 18. So far they've only charged him with one count of attempted destruction of an aircraft (20 year felony).

There are a half-dozen more criminal violations which could and should be charged, but that will wait until they are ready to indict and move forward with a trial. Charges should include possession of explosives, attempted murder, setting fire to an aircraft, interfering with a flight crew. Each is enough to tack on a lot more years.

So why do you think he should instead get a military trial?

The only reason military trials were considered for the Gitmo guys is that the rules of evidence would be hard to meet for those picked up on the ground in Afghanistan, or those "extraordinarily rendition" cases, where the legality of capturing them in other countries and bringing them into US custody could be grounds for throwing out the case. We don't have such problems with this case. It's pretty open and shut, with witnesses, evidence, and taken into custody on US soil.

Seems pretty simple to me.

 

[phil]

I had to think about that one for a long time. In this case, he wasn't someone from the middle east, nor did he even look like someone from there. What profiling should we use?

There are Irish terrorists, German terrorists, Italian terrorists, even American terrorists. Timothy McVeigh wasn't on the no-fly list, as far as I can tell. Should we be profiling people like him?

Okay, a guy with short hair and is ex military, who disagrees with a lot of current administration policies. Well.....it's a long hike back from Kandahar, but if you start now...

There is much talk/articles written about this fellow being allowed to fly tho being on a watch list. Will there ever be a single event, or even now that we have had several in the past few weeks, that will force the Administration & the Media to finally take an about-face & acknowledge that so-called Profiling may have its benefits? The honest and discerning
mid-easterner will recognize the need for following stricter rules. If only, because they see the caucasian having to go thru the same thing. I can change my hair, my eye color with contacts, my weight with padding, my posture, but I cannot change my skin color ....well, I guess I Have heard there is such a thing as Body Paint -
....Will the guys & gals along the chain of command be able to bring forth the charge that They Have Not Been Allowed to make/take decisive motions/actions that could be perceived as anit something or other?? (see the Ft Hood documents.)

 

[James48843]

I am advocating sending the individuals to hell via a military trial as a enemy soldiers belonging to a militant organization recognized by the international community that spans many countries and answers to none of those countries governments for their plans or actions.

The death penalty for "the testical bomber" is not an option under either military or civil law. Military tribunal wouldn't get you there if that is your goal.

And if that is your goal, to kill, then I think you need to rethink what it is we are doing, and why we are at war. That kind of thought is no better than them.

We are better than them.

 

[Show-me]

We will not be able to execute him because he is not a citizen, so why waste our civilian court system on him? We are just going through the motions.

Change the law, change the rules, times are changing. How many of these "criminals" belong to the same club? Sounds like a standing army hiding in the fringes of antiquated international laws, in multiple countries.

Root them out! Hell, I don't really care if you kill the few we catch. Keep them in GITMO and let them suffer..............forever. Or until they give up their leaders like Bin Laden.

 

[Show-me]

The death penalty for "the testical bomber" is not an option under either military or civil law. Military tribunal wouldn't get you there if that is your goal.

And if that is your goal, to kill, then I think you need to rethink what it is we are doing, and why we are at war. That kind of thought is no better than them.

We are better than them.

I'm all for a eye for a eye.

 

[James48843]

We will not be able to execute him because he is not a citizen, so why waste our civilian court system on him? We are just going through the motions.

Change the law, change the rules, times are changing. How many of these "criminals" belong to the same club? Sounds like a standing army hiding in the fringes of antiquated international laws, in multiple countries.

Root them out! Hell, I don't really care if you kill the few we catch. Keep them in GITMO and let them suffer..............forever. Or until they give up their leaders like Bin Laden.

I would encourage you to read the book "The Utility of Force", by General Rupert Smith. It's available on Amazon.com used for about six bucks. If you read that, you'd have a much better picture as to WHY they are fighting, and what to expect.

Simply put, if we do nothing different, there is an infinite supply of "testicle bombers" that will continue to to harass us for the next century or so.

If you want to change that, there is a way. But it is not through force, death penalties, or attacking countries around the world.

Read the book.

 

[Show-me]

I would encourage you to read the book "The Utility of Force", by General Rupert Smith. It's available on Amazon.com used for about six bucks. If you read that, you'd have a much better picture as to WHY they are fighting, and what to expect.

Simply put, if we do nothing different, there is an infinite supply of "testicle bombers" that will continue to to harass us for the next century or so.

If you want to change that, there is a way. But it is not through force, death penalties, or attacking countries around the world.

Read the book.

I'm sure the book is based on strong opinion, but I will look for it.

 

[WorkFE]

but it appears daddy and gramps are kinda mad at him at the moment.

I hate when family disagreements get in the way. Clouds the judgement

 

[Show-me]

And, like a stock chart you can see positive and negative tendencies depending on what camp you are in.

 

[James48843]

I'm all for a eye for a eye.

View attachment 7786

"An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind."
Mahatma Ghandi, (1869-1948)
​

 

[Show-me]

Nice pacifist try, but I don't think so and I want my representation Mr. President!!!

 

[phil]

Should we put Ann Coulter on the no-fly list?

http://rightwingnews.com/interviews/anncoulter.php

It's pretty clear she has violent tendencies.


John Hawkins: You've caught a lot of heat for a couple of quotes you made. In your column three days after 9/11, you said, "We know who the homicidal maniacs are.They are the ones cheering and dancing right now. We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." You also said in an interview with the New York Observer, "My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building." Do you stand by those quotes or do you think that perhaps you should have phrased them differently?
Ann Coulter: Ozzy Osbourne has his bats, and I have that darn "convert them to Christianity" quote. (Thank you for giving the full quote. I have the touch, don't I?) Some may not like what I said, but I'm still waiting to hear a better suggestion. RE: McVeigh quote. Of course I regret it. I should have added, "after everyone had left the building except the editors and reporters."

 

[James48843]

..
Fort Hood shows that no matter what country you claim your loyalty are to a different cause or organization. That bastard counseled with militant sympathizers as to whether it was OK to do it. He should be tried as a traitor, but the liberal media is sitting on this story big time. Why?

traitor [ˈtreɪtə]
n a person who is guilty of treason or treachery, in betraying friends, country, a cause or trust, etc.

The Fort Hood shooter will be tried under Military UCMJ Article 118, Murder. I presume they will also charge additional count of violation of Article 134- the general catch-all article, because of the circumstances of the Ft Hood case.

"treason"? This case does not have the legal elements for a clear cut case of treason. Treason under the law is different from your dictionary definition. Under UCMJ precedent, there is no treason which can be proven here.

It will be sufficient to try him for the multiple counts of murder, as that will be easy enough to prove in court, and the penalty will either be death, or life in prison.

 

[Show-me]

The strong hand would be death, but I don't expect that. Show the world that we will not stand for this.

 

[WorkFE]

it is clear you don't have the same understanding of what a military is that the rest of us do. Under military law of war, you have an obligation to safeguard the prisoner until the end of hostilities, and then you have the obligation to release them.

Only Up until the point where he attempted to kill noncombatants would he be considered a POW. From that point on he would not be considered for enemy exchange at the end of hostilities.
The intent to kill civilians was obvious unless he knew with certainty that there would be military personnel on that aircraft. It is the same as bombing a house hoping that there are military targets inside. Thats murder.

 

[James48843]

Only Up until the point where he attempted to kill noncombatants would he be considered a POW. From that point on he would not be considered for enemy exchange at the end of hostilities.
The intent to kill civilians was obvious unless he knew with certainty that there would be military personnel on that aircraft. It is the same as bombing a house hoping that there are military targets inside. Thats murder.

And he could/would be tried for murder. Under Article 118 of the UCMJ if he were a military member legally entitled to and subject of military discipline. Or he COULD be tried under civilian law if resisting and committing the act after capture and internment.

Each case would have to be looked at on it's own.

It's simple to me-

1. In the Fort Hood case, trial under UCMJ Article 118 for murder. Multiple counts. And through in 134 for use of the weapon illegally, etc. You can actually blend several civil charges under Title 18 and/or state law through a maneuver with Article 134. In any case, it's clear that he was military, on military property, killing military people. UCMJ prevails. Penalty possibility up to life in prison, or death penalty is within guidelines.

2. The testicle bomber- trial under civilian courts. He was on civilian property at the time. He is not a formal member of a military recognized under the Geneva convention, carried no military ID, was not in a uniform. Attempted a crime for which there is specific, credible evidence he tried to blow up an airplane, for which there is a specific crime penalty written into Title 18. Clean as glass. Testicle Bomber should be tried in Civilian Court. Since no one died, death penalty is not within guidelines, but multiple consectutive 20 year sentences are possible and within guidelines. My guess is he will never see the light of day again. No bail will be allowed. He will never walk as a free man again, although he will be given a fair trail.

 

[WorkFE]

I would have to agree:
Fort Hood: all that and you could argue treason as well. I suspect the country would get the desired result with the murders alone.

Testicles: Although I would prefer him to go to Leavenworth to serve his time with Military Prisoners that is one for the civilians.

 

[James48843]

Under UCMJ, "treason" is usually only charged in connection with espionage. There is no espionage to connect it to here. Therefore, it would be a difficult case to make.

Murder is plenty enough to obtain a conviction.

Always remember the end game. It is only necessary to prove murder in order to get life in prison, or to include the death penalty. You can't get and should not ask much more penalty than that. Cruel and unusual punishment is forbidden by that pesky old U.S. Constitution.

 

[WorkFE]

Treason: Offense of attempting to overthrow the government of one's country or of assisting its enemies in war. In the U.S., the framers of the Constitution defined treason narrowly — as the levying of war against the U.S. (No one is more visibly identified as US than a soldier) or the giving of aid and comfort to its enemies — in order to lessen the possibility that those in power might falsely or loosely charge their political opponents with treason.

Espionage would be a different charge all together. The act or practice of spying or of using spies to obtain secret information, as about another government