Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Poor, Poor Bin Laden...He Didn't Get A Trial.......Well Perhaps This Is Why He Didn't Deserve One!

page: 12
11
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 10 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by HawkMan11

Thank you for the reply.

So, if we could take him alive, he could re affirm his confession, the prosecutor has no obligation to show any other evidence, and he can be sentenced concluding the hearings.


Yes. The court would have the decision to accept that plea, or reject it, and force him to trial.

Also, the prosecution would provide aggrivating and mitigating circumstances that would affect sentencing.


Originally posted by HawkMan11

So what exactly is the problem with taking him alive? In that case he wouldn't get the fictional trial being debated anyways. Please note I'm not saying why didn't we, or we should have.


We could have brought him in alive if he had done like Hussein et al. have and put their hands up and surrendered.


Originally posted by HawkMan11
If he pleads guilty, that satisfies the legal standard to convict and sentence. No need for further Investigation according to law.


No. He has admitted to guilt. No need to prove guilt after that.



Originally posted by HawkMan11
Is the problem that in an International Military Tribunal that may not be the the standard? And he will get some sort of legal proceeding even after confession? I truly don't know.


No, even in a IMT that is still the standard. If someone enters a guilty plea in open court, and the court accepts that plea and adjudicates him guilty, there is no need for a trial. Sentencing hearings would begin after that.




posted on May, 10 2011 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by HumansRuleTheGalaxy
reply to post by Ryanssuperman
 


Have you ever seen ANY of his videos???

Where are these videos? Are you refering to the audio tapes? Somtimes they have pictures they display while playing the audio tapes. These tapes are fakes. I would love to see him taking credit for some crime.



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   
I heard he was wrapped for a ceramonial burial. A few choice words were said, then the body," wrapped in bacon", was wipped overboard. Why would they do that? That seems a little odd to me. Anyone hear about this? A ceromonial burial?



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Poor guy...



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen
The FBI itself has said they don't have evidence to link OBL to 9/11.


Yep. And yet, indictments for the bombings of the US Embassys in Kenya and Tanzania, and the bombing of the USS Cole, still stand.

Nice dodge BTW. I never said anything about 9/11.


Originally posted by wcitizen

So - this is pre-meditated murder of someone who has suspected involvement in a crime with insufficient evidence to bring charges against him. You think that's a goodt precedent?


Wrong. He was indicted on other charges. Nice strawman.


Originally posted by wcitizen

You call that war? Self defence?

I call it illegal murder.


It's a good thing the USG didn't ask your legal opinion. You're confused about current indictments.


Originally posted by wcitizen

What if you were wrongly suspected of terrorism? Would you think it was ok for them to imprison you, torture you, kill you without a proper legal process, just because they suspected you?

THAT is the precedent which has been set here.


I disagree.


Originally posted by wcitizen
It's NOT about anyone 'deserv ing' a fair trial or not. It's about ensureing that the legal process is respected and the government does NOT act outside the law. That road leads to the very dictatorship which is now rapidly taking over America.


The legal process was respected. I am sorry that you have problems with reading for comprehension.


Originally posted by wcitizen

Apart from all OBL is a CIA created fiction, and you've been punked, along with mllions more who believe the government lies.


Yep. And you're duped by liars like Fetzer, Jones, et al.



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by cloaked4u
I heard he was wrapped for a ceramonial burial. A few choice words were said, then the body," wrapped in bacon", was wipped overboard. Why would they do that? That seems a little odd to me. Anyone hear about this? A ceromonial burial?


Interesting, what kind of ceramony was this?



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by wcitizen
The FBI itself has said they don't have evidence to link OBL to 9/11.


Yep. And yet, indictments for the bombings of the US Embassys in Kenya and Tanzania, and the bombing of the USS Cole, still stand.

Nice dodge BTW. I never said anything about 9/11.


Originally posted by wcitizen

So - this is pre-meditated murder of someone who has suspected involvement in a crime with insufficient evidence to bring charges against him. You think that's a goodt precedent?


Wrong. He was indicted on other charges. Nice strawman.


Originally posted by wcitizen

You call that war? Self defence?

I call it illegal murder.


It's a good thing the USG didn't ask your legal opinion. You're confused about current indictments.


Originally posted by wcitizen

What if you were wrongly suspected of terrorism? Would you think it was ok for them to imprison you, torture you, kill you without a proper legal process, just because they suspected you?

THAT is the precedent which has been set here.


I disagree.


Originally posted by wcitizen
It's NOT about anyone 'deserv ing' a fair trial or not. It's about ensureing that the legal process is respected and the government does NOT act outside the law. That road leads to the very dictatorship which is now rapidly taking over America.


The legal process was respected. I am sorry that you have problems with reading for comprehension.


Originally posted by wcitizen

Apart from all OBL is a CIA created fiction, and you've been punked, along with mllions more who believe the government lies.


Yep. And you're duped by liars like Fetzer, Jones, et al.


No - YOU never mentioned 9/11, but the Bush administration blamed him for 9/11. That is why he was killed. That's why some people have been rejoicing about his death, that's why 9/11 victim family members have been interviewed about how they feel about his death. The whole implication of this farce is about 9/11.

Nice try.

He never went through a trial, no proper judiial process for any of the charges. He should have been brought back to US to face those charges. BUT, of course, they couldn't do that.

If you support disregard for the law and a President who can murder at will, that's your choice. Enjoy it when it comes knocking at your door.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 


Bin laden has not even come close to committing the atrocities committed by most governments.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by bhornbuckle75
reply to post by paxnatus
 


You complete miss the point...Its not that he's dead...I'm glad he's dead, but he should have been executed after trial. NOT because he "deserved" it...but because it sets a horrifying precedent.

Presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan issued executive orders (E.O. 11905 (1976), E.O. 12036 (1978), and E.O. 12333 (1981), respectively) banning assassination. Not to mention International Law forbids it: Article 23b of the Hague Regulations, 1907

But F**K all that...I mean were Americans right? We don't have to follow anyones laws...not even our own!


Assasination refers to a member of a foreign government. What government did OBL represent again?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen
No - YOU never mentioned 9/11, but the Bush administration blamed him for 9/11. That is why he was killed.


You're not understanding the pevious post, are you?

He was a wanted international terrorist. Wanted by our government, and others, for the acts of terrorism he planed/financed/participated in.

The REASON why he was not indicted for the events of 9/11, is because they (FBI, etc) didn't have enough unclassified evidence to GUARANTEE a conviction. If they had sought a conviction with all of the available evidence, we would have had to show ALL of the evidence. Much of which, is still classified.


Originally posted by wcitizen
That's why some people have been rejoicing about his death, that's why 9/11 victim family members have been interviewed about how they feel about his death. The whole implication of this farce is about 9/11.


Wow. That makes no sense whatsoever.


Originally posted by wcitizen
Nice try.


Thank you. Care to actually try to address my previous post? Or is handwaving your only weapon?


Originally posted by wcitizen
He never went through a trial, no proper judiial process for any of the charges. He should have been brought back to US to face those charges. BUT, of course, they couldn't do that.


If he had surrendered like Saddam et al. have, he WOULD have been brought to the US.


Originally posted by wcitizen
If you support disregard for the law and a President who can murder at will, that's your choice.


I support the killing of a known terrorist who made some type of move that the SEALs deemed as aggressive for one reason or another, in order to prevent their own deaths. Yes, absolutely. Just as I support your right to defend yourself if you are out on the town, and someone tries to rob you.



Originally posted by wcitizen
Enjoy it when it comes knocking at your door.


I don't associate with known terrorists, I don't kill innocent people just because of their beliefs, and I don't commit crimes against other nations, so I don't have much to worry about.

But hey, thanks for the heads up.....



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343

Enjoy it when it comes knocking at your door.


I don't associate with known terrorists, I don't kill innocent people just because of their beliefs, and I don't commit crimes against other nations, so I don't have much to worry about.

But hey, thanks for the heads up.....



Wow. It's kind of sad to see people who still believe the MSM pulp propaganda.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by bhornbuckle75
reply to post by paxnatus
 


You complete miss the point...Its not that he's dead...I'm glad he's dead, but he should have been executed after trial. NOT because he "deserved" it...but because it sets a horrifying precedent.

Presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan issued executive orders (E.O. 11905 (1976), E.O. 12036 (1978), and E.O. 12333 (1981), respectively) banning assassination. Not to mention International Law forbids it: Article 23b of the Hague Regulations, 1907

But F**K all that...I mean were Americans right? We don't have to follow anyones laws...not even our own!


Assasination refers to a member of a foreign government. What government did OBL represent again?



You really don't understand the definition of the term assassination do you?

www.thefreedictionary.com...
as·sas·si·nate (-ss-nt)
tr.v. as·sas·si·nat·ed, as·sas·si·nat·ing, as·sas·si·nates
1. To murder (a prominent person) by surprise attack, as for political reasons.


www.merriam-webster.com...
Definition of ASSASSINATE

transitive verb
1
: to injure or destroy unexpectedly and treacherously
2
: to murder (a usually prominent person) by sudden or secret attack often for political reasons



Osama was an incredibly prominent person who was head of a large group calling itself Al Queda...Although the term 'assasination' does not need to be political to be used correctly, perhaps you think that Osama had no effect on Politics, and the killing was therefore non-political....I think the rest of the world disagrees with that as these links show:

'Osama Bin Laden’s Journal Said to Outline Terror Plots, Political Games' -Bloomberg News
www.bloomberg.com...

Obama's political victory clinched by Osama's death' - Global Times
opinion.globaltimes.cn...


'Osama Bin Laden death: Political implications' -Washington Post
www.washingtonpost.com...

[I could have posted about a dozen more similar headlines...but I think I made my point]



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by FDNY343
 


So if I report you as a terrorist it is OK if someone assasinates you without a trial? Cool? NO, a HORRIBLE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN SET.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   
No sympathies for Bin Laden.

However, I'm not a fan of the Commander in Chief taking it upon himself to sanction an assassination on foreign soil without the knowledge or permission of that nation's ruler.

I think it sets a dangerous precedent (as well as violating international law, and a nation's sovereignty). Glad he's dead, but still amazed we seemed to have received no real flak from the international community on it.

This is one of those things that may work once, but the next time (like trying to go in and secure nukes in Pakistan) we try it, it's going to be less well received.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by wcitizen

It's NOT about whether anyone DESERVES a trial, it is IMPERATIVE in any civilised society that EVERYONE be given a fair trial before being sentenced, and especially before being executed.

It's the LAW which has to be adhered to under all circumstances. If not, dangerous precedents are set and that can get out of control. The only thing that protects citizens from tyranny is proper adherence to the constitution and the rule of law and there should ne NO exceptions.

If you condone execution without trial, you're condoning mob rule, which is what dictatorships are. One day that might just come back and bite you on the bum.


While I will absolutely agree that everyone deserves a trial, there is no way that is going to be feasable.

It's not like this guy was walking down the street to buy some milk. This was war. In war, people are killed.

Also, here's a little analogy.

I am sitting in my living room, watching a baseball game on tv. Some dude busts through my door and tries to harm my wife and kids. I have EVERY right to defend myself, up to and INCLUDING deadly force. Should I just wait for the cops? Nope. Sorry. I guarantee I will put two shots of .45 cal right into his center mass.

Now, go ahead and try to spin this to say that we shouldn't have shot the bastard. It won't make a bit of difference. This was war.





The FBI itself has said they don't have evidence to link OBL to 9/11.

So - this is pre-meditated murder of someone who has suspected involvement in a crime with insufficient evidence to bring charges against him. You think that's a goodt precedent?

You call that war? Self defence?

I call it illegal murder.

What if you were wrongly suspected of terrorism? Would you think it was ok for them to imprison you, torture you, kill you without a proper legal process, just because they suspected you?

THAT is the precedent which has been set here. It's NOT about anyone 'deserv ing' a fair trial or not. It's about ensureing that the legal process is respected and the government does NOT act outside the law. That road leads to the very dictatorship which is now rapidly taking over America.



Apart from all OBL is a CIA created fiction, and you've been punked, along with mllions more who believe the government lies.




That was really well said. As an American, I feel I am part of a ruthless gang of mobsters now, mobsters with no code of honor.



posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 


All the taking out of Bin Laden was removing a CIA lowlife gone rogue to get a war going forever. The fighters the US military are fighting use the Quran and religion to keep the CIA's agenda flowing to keep money in their pockets and they dont even know it.



posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
The reason the world is the way it is ?

Just read the Headline to this Post !

Ignorant feeding the ignorant.



posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 





Government??? whose???? Try the Rogue group known as the Taliban whom would just as soon cut someones tongue out as look at you.

Just so you know, it was our (US) government that created the Taliban. And OBL was a CIA lap dog for many years.



posted on Jun, 21 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by GunzCoty
 


Yes you got it right. The USA owes him a medal for helping to beat those evil communists. I would loved to have seen him in a court telling the world how he was financed by the west. How he was a close personal friend of the bushs. He was thier main dealer in the Afghan, weapons for opium. Guess the CIA made a lot of money out of thier good friend Tim Osman. He was on their payroll right up to the 911 scam.



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 


YOU my DEAR, have no IDEA!


________________________________________

Mind Blowing




From the managing editor of the Washington Post, a news-breaking account of the CIA's involvement in the covert wars in Afghanistan that fueled Islamic militancy and gave rise to bin Laden's al Qaeda. For nearly the past quarter century, while most Americans were unaware, Afghanistan has been the playing field for intense covert operations by U.S. and foreign intelligence agencies-invisible wars which sowed the seeds of the September 11 attacks and which provide its context. From the Soviet invasion in 1979 through the summer of 2001, the CIA, KGB, Pakistan's ISI, and Saudi Arabia's General Intelligence Department all operated directly and secretly in Afghanistan. They primed Afghan factions with cash and weapons, secretly trained guerrilla forces, funded propaganda, and manipulated politics. In the midst of these struggles bin Laden conceived and then built his global organization. Comprehensively and for the first time, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Steve Coll tells the secret history of the CIA's role in Afghanistan, from its covert program against Soviet troops from 1979 to 1989, to the rise of the Taliban and the emergence of bin Laden, to the secret efforts by CIA officers and their agents to capture or kill bin Laden in Afghanistan after 1998. Based on extensive firsthand accounts, Ghost Warsok is the inside story that goes well beyond anything previously published on U.S. involvement in Afghanistan. It chronicles the roles of midlevel CIA officers, their Afghan allies, and top spy masters such as Bill Casey, Saudi Arabia's Prince Turki al Faisal, and George Tenet. And it describes heated debates within the American government and the often poisonous, mistrustful relations between the CIA and foreign intelligence agencies. Ghost Warsanswers the questions so many have asked since the horrors of September 11: To what extent did America's best intelligence analysts grasp the rising threat of Islamist radicalism? Who tried to stop bin Laden and why did they fail?




Ex·cerpt

edit on 26-6-2012 by iIuminaIi because: (no reason given)





new topics




 
11
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join