Military Tribunals For Terrorists? Obama says “No.”
February 14th, 2008 at 10:22pm Matt Margolis
Another message of hope for the terrorists.
The Pentagon’s plans for death-penalty prosecutions of six men accused of plotting the 2001 terrorist attacks were criticized by Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, who said capital punishment is appropriate for such crimes but that military tribunals are the wrong forum for the case.
The Defense Department announced murder, terrorism and conspiracy charges Monday against alleged attack mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and five other inmates of the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It gave the leading presidential candidates a chance to show how they would balance anti-terrorism zeal and civil liberties concerns in a heated political climate.
We’ve seen in the past that public trials of terrorists expose our tactics in capturing terrorists, thus making it harder to fight terror.
So, please, Mr. Obama, please explain why you want to make it harder to fight terror.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, War on Terror
40 Comments
1. Christian Wright | February 14th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
These men were tortured until they were forced to say what the White House wanted them to say.
You cannot try people for testimony extracted through torture.
The Bush Administration realized tortured testimony would not be allowed, so they brought in clean teams to re-interview them according to international law.
But it is too late. These men are too afraid if they don’t repeat the same story, they will be tortured again.
90% of the people in Gitmo are innocent men who were kidnapped and sold for the bounty the US was offering. After giving false confessions under torture, the US was stuck. They could not let them go because they would recant and tell the world about the torture they suffered. And the US could not try them because tortured confessions are not admissible, so give them a monkey trial and execute them. They figure that is the only way to dispose of hundreds of innocents.
These six guys may not be innocent, but now we will never know.
2. Matt Margolis | February 14th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Actually, CW, they were interrogated, some using waterboarding (which is not torture) and we got useful intelligence from those interrogations which actually helped us prevent attacks…
Get out of your liberal fantasy world and accept the truth, even though you don’t want to believe it.
3. Tractatus | February 14th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
some using waterboarding (which is not torture)
Except that waterboarding is torture. As has been proven over and over again. But I guess actual facts are no match for your mighty wishful thinking!
Have you ever had an original thought, Matt, or do you think purely in GOP talking points?
4. Diana Powe | February 14th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Matt,
You were told that “useful intelligence” came from waterboarding and you were told that this “useful intelligence” “prevented attacks”. However, your only source for that information is the very people who would be criminally culpable if that waterboarding constituted a crime. See any possible credibility issue there? Naaah!
So, what does your man, Senator John McCain, have to say about your claim that waterboarding isn’t torture?
But, what does he know compared to you? He was only tortured.
5. SEW | February 15th, 2008 at 12:34 am
dian and her brothers are back! Vomit.
6. SEW | February 15th, 2008 at 12:37 am
One can only hope that Hussein is beginning to implode. Sooner or later empty suits implode. This may be one of those moments, it is coming. And McCain will pounce.
7. Diana Powe | February 15th, 2008 at 12:42 am
What’s the matter, SEW? Is having truth come from Senator McCain too much for your nervous electoral stomach?
8. SEW | February 15th, 2008 at 12:52 am
Not nervous here. If Hussein wins we can always nicely ask terrorists for info. And then say please, pretty please? Pretty, pretty please? That works every time and I don’t think it is torture either.
And Hussein will implode. By Sharia law he is one of them, or the laws of Sharia apply otherwise. Crawl back in your hole with brothers Christian and Tract. Wussies always appear in numbers.
9. Diana Powe | February 15th, 2008 at 12:58 am
SEW,
I note with interest your complete, utter and total silence on what the presumptive Republican nominee for president had to say about what torture is. Senator John McCain said waterboarding is torture. I guess it kind of takes the starch out of that whole “Obama is a sissy who would say ‘pretty please’” line you have going there, doesn’t it?
10. SEW | February 15th, 2008 at 1:06 am
Not at all. McCain is an idiot too. McCain preferred the Hilton style of POW status, like we afford those in Gitmo. Billiary might be the only one to lie about their actual position, just for the votes. I’m undecided but will not vote for Hussein or Billary.
Yet quit twisting your lame arguments that the POTUS in not the Commander in Chief with sworn duties to protect the USA. LAME. And try reappearing without backup cops sometime.
11. Dennis | February 15th, 2008 at 1:16 am
Hey SEW - just how is Barack Obama (we generally don’t call people by their middle names) “one of them” by Sharia law? That applies to Muslims, and Mr. Obama is a Christian. Even Mark Noonan called him “my brother in Christ”.
Can you bring reasonable evidence to the forum to defend your assertion? If not I would suggest your comment be deleted for general ignorance, not to mention for disputing your blog host.
12. SEW | February 15th, 2008 at 1:21 am
Not only does Hussein implode, Billary wins Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Then the “Democratic” Party implodes in Denver! Millions of “Democratic” voters from Florida and Michigan disenfranchised, for real this time, by “Democrats”!
Great show Dems. Poetic in fact.
13. SEW | February 15th, 2008 at 1:25 am
Sharia states that offspring of Muslims are Muslim. And for a Muslim to convert to Christianty is a SERIOUS no no dealt with by the principles of Muhammad and the Religion of Peace.
So I suggest your comment be deleted for ignorance. And you only don’t call people by their middle name, unless it IS Hussein.
14. Kahn | February 15th, 2008 at 1:37 am
CW said “These men were tortured until they were forced to say what the White House wanted them to say. You cannot try people for testimony extracted through torture.”
Yep. So we don’t use any coerced testimony. Using that rule it’s OK if they swing… right?
And what do you mean got them to say what the White House wanted them to say? Huh? They weren’t questioned for confessions. They were questioned as to the identities of people trying to kill you and me and about their whereabouts and weapons caches. Get with the program, will you?
I am so sick of educating liberals who just flat out refuse to learn based upon some 1960’s mentality that imposes an anti-American bias in everything they see.
These people planned, financed, coordinated, and ordered the murders of thousand of people. Some of whom I knew. They were almost all civilians. This is either 1. Mass murder or 2. A gross war crime. Either way, it’s swing time.
15. Dennis | February 15th, 2008 at 1:38 am
SEW, you seem to be some kind of expert - are YOU a Muslim? Oh, forget that - you’d never admit it here.
You just brought more assertions to the forum. Documentation is what we’re after here.
Any good Muslims out there who can vouch for SEW? Is there a price on Obama’s head?
16. Kahn | February 15th, 2008 at 1:40 am
Diana, you do realize the the source that says we got useful intelligence from the THREE times we used waterboarding is the same source that told us of the waterboarding, right?
So, you think they are lying about getting intelligence (and the people they captured and the arms caches they discovered were a lucky coincidence)? But they were telling the truth about using the techniques?
OK, I guess so. It could happen.
17. Kahn | February 15th, 2008 at 1:57 am
Real liberals should fear Hillary - She’d be a Democrat Nixon.
And Obama wants “free” medical, “free” housing, and “free” food. I guess he’s going to nationalize all the hospitals, apartment buildings, and farms and then force the bourgeoisie to work their under pain of death?
Oh, and just how will our immediate headlong withdrawal from Iraq stabilize the area? I must admit, with an aggressive Iran and a heavily armed bunch of Gulf States eying them, I would not council isolationism. I guess he’ll just HOPE nothing bad happens.
But whatever, he speaks so well. I just HOPE that raising all taxes by 25 to 30 % doesn’t adverselty affect the economy.
I just HOPE that a conversion to socialism goes smoothly. I just hope that abandoning international trade treaties (I guess by ignoring the fact that they are in fact, law) won’t hurt the economy either.
I just HOPE that retreating in the face of victory doesn’t make our enemies feel emboldened and strong.
Yep. I HOPE everything works out with that stuff.
I also HOPE that I win the lottery. And I HOPE that Brazilian Super Model stops by to spend the night. And I HOPE that my hair grows back. And I HOPE that I get the Nobel Prize for my particularly well written blog entries.
But ya know what? I doubt it.
18. Dennis | February 15th, 2008 at 1:59 am
Matt, exactly where have we “seen in the past that public trials of terrorists expose our tactics in capturing terrorists”?
Please name a few. Surely there must be several, if the assertion comes so easily to you. I seem to be drawing a momentary blank.
19. Jeremiah | February 15th, 2008 at 2:08 am
With all due respect, somebody needs to slap some sense into Mr. Obama.
It’s too late to think about interrogation when one is sitting holding their own guts in their hands praying that they’ll live.
God help this country.
–Jeremiah–
20. Dennis | February 15th, 2008 at 2:23 am
From what I’m reading here, it seems as if unsupported assertions based on fear constitute the main motivation for many of the present tactics in the putative war on terror. And boy, is there LOTS of fear being circulated around this blog thread.
Matt, how would you relate to Ben Franklin’s statement, “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety”?
Was he living in some “liberal fantasy world,” as you so eloquently phrased it in your post (no. 2)?
21. Kahn | February 15th, 2008 at 2:30 am
Dennis, I talked in the elevator with a friend who died on 9/11. I attended the funerals of people from my town who died at the pentagon. These trials are for the people who planned, financed, coordinated, and ordered those murders of people that I knew.
Life is not some stupid TV show. This is serious. I want these people dead and would kill them myself.
“Unsubstantiated” You asshole. Now all I can think of is talking to to her in the elevator. Dammit.
22. Dennis | February 15th, 2008 at 2:30 am
Jeremiah: “With all due respect, somebody needs to slap some sense into Mr. Obama.”
And you are just the one to do it, faithful Jeremiah. For all your demonstrated good sense, perspicacity and loyalty to God and country, I nominate you for the job.
Slap away - and however it goes, please do not slack. And if you need to do a little water boarding in the process, I’m sure you’ll find plenty of loyal friends here to help you out.
23. liberalT | February 15th, 2008 at 2:39 am
nobody is saying that we shouldn’t prosecute terrorists. It is just a simple matter of that pesky constitution which we should uphold. What is wrong with you people - do you not believe it ? It has worked for so long against organized crime, against other terrorists, against everyone. Stop being such pandering idiots claiming that everyone who doesn’t want to suspend the constitution is for terrorism. screw you
24. Dennis | February 15th, 2008 at 2:59 am
Kahn, I am sorry for your loss. And I don’t mean that lightly or sarcastically.
But remember there are many who have lost loved ones to murderers, to religious zealots, to utopian ideologues and demented madmen. Nobody’s loss is worth the loss of the principles our founders based this nation upon. They are principles of fairness and humanity that once set us on a higher moral foundation than our enemies.
After winning the Battle of Trenton in the winter of 1776, George Washington famously ordered his troops to give refuge to hundreds of surrendering Hessian soldiers. “Let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British army.”
You will argue that our present enemies aren’t surrenduring and there is no comparison. But the moral issue is the same. If we had BEGUN with fairness in our foreign policy and in our conduct on the war on terror, we wouldn’t be experiencing the problems we have now. We’ve boxed ourselves into a corner.
The principles of our founders are a reliable guide, and they are codified in our Constitution and many other binding laws and treaties, such as the Geneva Conventions.
The problem is, we’ve lost trust in their principles. It’s the same with many of my Christian brothers. I say, if we have the audacity to call ourselves a Christian nation, then we’d better start paying attention to the actual things Christ taught, and not some violent Old Covenant ideology. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus said to love our enemies and pray for those who spitefully use us. Romans 12 says vengeance belongs to God, and to overcome evil with good.
People who love power always have seen Christ’s way as weakness. The truth is, no nation has ever really tried it. Our founders came close - they made a valiant effort and left us a noble legacy - but it’s been forgotten.
I’m genuinely sorry for your loss. But consider that many multiples of the number of Americans killed on 9/11 have been killed by our own military - I am talking about innocent civilians - by invading a country that had nothing, nada, zip, to do with the attacks on us.
Don’t you understand their loved ones feel the same pain and searing hatred you feel? Are they not equally human? We forget that our own pain is not greater or nobler than that of others, and when we forget and react violently, it only perpetuates the hatred.
Someone has to break the cycle. Our adherence to Geneva Conventions and realistic acknowledgement that we held and mistreated many innocent people in Guantanamo - people who were rounded up for bounty payments made by the US - would be a start. A tiny start, but it has to start somewhere. Otherwise there is only a vortex of destruction ahead.
A show trial of terror suspects in a military tribunal with the death penalty virtually assured, will only show the world that America has become separated from its moral foundations.
25. Mark Noonan | February 15th, 2008 at 3:25 am
liberalT,
And military tribunals are perfectly legit under our Constitution…or have you never heard of the US military tirbunals in post-Nazi Germany?
26. bozo the neoclown | February 15th, 2008 at 5:41 am
“25. Mark Noonan | February 15th, 2008 at 3:25 am
liberalT,
And military tribunals are perfectly legit under our Constitution…or have you never heard of the US military tirbunals in post-Nazi Germany?”
Big difference, we declared war against Germany, can you provide the link where congress declared war on terror?
27. McLame2008!!! | February 15th, 2008 at 5:48 am
Have you ever had an original thought, Matt, or do you think purely in GOP talking points?
Have you ever had an original thought, Tractatertot, or do you think purely in Donkaroach talking points?
Waterboarding is not torture; reading your posts is…
28. McLame2008!!! | February 15th, 2008 at 5:52 am
I seem to be drawing a momentary blank.
Judging from all your posts, Denise, your “blank” is worse than momentary.
Do all you kook trolls get your tin-foil hats from CW?
29. McLame2008!!! | February 15th, 2008 at 5:55 am
Not at all. McCain is an idiot too.
In this case, I have to agree. McLame will continue on the offensive against these animals, but he will be soft on captured combatants.
He’s still infinitely better than Hillbama…
30. js | February 15th, 2008 at 7:25 am
Its a real eye opener how people respond to this. The CIA waterboarded 3, key, AQ members, to get information that prevented more attacks that would have killed many Americans, like 9-11. Even though these 3 were never in any physical danger, we condemn the CIA for doing it.
It doesnt dawn on people that at times, in a war of ideals, drastic measures need to be taken to expose the plans of the enemies. Its pretty certain that information was obtained according to the CIA, yet, our very way of life is at stake, and people cant figure out whats going on.
Is that naive, or just plain stupidity? Our enemies dont even bother to waterboard thier people. The strip the skin off of thier backs, mutilate thier bodies, shove nails and spikes into sensitive areas, to induce people to talk. Most of the time, they are dead when its over, that torture.
Waterboarding doesnt even cause physical pain, only distress. Thier lungs never fill with water, they are never even close to drowning.
Figure it out, 3 men, 5 years ago. STOP condemning our intelligence service, and our Government for this. Many people experience far worse distress in auto accidents and roller coasters than these 3 men did during waterboarding.
Please, stop torturing us with stupidity!!
31. Kahn | February 15th, 2008 at 9:40 am
We can’t try them in civilian courts because they are war criminals and not mere murderers.
And we can’t try them in civilian courts because they are not in the United States.
And we can not try them in civilian courts because there were secret sources and techniques used to capture them.
Coerced information IS problematic. None will be allowed in trial. Most coerced information on the only three people the technique was used on was of immediate tactical value anyways. It wasn’t confessions, it was information on the location of hostile individuals and weapons.
Why do the liberals here assume that the military will do a bad job? Not all Nazi’s and Japanese were convicted you know. And not all that were convicted were given death.
Surely you all agree that these murdering S.O.B.’s need to be punished? They killed our friends.
So, I’ve outlined why the military tribunals are necessary. I see fuzzy and prejudice reasons why not to do that. I’ve got to say your arguments are weak. It just looks like you are Berkeley anti-military jello heads.
32. SEW | February 15th, 2008 at 10:50 am
liberalT “It is just a simple matter of that pesky constitution which we should uphold”
Gook work LT! As you know, OUR constitution does not apply to terrorists. They are enemy combatants, not US citizens.
33. Kahn | February 15th, 2008 at 11:33 am
Exactly. Are they civilians who plotted murder? No. Are they leaders of a paramilitary unit who plotted the murder of civilians? Yes.
But the liberal uproar here simply belies an underlying prejudice against the military. They assume that the military is incapable of conducting a fair trial.
I have two words for that: Tokyo Rose
34. Matt Margolis | February 15th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
If a Democrat were commander-in-chief for the duration of the war on terror, we’d all be dead by now.
35. Tractatus | February 15th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
If a Democrat were commander-in-chief for the duration of the war on terror, we’d all be dead by now.
Sounds like somebody needs a new diaper. Poor baby, living in cowering fear every day. Don’t worry, Matt, the world isn’t nearly as scary as your paranoia says it is. Maybe you’ll figure that out for yourself someday.
Hey SEW - just how is Barack Obama (we generally don’t call people by their middle names) “one of them” by Sharia law?
Oh, Dennis, don’t you understand that Obama is the Muslim Manchurian candidate who, once elected, will force people to convert to Islam or be executed? The fact that his middle name is “Hussein” and he has that cousin in Kenya totally proves it!
36. SteaM | February 15th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Completely false and highly paranoid. Actually, I think you should really think about what you just said.
“We’d all be dead by now“
37. Some Assembly Required | February 15th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
“If a Democrat were commander-in-chief for the duration of the war on terror, we’d all be dead by now.”
Wow………
38. SteaM | February 15th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
If Al Gore had won the presidency. A Nobel Peace Prize winner. A Southern Baptist. An man who served his country in the Army and went to Vietnam, who served in congress from !976 to 1993 when he served as Vice President.
This is the man who would’ve been the leader that you are suggesting would’ve led us to all be “dead by now”.
That’s pretty sickening, Matt.
39. LOLguy23 | February 15th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Deleted - off topic.
40. Christian Wright | February 15th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Deleted - off topic.