It Begins; Judge tosses out most evidence on Gitmo detainee (Iraq, enemies)

[sanrene]

That's it in a nutshell.

You selectively missed my post #45 addressing who exactly is putting on a mock trial.

Can't answer?

[sanrene]

Originally Posted by SLCPUNK

My advice: You shouldn't listen to other posters who are wrong.

Please, point out where it is wrong.

Of course, just as you were wrong about "mock trials", you are wrong here as well.

[Gary Siete]

Originally Posted by jkbatca

Al Qaeda Leader Behind Northwest Flight 253 Terror Plot Was Released by U.S.

While Obama and the left play their political kiddie games, we enable enemy combatants to attack us again and again.

He was released by Bush to his hand-holding buddies in Saudi Arabia.

[ergohead]

Originally Posted by sanrene

Our laws and rights under the criminal justice system don't apply to enemy combatants - they never have.

Well, wouldn't that leave YOU out?

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by sanrene

They were under the jurisdiction of the military, until obama and holder decided it would be a fine idea to hold mock trials that will cost millions.

Once again, you haven't a clue about what you are talking about.

The ruling by Federal Appeals court has nothing to do with your current strawman argument since it involves a defendant facing a military tribunal, not a civilian criminal court.

What you fail to address is the very fact that under the system established by the Bush Justice Department, the detainees have scored 32 victories compared to 9 for the government in Federal Court. In short the Bush military tribunal system which all you folks think is oh so damned superior is and has been fatally flawed from the beginning. Trying to shift the argument to possible upcoming trials is just a red herring.

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by sanrene

Please, point out where it is wrong.

Of course, just as you were wrong about "mock trials", you are wrong here as well.

Please in the recorded history of prosecutorial press conferences please, point to one where a DA, didn't state that they were confident of a conviction.

[saganista]

Originally Posted by sanrene

Our laws and rights under the criminal justice system don't apply to enemy combatants - they never have.

Note to those with short-term memory loss...

You lost Hamdan.
You lost Rasul.
You lost Boumediene.

There is nothing left of the arguments you want to make.

[hortysir]

Originally Posted by SLCPUNK

My advice: You shouldn't listen to other posters who are wrong.

When have we tried POWs in civilian courts?

[sanrene]

Don't forget, the democratic congress had a hand in setting up and tweaking the military tribunals.

It is a fact, based on the predetermined "guilt" of the detainees uttered by obama and holder, they are engaging in mock trials.

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

Well then dismiss the cases and send them home to work in their Dad's furniture store like the others.

He didn't dismiss the case. He ruled against the detainee and concluded he was legally detained. I have no clue what people are upset about. Invalid evidence gets tossed out all the time from any kind of court, but it turns out there was sufficient evident to doom this guy anyway. So where's the beef?