Left Wing America Haters Punish Soldiers for Doing Their Job

[callmeslick]

Who are these "most experts" you occasionally refer to? Left wing nut jobs?

you can start with Sen. Lindsay Graham and go from there. And, yes, that's the same Senator who has opposed the concept of civilian trials. He nonetheless admitted last week that this case might have been
problematic in a fair military tribunal.


oh, and while you're exercising your awesome search powers, try to find where Bush started this business about trying terrorists in criminal courts. It's not like it's some sort of scary Obama ruse.

[callmeslick]

oh, and to save you a search for this.....the pertinent sections of the Military Code:


Rule 304. Confessions, admissions, and other statements

(a) General Rules

(1) Exclusion of Statements Obtained by Torture or Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment. No statement, obtained by the use of torture, or by cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment (as defined by section 1003 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 2000dd)), whether or not under color of law, shall be admissible in a trial by military commission, except against a person accused of torture or such treatment as evidence that the statement was made.

[...]

(5) Derivative Evidence.

(A) Evidence Derived from Statements Obtained by Torture or Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment. Evidence derived from a statement that would be excluded under section (a)(1) of this rule may not be received in evidence against an accused who made the statement if the accused makes a timely motion to suppress or an objection, unless the military judge determines by a preponderance of the evidence that--

(i) the evidence would have been obtained even if the statement had not been made; or

(ii) use of such evidence would otherwise be consistent with the interests of justice.



BTW, section 5(A)ii provides the sole opening for allowing the testimony of the African who was barred from testifying at the trial, but most experts, Military and Civilian, feel that would not have happened, whether tried in NYC, Guantanamo, or on the Moon.

[Dawg]

Who are these "most experts" you occasionally refer to? Left wing nut jobs?

you can start with Sen. Lindsay Graham and go from there. And, yes, that's the same Senator who has opposed the concept of civilian trials. He nonetheless admitted last week that this case might have been
problematic in a fair military tribunal.


oh, and while you're exercising your awesome search powers, try to find where Bush started this business about trying terrorists in criminal courts. It's not like it's some sort of scary Obama ruse.

You keep saying Obama is supposed be smarter than Bush, so...no Bush tricked Obama into having these trials?

you mean this guy? lindsey graham?? not enough time to point out his flaws today, but expert is hardly a label I'd use.

[callmeslick]

You keep saying Obama is supposed be smarter than Bush, so...no Bush tricked Obama into having these trials?

and you want to whine like an insulted schoolgirl about 'lefties' twisting words?
Who suggested any such thing? I merely stated that the policiy didn't start with Obama. The fact that I've supported the concept of civilian prosecution for years doesn't limit me to saying it was bad under Bush and good under Obama. You, apparently, cannot muster that level of honesty or integrity.

you mean this guy? lindsey graham?? not enough time to point out his flaws today, but expert is hardly a label I'd use.

of course, the fact that he's actually spent a good deal of his adult life dealing with the Military Legal system counts for nothing. It's all about the ideology. Way to go, Dawg! Why don't you discredit yourself some more today, you're on a roll and I'm home all week..........(I need the laughs, they'll make my drive back to PA all
the much better and you provide such prime material. Takes me back to aCWOS' 'golden years'.)