The question had absolutely nothing to do with terrorists or what they're suspected of doing, or how evil they are, or what you think of them. I don't think anyone doubts these are bad guys.
The questions was about the govt subverting the legal system by intimidating lawyers.
Can you guys read?
What if you committed an unspeakable crime? Would you want the govt to hassle your lawyer?
2007-01-17 07:59:20 · 15 answers · asked by bettysdad 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Another terrorist sympathizer blaming Republicans for everything.
2007-01-17 08:02:33 · answer #1 · answered by Abu 5 · 10⤊ 6⤋
The following is the question that you are now writing about:
"How despicable can a Republican get? Do they understand the law?
Many of the prisoners at gitmo are being represented by attys from some of the most prestigous corporate law firms. It's mostly pro bono, but some families have given some money. All that money has been given to 9-11 families charities."
They are not just prisoners, they are terrorists - they are sworn to destroy our country and everything it stands for.
"Recently, Cully Stimson, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainee Affairs, has said he will be contacting the corporate clients of these firms and asking them to reconsider if they want to pay large legal fees to their terrorist supporting lawyers.
This is truly amazing. "
This must be the part that you are writing about now. And... so?
I think that if I were being represented by one of these firms, I would want to know if they were representing the animals sworn to destroy my country, and pro-bono to boot. I might look for another law firm.
"Say what you want about terrorists, they are still just criminals, not some special group to be treated differently. And we don't know they are terrorists. That's why they have lawyers for upcoming trials. They are terrorism suspects. And lawyers represent clients they can't stand all the time. You think the public defender defending a child molester supports child molestation?"
They are not "just criminals." Criminals in the US have Constitutional rights. They have no rights in this country, they are non-uniformed combatants and don't even have rights under the Geneva Convention. They are terrorists.
"In the US every one is entitled to an atty. But it seems this Repub administration doesn't believe"
"In the US" is the operative phrase - they are not in the US - they are at Guantanamo Bay. They are not US citizens, they have no rights, ncluding the right to representation. If it hadn't been for GWB and MCA 2006, they would just be sitting there until the conclusion of the war, and even beyond that, depending on their threat level to this country.
As for wanting the government to hassle my lawyer, I would not retain anyone who represented these animals. There are too many other lawyers with better ethics and taste in clients.
2007-01-17 22:17:35 · answer #2 · answered by Lily VonSchtupp 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There is a difference between myself and most of the terrorist that makes a huge difference here. I am a citizen of the US and therefore I am protected by it's bill of rights and constitution, the terrorist are not. I am also covered by the Geneva Convention where as most of the terrorist are not. The legal system as we know it doesn't apply to the terrorist. Tribunals can and have been used in war times by the US.
2007-01-17 16:06:30 · answer #3 · answered by joevette 6 · 7⤊ 1⤋
I've got news for you. It is daily savoire faire for the government (state or fed) to give us defense attorneys a hard time. The old-timer attorneys say it used to be worse.
And we give them a hard time, too. It's the way the game is played.
As to your other question, you didn't mark this as a sequel, and I just got here.
2007-01-17 16:32:09 · answer #4 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What a complete bunch of Neaderthals people are! Of COURSE these people deserve a defense..... anyone who is being tried in this country does, and they certainly deserve a trial.
We are not the world's gestapo.
You can't pull people off of an arbitrary "battlefield" anywhere in the world (FYI, many of these people were simply pulled off the streets) and imprison them indefinitely on a whim. Yes, a whim, there are NO qualifications of terrorist activity to put someone at gitmo. That is what was done to these people, many of whom we already know were guilty of exactly NOTHING.. If you people are so convinced they are terrorists, why in the world are you so against our government having to prove it?
2007-01-17 16:15:28 · answer #5 · answered by woodthi32 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
You missed the point most of us made: they are not properly subject to US criminal law. I don't care if they ever come to trial. They're not on US soil, nor are they citizens thereof. How many German, Italian, or Japanese POWs were tried in US courts during WWII?
2007-01-17 16:17:59 · answer #6 · answered by Rick N 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
according to the geneva convention (which you have tried to use in other questions) Article 51 says any person fighting in war that is not in uniform or clearly marked to show who he is fighting for is considered a spy and can be SHOT ON THE SPOT. we give them way more rights than even your great UN and Geneva Convention says we should. but keep fighting for terrorist rights maybe one day we will all be equal...
2007-01-17 16:15:12 · answer #7 · answered by CaptainObvious 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Hey dude they came out with a new magic the gathering trading card set, i heard Kord would be playing at the opening thing tonight too. Maybe we can head on down to the mall and shop at hot topic for a little while before hand? We can non conform, it'll be sweeeeeeeeeet
2007-01-17 16:02:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 3⤋
Your first question was an incoherent whiney rant.
The respondents were not changing your question, they were correcting you; the terrorists are not criminals and are not facing criminal trials.
2007-01-17 16:29:58 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I saw that question and you were babbling about how the poor guys deserve lawyers and other nonsense. Pretty sad you had to strt another whole question to whine about answers you got in a previous whine.
2007-01-17 16:04:54 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 10⤊ 4⤋
Stupid is as stupid writes. Give it a rest, you're only going to piss yourself off trying to communicate with the brain-dead amongst us.
2007-01-17 16:14:27 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋