 |
| Opinion Editorial |
Now all of a sudden the New York Times are experts on trying military prisoners which is a joke in itself.Their second lead OPED this morning is "Guantánamo, on Trial" makes the NYT sound even more stupid than they already are.
They begin their uninformed BS "In bringing justice to those accused of plotting the Sept. 11 attacks, it will never be possible to have military trials at Guantánamo that Americans can be fully proud of, or that the world will see as credible.Still, it seems certain those trials will be held. In a triumph of raw politics over the nation’s security interests, the Obama administration was forced to abandon its effort to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four others in federal court, where these cases belong."
These cases belong in what is called a Military tribunal not a civilan court where some lamebrained left winger would have sympathy on thes punk terrorists and not pus for the death penalty.
Here are a couple of reasons why the NYT don't want the tried in a miliatry tribunal "It was announced that they will be tried before a military tribunal at the Guantánamo prison, which President George W. Bush made a symbol of torture and illegal detention."
Torture and Illegal detention oh yeah like a Koran was flushed down the toilet too NYT.Hey NYT I have a bridge I want to sell you.
Here is more evidence (after all we are talking about trying military prisoners) that the NYT have no idea about what they are writing about "It was a shocking example of politicians dictating a prosecutorial decision. The result: huge gaps of competency and credibility. Federal courts have a long record of successfully handling complex terrorism cases. These most important of 9/11 trials will take place in a system of questioned legitimacy, operating under untested rules, with no experience in concluding major terrorism trials.Still, there are things that should be done to avoid an utter legal shambles and administer some justice."
The only justice for these punks is and listen good NYT the D-E-A-T-H P-E-N-A-L-T-Y I know we have to spell it out for those dumb ass liberals to understand.
Its all about politics to these ideologues at the NYT Opinion/Editorial board.And their political philosophy is political correctness.
The rest of the OPED goes into a ludicrous explanation and breaks down their warped perversion of how the trials should be conducted according to them "NO TAINTED EVIDENCE,ADEQUATE DEFENSE
TRANSPARENCY,LESS SECRECY."
Just for the record U.S.Attorney General Eric Holder should just butt out of any idea about knowing anything about the military tribunal system.
They begin their uninformed BS "In bringing justice to those accused of plotting the Sept. 11 attacks, it will never be possible to have military trials at Guantánamo that Americans can be fully proud of, or that the world will see as credible.Still, it seems certain those trials will be held. In a triumph of raw politics over the nation’s security interests, the Obama administration was forced to abandon its effort to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four others in federal court, where these cases belong."
These cases belong in what is called a Military tribunal not a civilan court where some lamebrained left winger would have sympathy on thes punk terrorists and not pus for the death penalty.
Here are a couple of reasons why the NYT don't want the tried in a miliatry tribunal "It was announced that they will be tried before a military tribunal at the Guantánamo prison, which President George W. Bush made a symbol of torture and illegal detention."
Torture and Illegal detention oh yeah like a Koran was flushed down the toilet too NYT.Hey NYT I have a bridge I want to sell you.
Here is more evidence (after all we are talking about trying military prisoners) that the NYT have no idea about what they are writing about "It was a shocking example of politicians dictating a prosecutorial decision. The result: huge gaps of competency and credibility. Federal courts have a long record of successfully handling complex terrorism cases. These most important of 9/11 trials will take place in a system of questioned legitimacy, operating under untested rules, with no experience in concluding major terrorism trials.Still, there are things that should be done to avoid an utter legal shambles and administer some justice."
The only justice for these punks is and listen good NYT the D-E-A-T-H P-E-N-A-L-T-Y I know we have to spell it out for those dumb ass liberals to understand.
Its all about politics to these ideologues at the NYT Opinion/Editorial board.And their political philosophy is political correctness.
The rest of the OPED goes into a ludicrous explanation and breaks down their warped perversion of how the trials should be conducted according to them "NO TAINTED EVIDENCE,ADEQUATE DEFENSE
TRANSPARENCY,LESS SECRECY."
Just for the record U.S.Attorney General Eric Holder should just butt out of any idea about knowing anything about the military tribunal system.
No comments:
Post a Comment