The murder trial for the Army psychiatrist charged in the Fort Hood shooting rampage has been postponed by Presiding Military Judge Gregory Gross until June 12.
The decision came Thursday at a hearing in which Maj. Nidal Hasan and his attorneys requested a delay in the trial. The defense argued their expert hasn’t completed the investigation of Hasan's background. (The defense expert hasn't completed the investigation?? After 2½ YEARS? Sounds like he has his career picked out - milking this case until he reaches retirement age.)
They also argued they need more time to review documents involved in the case, a totaled of 320,000 pages as of December. (320,000 pages? This "expert" better have a staff of about 500 to read, summarize, analyze and report if the government wishes to go forward before the military judge retires or Hasan - now 41 - dies of old age!)
He is charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder and faces the death penalty or life without parole if convicted in the November 2009 shootings. (Life without parole should not be an option. He personally ended 13 lives that day, and should forfeit his own right to live to see another sunrise! There should be no need for a trial, either. Hasan was caught at the scene with the weapons. He is GUILTY beyond a shadow of a doubt! It's just a shame that the police officers responding weren't better shots.)
Ragnarok: chaos; the end of the cosmos in Norse mythology. "Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war!"
Showing posts with label trial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label trial. Show all posts
Monday, March 5, 2012
Saturday, November 14, 2009
OBAMA DICTATES KHALID SHEIKH MOHAMMED TO BE TRIED IN NYC!
Barack Hussein Obama, as part of the "change" he promised, chose to ignore 2000 years of history and determined that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed must be tried in a civilian court for acts of war against the United States. This self-professed, mass-murdering, terrorist scumbag is in New York City awaiting trial, rather than facing a military tribunal - as those who commit acts of war against a sovereign have for millennia. Never before in the course of history has there been an instance recorded where a known enemy combatant was given a civilian trial! Acts of a military nature are - and always have been - subject to military law and military justice.
First of all, why is Obama even involved in the process of determining where and how this coward will be tried? Because he chose to insinuate himself into it. Only Obama understands the warped reasoning behind that choice. This is the one instance where he really should have just voted "present". His role as "Commander in Chief" is laughable inasmuch as he has never had any military training, much less worn a uniform. How does one "command" that which he has never experienced himself? Obama isn't qualified to lead an orchestra! Why did all you left-wing, bleeding-heart, pinko liberal-"progressives" put him in charge of our nation's security?
Perhaps Obama involved himself in this military issue to placate his Muslim pals, and maybe he has assured them that all will be forgiven, and that their terrorist minions will all be returned home (at U.S. taxpayer expense, of course) alive and well... and a few pounds heavier than when they left. The only thing he's accomplished since elected is to vacation around the world while apologizing for the USA at every stop!
First of all, why is Obama even involved in the process of determining where and how this coward will be tried? Because he chose to insinuate himself into it. Only Obama understands the warped reasoning behind that choice. This is the one instance where he really should have just voted "present". His role as "Commander in Chief" is laughable inasmuch as he has never had any military training, much less worn a uniform. How does one "command" that which he has never experienced himself? Obama isn't qualified to lead an orchestra! Why did all you left-wing, bleeding-heart, pinko liberal-"progressives" put him in charge of our nation's security?
Perhaps Obama involved himself in this military issue to placate his Muslim pals, and maybe he has assured them that all will be forgiven, and that their terrorist minions will all be returned home (at U.S. taxpayer expense, of course) alive and well... and a few pounds heavier than when they left. The only thing he's accomplished since elected is to vacation around the world while apologizing for the USA at every stop!
Friday, June 12, 2009
Obama Blows It Again! Or, Maybe, "It Again" Is Unnecessary
President Obama and his administration have ordered FBI agents to read terror suspects their Miranda Rights; even though they have been captured on foreign soil and are not U.S. citizens officially protected by the Miranda vs. Arizona decision over 40 years ago. The Obama Justice Department has quietly ordered the FBI to issue Miranda rights to foreign fighters captured on the field of battle.
The problems I have with that include (but are not limited to):
1. The terror suspects are not American citizens, nor have they been "arrested" for committing a crime on American soil.
2. The FBI's "charter" is within the confines of the 50 United States.
3. The vast majority of terrorists (99.9%) were not captured upon U.S. soil. They have not been "arrested" per se.
4. Accordingly
, suspects arrested in the US are to be Mirandized before Questioning - which, in the case of foreign enemy combatants, will mean that crucial intelligence opportunities must be postponed until the FBI arrives. In the interim, the lives of American soldiers are placed in additional and unnecessary jeopardy, due to their inability to harvest
immediate and timely humint.
5. Under whose laws will they be charged, and what will those charges be? We cannot charge them under the laws of the country in which they were captured, simply because we do not administer those laws. We can't charge them under the United States Code, because they commited no crime upon U.S soil.
6. Besides which, is there anything in our laws which makes it illegal to fire upon U.S. military forces on foreign soil?
7. Where the hell is the money going to come from to try these 200+ prisoners in US civilian courts?
The trial of an enemy combatant has, throughout recorded history, fallen upon the commander of the opposing forces and whatever military tribunal was appointed by him. Prior to the 20th century, trials of enemy combatants were considerably simpler. The prisoner was brought before the tribunal, found guilty, and executed - all within the space of about 10 minutes... and at virtually NO expense! Beheadings by the sword were free... and an 18th century 7-man firing squad invoked a total cost about 21¢ for the cost of 7 bullets and gunpowder. Those were the good ol' days!
The legal complexities and logistics of trying enemy combatants in civilian courts under US laws are mind boggling. This is obviously something that should remain under the auspices of a military tribunal, for any number of practical reasons (see items 1-7 above). In an imploding economy cost alone should tell Obama that he has chosen the wrong path. On the other hand, it's not like it's Obama's money being spent on this fiasco... it's OURS! And, if he needs more, he'll just raise taxes!
I could be wrong about this whole thing... what do you think?
The problems I have with that include (but are not limited to):
1. The terror suspects are not American citizens, nor have they been "arrested" for committing a crime on American soil.
2. The FBI's "charter" is within the confines of the 50 United States.
3. The vast majority of terrorists (99.9%) were not captured upon U.S. soil. They have not been "arrested" per se.
4. Accordingly
, suspects arrested in the US are to be Mirandized before Questioning - which, in the case of foreign enemy combatants, will mean that crucial intelligence opportunities must be postponed until the FBI arrives. In the interim, the lives of American soldiers are placed in additional and unnecessary jeopardy, due to their inability to harvestimmediate and timely humint.
5. Under whose laws will they be charged, and what will those charges be? We cannot charge them under the laws of the country in which they were captured, simply because we do not administer those laws. We can't charge them under the United States Code, because they commited no crime upon U.S soil.
6. Besides which, is there anything in our laws which makes it illegal to fire upon U.S. military forces on foreign soil?
7. Where the hell is the money going to come from to try these 200+ prisoners in US civilian courts?
The trial of an enemy combatant has, throughout recorded history, fallen upon the commander of the opposing forces and whatever military tribunal was appointed by him. Prior to the 20th century, trials of enemy combatants were considerably simpler. The prisoner was brought before the tribunal, found guilty, and executed - all within the space of about 10 minutes... and at virtually NO expense! Beheadings by the sword were free... and an 18th century 7-man firing squad invoked a total cost about 21¢ for the cost of 7 bullets and gunpowder. Those were the good ol' days!
The legal complexities and logistics of trying enemy combatants in civilian courts under US laws are mind boggling. This is obviously something that should remain under the auspices of a military tribunal, for any number of practical reasons (see items 1-7 above). In an imploding economy cost alone should tell Obama that he has chosen the wrong path. On the other hand, it's not like it's Obama's money being spent on this fiasco... it's OURS! And, if he needs more, he'll just raise taxes!
I could be wrong about this whole thing... what do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
