Republicans say the darndest things! Or rather, the DUMBEST things

[Boris Godunov]

Drake's always had a big hard-on for me. Not sure why...must like blondes.

So, Drake, do you think that if an accused Gitmo detainee is acquitted, he'll be given U.S. citizenship as compensation? I'd love to hear about how that's a factual claim.

But anyway, I see Ben is now shifting his goal posts, as usual. At first he would only accept executions as proof that BHO wasn't a Muslim terrorist lover, now he's said convictions. Typical

He was stripped of that one post in particular. The man is a good Catholic, just not on this one issue.

Ben, you are a dishonest piece of crap. Cardinal Martino was not stripped of anything. He retired because he was 77 years old, two years past the mandatory retirement age. Benedict relieved him of his duties as a result of his submitting his resignation. If anything, his being able to retain his post past the retirement age is proof that the Vatican liked what he was doing.

The Vatican has never issued any statement disputing Martino's words, criticizing his actions in this role or retracting anything he's said or done. You're flat-out lying about him, and you know it. That's a sin.

[Drake Tungsten]

So, Drake, do you think that if an accused Gitmo detainee is acquitted, he'll be given U.S. citizenship as compensation?

He'll be locked back up in Gitmo; these will be nothing more than show trials.

It is funny to see you complain about goalpost moving when you're the one concentrating on the dumbest thing Ben said in the following post (the mangled point about the wisdom of granting foreign terrorists legal rights equivalent to those enjoyed by U.S. citizens) while ignoring the rest of the post, which is generally accurate. It's pretty pathetic when you can't even confront Ben Kenobi head on in a debate...

The way it works in the Geneva convention is they are entitled to the treatment in Gitmo if they are established to be enemy combatants. Prisoner release/exchange. That means wearing a uniform.

If you conceal yourself, and attempt to kill a soldier in a combat zone, the practice until now, has been that you get shot, and that you end up in an unmarked grave.

It's different with domestic terrorists, they are protected by the constitutional requirements of the US. WRT to Hasan, he's entitled to a military tribunal where they will decide his fate, and execution is one of the options.

WRT to the terrorists in Gitmo, it's murkier. They don't have a state that they can be returned to and Geneva does not treat them as enemy combatants. That's what Obama is running into. Legally they have zero status, and no access to American courts. Elevating them to the status of US citizens with the right to trial is a horrible precedent.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben, you are a dishonest piece of crap. Cardinal Martino was not stripped of anything. He retired because he was 77 years old, two years past the mandatory retirement age.

Cardinal Martino retired, yes. He has retained some of his duties, but has been relieved specifically of development and peace.

The Vatican has never issued any statement disputing Martino's words, criticizing his actions in this role or retracting anything he's said or done. You're flat-out lying about him, and you know it. That's a sin.

The Vatican chose to relieve him of his post. You can spin it all you want, but Martino no longer is responsible for the position your article reported him. I've clearly demonstrated that he has connections with Castro, which is not Kosher, given the communist regime, which I personally find troubling. It seems clear to me, he was relieved of development and peace quietly.

[Drake Tungsten]

Good lord. First Ben starts making good points and now Pat Buchanan has joined in...

Are we at war -- or not?

For if we are at war, why is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed headed for trial in federal court in the Southern District of New York? Why is he entitled to a presumption of innocence and all of the constitutional protections of a U.S. citizen?

Is it possible we have done an injustice to this man by keeping him locked up all these years without trial? For that is what this trial implies -- that he may not be guilty.

And if we must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that KSM was complicit in mass murder, by what right do we send Predators and Special Forces to kill his al-Qaida comrades wherever we find them? For none of them has been granted a fair trial.

When the Justice Department sets up a task force to wage war on a crime organization like the Mafia or MS-13, no U.S. official has a right to shoot Mafia or gang members on sight. No one has a right to bomb their homes. No one has a right to regard the possible death of their wives and children in an attack as acceptable collateral damage.

Yet that is what we do to al-Qaida, to which KSM belongs.

We conduct those strikes in good conscience because we believe we are at war. But if we are at war, what is KSM doing in a U.S. court?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/11/17/are_we_at_war_or_not.html

I'm so confused.

[Asher]

I think you just wandered across the sanity line.

[Drake Tungsten]

Really? You think it's insane to believe there might be a logical disconnect between claiming some al-Qaeda members have a right to the same protections granted to U.S. citizens by the American judicial system while at the same time denying that other al-Qaeda members have a right to be protected from summary execution without trial?

[Asher]

That sentence is too long and subjectmatter is too boring for me to render definitive judgement.

[Garth Vader]

Maybe the problem isn't the trial, maybe it's that you are flying drones around killing whoever you feel like.

[Ben Kenobi]

Man, that's some lame-ass Vader.

[Asher]

Maybe the problem isn't the trial, maybe it's that you are flying drones around killing whoever you feel like.

UAVs. Putting pilots out of a job since 2006

Bye-bye F-22s.

[Drake Tungsten]

Maybe the problem isn't the trial, maybe it's that you are flying drones around killing whoever you feel like.

While your position is stupid, it's at least logically consistent.

[Ramo]

Really? You think it's insane to believe there might be a logical disconnect between claiming some al-Qaeda members have a right to the same protections granted to U.S. citizens by the American judicial system while at the same time denying that other al-Qaeda members have a right to be protected from summary execution.

If you haven't noticed, it is not the Admin's position that KSM has the "right" to a criminal trial. It's self-evident from the fact that every detainee is not getting such a trial. What every detainee has a right to, is the ability to challenge their detention in a competent tribunal.

And rights on a battlefield differ from rights in detention for every class of individual for obvious reasons. You realize that you can't summarily execute POWs, right?

[Boris Godunov]

[
He'll be locked back up in Gitmo; these will be nothing more than show trials.

If that happens, then neither you nor BK has anything to complain about.

It is funny to see you complain about goalpost moving when you're the one concentrating on the dumbest thing Ben said in the following post

What you fail to grasp is that the original point has little to do with that argument. The original point was Ben asserting that Obama's bringing the suspects to trial was somehow evidence that Obama was a Muslim terrorist lover who planned to set them "free." Nothing Ben has provided remotely substantiates his absurd claim, and I'm guessing even you agree it's a stupid claim. And that was the main point that was being argued, and Ben has already conceded a good part of it.

It is Ben who has failed to provide head-on debate, except of course when he's lying.

[Drake Tungsten]

it is not the Admin's position that KSM has the "right" to a criminal trial

When did I say I was talking about the Administration's views? It's pretty clear that they don't actually think al-Qaeda members have any rights and are giving KSM a trial in NYC for other reasons.

You realize that you can't summarily execute POWs, right?

You can summarily execute unlawful combatants.

[Boris Godunov]

Cardinal Martino retired, yes. He has retained some of his duties, but has been relieved specifically of development and peace.

He resigned. Full stop.

The Vatican chose to relieve him of his post.

They relieved him because he resigned, you dishonest hack. *You* are the one trying to spin it as a negative for Martino and somehow repudiation of Martino's words, when in fact there is zero evidence to support your assertion. The Vatican has never repudiated them, not at all.

It seems clear to me, he was relieved of development and peace quietly.

Yes, because you always feel free to make up whatever **** you want without substantiating it. See above Obama-is-a-secret-Muslim-terrorist-lover claims.

As I said, your smearing of the reputation of a Cardinal of your own church by lying about him being dismissed is simply appalling. I suggest you bring this up in the confessional.