Ace,
The generally accepted definition of "Show trial" is that the accused will be found guilty, regardless of whether he actually did it or not. Trying someone who was caught redhanded is not a show trial. It may feel like we are simply going through the motions, but it is not a show trial. "Show trial" has a very negative connotation to a civilized people because implies there is no rule of law in the land.
Since some people feel as if the Guantanomo detainees were either unjustly apprehended or that the evidence against them was plucked from the poisonous tree, the use of the term "show trial" only enhances their assertion that those wishing to have them convicted punished severely do not seek justice - but revenge. Once again, the rule of law being denied.
You and I are incapable of determining guilt for these people. We don't know the details of their alleged crimes or whether the rule of law was used in collecting the evidence against them. So, once again, assuming they are all guilty and should be sentenced as such to "send a message", only sends a message that the rule of law is not followed in
our land and that we are vengeful even in our deliberative trial environment. That's not what we stand for. I wish you could just say, "Yeah, that's a misuse of the term. Sorry for that."
rb -
Quote:
|
and the fact is that i'm as concerned that the bush people tried to throw the rules of post world war 1 civilization out the window because of their Outrage over the fact that it was the Mighty United of States The Greatest Empire in the History of Empires Full of the Most Virtuous People in the History of Virtue Who Live in the Most Amazing Way in the History of Amazingness that got attacked.
|
....this is hilarious! I'm still chuckling over it. Good stuff! I didn't know you knew where the shift key was!
(Yeah, yeah, I know it's part of your shtick.)