Would you be pissed to find your donations. . .

[Todd]

. . . for the September 11 tragedy would be going to defend those caught and on trail as terrorists?

 

[Todd]

comments please



http://www.nlpc.org/media/2001/110801.htm

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200111\NAT20011108e.html

 

[MidnightAngel]

That's just wrong !!

I'd like to say I can't believe it.....but I do. Unfortunately, the American justice system spends more time and effort preserving the rights of the accused than they do the victims.

 

[lilminx]

Well, now I know who I'm not giving any money to...

 

[BlondeBeauty]

At least the poll isn't biased...

 

[Todd]

At least the poll isn't biased...

I was hoping it wasn't

 

[Kymberley]

Well I am now going to have to seriously consider withdrawing the gift of 10% of each pay check that I give to the United Way.


I am already angry enough to find that the Red Cross has chosen to upgrade their office equipment with money that was given to help the victims. This is just insane.


Fuck!



*storms out of this thread*

 

[Todd]

bump for the day crew

 

[mig]

The poll

Like everyone else(so far) I voted 'yes'.

'No' not even considered.

Third option.The politest thing I can say 'BOLLOCKS'.

I'm so glad that none of my money is involved.

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

That's just wrong !!

I'd like to say I can't believe it.....but I do. Unfortunately, the American justice system spends more time and effort preserving the rights of the accused than they do the victims.

Excuse me?

Look, the way our system is supposed to work is that the rights of the accused are to be preserved if there is to be any justice. The founding fathers felt so strongly about this that they said they would rather that ten guilty parties go unpunished than one innocent be punished unjustly.

While I voted yes I would be pissed to "know my donations were used to defend caught terrorists", I also feel that "everyone deserves a fair trial, even leecherous scumbags of society who are guilty of the most heinous acts possible".

However, I would point out a few problems with those wordings; first, legally we do not know that the suspects are indeed terrorists - nor do we know they are guilty.

The principles this country was founded on, presumption of innocence until found guilty by a properly constituted court of law being one of them, are more important than finding and punishing those responsible for the acts of terrorism in NYC.

If we compromise these principles for the sake of expediency, the terrorists have, in one respect, gained a victory over our way of life. I for one will not let stand unchallenged the assertion that such principles are "unfortunate".

I would be pissed about the donations being used for the legal defense of the suspects because that is not what the funds were contributed for, but I am not pissed because Legal Aid helped these people. I would be just as pissed if the contributions went to some art museum.

 

[Myrrdin]

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200111\NAT20011108e.html

In its Oct. 3rd announcement, the September 11 Fund stated the grant($171,000) to the Legal Aid Society will be used to "provide immediate direct legal services to the thousands of lower-income individuals working in or near the World Trade Center (including cleaning staff, waiters, messengers, vendors, etc.) who were directly affected by the terrorist attack."

What's your problem with this, Todd?

Do you have a problem with he idea that a non-profit organisation gives legal advice to poor people who would otherwise have no other form of legal advice. Do you think that epeople who are being held on immigration charges should have no right to a defense? Or are you that confident of the FBI to be judge and prosecution and no defense.
No matter what the suspected crime, a person should still have the right to proper legal advice.
What happened to "innocent until proven guilty".
Or "Justice being seen to being done."

Do a search on what happened after the (UK) Birmingham pub bombings of the 1970's. Public and political pressure to get a quick conviction led to the the guilty verdicts being recently quashed because of corner cutting by the Police and prosecution.

 

[Todd]

On November 1, the Wall Street Journal reported in an article ("Detainees on INS Breaches Held in Solitary Status") that the Legal Aid Society was providing civil legal assistance to eight detainees in the Special Housing Unit of the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200111\NAT20011108d.html

 

[xzchief]

Todd, do you watch the Fox News Channel--specifically Hannity and Colmes or The O'Reilly Factor?

 

[TigerClaw]

.....

.....

 

[Guest]

Tigggggggggggggggggggger! <Pounce!>

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Re: EveryOne has the right to a good defense!!!

Of Course everyone in the US has the right to a good defense. How can you justify not allowing a good defense to a US citizen!!!
BUT, thier is one hitch. These people are NOT US citizens. The few that are, yes, they are entitled to the right. These people are WAR criminals. Let their own country, citizens and friends put up the money for a defense.

TNNJ, all people, citizens of the US, or not, have the same rights. The right to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty is one of those rights - as such, they are not criminals of any kind until that is proven.

What the thread is about, is the poor judgement the United Way exercised in giving a contribution to Legal Aid from monies meant for victim relief for the NYC/WTC attacks. Whether the monies were used for the defense of the alledged terrorists, or any other person, I fail to see how this could be construed as victim relief for those attacks.

 

[sigh]

While I voted yes I would be pissed to "know my donations were used to defend caught terrorists", I also feel that "everyone deserves a fair trial, even leecherous scumbags of society who are guilty of the most heinous acts possible".

i agree with STG...i voted yes, but wish i could have voted twice

and to say that these rights only apply to american citizens is completely missing the point...except for native americans, every single one of us is descended from non-american immigrants...i'm glad my grandparents were afforded the rights of the constitution the moment they stepped off the boat...it was the reason they came here, and the reason i'm an american today