PDA

View Full Version : 9/11 trials in NYC



Kaleigh007
Nov. 25, 2009, 01:37 PM
I, for one think this is going to yet another monumental mistake for the BO administration. Why should these scumbags be given the same rights as you and I??? Why should we allow them a stage to spew their anti-American bs??? How are they going to get around the fact that they were not read their miranda rights due to be captured ON THE BATTLEFIELD??? When you sit down to your Thanksgiving dinners, give a thought to all the innocent people that died that awful day and to our troops. They will not ever be able to sit down to any dinner again with their families because of these Muslim extremists.

JER
Nov. 25, 2009, 01:53 PM
I, for one think this is going to yet another monumental mistake for the BO administration. Why should these scumbags be given the same rights as you and I??? Why should we allow them a stage to spew their anti-American bs??? How are they going to get around the fact that they were not read their miranda rights due to be captured ON THE BATTLEFIELD??? When you sit down to your Thanksgiving dinners, give a thought to all the innocent people that died that awful day and to our troops. They will not ever be able to sit down to any dinner again with their families because of these Muslim extremists.

A federal court trial isn't a venue for 'spewing anti-American bs'. If you think it will be, you clearly aren't familiar with how trials proceed in federal courts. Perhaps learning more about the system and how it functions will help ease your fears.

And as a member of a family who will always be missing someone at holidays due to 9/11, I can tell you that we find attitudes like yours wrong-headed and destructive.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:01 PM
Well I'm in good company with my thinking. Rudy Guiliani, over 150 people who work for my company who lost 8 workers in the towers,senators, and many 9/11 victim's relatives. Just because your Messiah wants to do it does not mean it is right.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:02 PM
Just the fact that you had to put "Muslim" in front of the word "Extremists" shows ignorance.

If they were NOT Muslim's what were they????? I don't care if they had been Catholic or whatever. They are Muslim and they are extremists. Unbelievable.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:05 PM
Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey warned Tuesday that trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other terrorist suspects in Manhattan could become an ugly sideshow.

Mr. Mukasey presided over terrorist trials in New York City before becoming attorney general.

"It's simply a fact of life that a jihadist, particularly somebody like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, is looking for a big stage," Mr. Mukasey told The Washington Times' "America's Morning News" radio show. "New York City is the biggest stage in the world, and the attempt will be made to make this as big, spectacular and ugly as possible."

BayHorseUK
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:08 PM
A federal court trial isn't a venue for 'spewing anti-American bs'. If you think it will be, you clearly aren't familiar with how trials proceed in federal courts. Perhaps learning more about the system and how it functions will help ease your fears.

And as a member of a family who will always be missing someone at holidays due to 9/11, I can tell you that we find attitudes like yours wrong-headed and destructive.

Classy post JER. Thank you.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:17 PM
I guess a former AG who actually tried some terrorists in NYC does not have the same "expertise or knowledge" as JER:rolleyes:

JoZ
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:18 PM
The trial will not be televised. It is not a bully pulpit for ANYONE'S beliefs. I would hope that testimony of any sort that is irrelevant will be silenced by the judge, as is done routinely in the American judicial system.

Kaleigh, are you aware that the only people using the label "Messiah" for Obama are his right-wing critics? He is not my Messiah, he is my President. The sooner you understand the difference, the better off we will all be.

MyGiantPony
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:20 PM
Kaleigh, are you aware that the only people using the label "Messiah" for Obama are his right-wing critics? He is not my Messiah, he is my President. The sooner you understand the difference, the better off we will all be.

I lean toward the conservative side of things, and I HATE that kind of crap.

caffeinated
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:20 PM
I tend to think that we would give these people real trials because we are bigger than they are, and believe in justice rather than blind retribution.

I tend to think that part of being an American is believing that everyone has certain inalienable rights, and all that stuff - to free speech, to a fair trial. No matter who they are or what they did, regardless of how much I want to rip them limb from limb.

No, they are not our citizens and thus our constitution doesn't have to cover them. But from my perspective it's not enough to believe in those rights only sometimes.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:22 PM
NEW YORK -- The five men facing trial in the Sept. 11 attacks will plead not guilty so that they can air their criticisms of U.S. foreign policy, the lawyer for one of the defendants said Sunday.

Scott Fenstermaker, the lawyer for accused terrorist Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, said the men would not deny their role in the 2001 attacks but "would explain what happened and why they did it."

Yea, it is not going to be a circus sideshow...not at all:rolleyes:

Kaleigh007
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:26 PM
I call him your Messiah because his fans follow him blindly..like lemmings off a cliff...no matter if it is to the detriment of this country. He may be our President but I will not agree with him just because of that fact. This is not 1940's Germany.

JER
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:30 PM
Yea, it is not going to be a circus sideshow...not at all:rolleyes:

Kaleigh007, the Moussaoui trial wasn't a 'circus sideshow' -- despite the fact that Moussaoui was acknowledged by all to be a grandstander

You can read more about it here: First US trial of 9/11 case was full of surprises (http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/first-us-trial-of-9-11-case-was-full-of-surprises-1.1597323)

Spain and the UK have all successfully held trials of terror suspects. Why do you think the US is incapable of doing the same? Where is your faith in our justice system?

MyGiantPony
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:31 PM
NEW YORK -- The five men facing trial in the Sept. 11 attacks will plead not guilty so that they can air their criticisms of U.S. foreign policy, the lawyer for one of the defendants said Sunday.

Scott Fenstermaker, the lawyer for accused terrorist Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, said the men would not deny their role in the 2001 attacks but "would explain what happened and why they did it."

Yea, it is not going to be a circus sideshow...not at all:rolleyes:

Could you cite your source for these quotes? World Daily news, is it? :rolleyes:

MyGiantPony
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:33 PM
I call him your Messiah because his fans follow him blindly..like lemmings off a cliff...no matter if it is to the detriment of this country. He may be our President but I will not agree with him just because of that fact. This is not 1940's Germany.

Who said anyone has to blindly follow him?

I'm a Republican and hell, I didn't even blindly follow Reagan.

People who say things like "your messiah" do so because they are weak minded, not on the strength of any real position.

JoZ
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:34 PM
I call him your Messiah because his fans follow him blindly..like lemmings off a cliff...no matter if it is to the detriment of this country. He may be our President but I will not agree with him just because of that fact. This is not 1940's Germany.

Where do you GET this stuff? Fox News? I don't follow ANYONE blindly.

I watched CNN News the other night and there was a debate about the NYC 9/11 trials -- there were good points on both sides. I thought perhaps this thread would be a similar debate, but alas no, it is one person spouting nonsense. I think I'll check out before you have an opportunity to bring up Bill and Monica. I think that usually comes at about post #8-10.

cloudyandcallie
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:35 PM
Actually guys, the military courts granted defendants more rights many years earlier than did the state and federal criminal courts. The code of miltary justice gave them rights long before Escobedo and Miranda were decided. (This info provided by my Prof. Murray at UGA who later went on to run St Louis Univ Law School.)

Federal courts are much more restrictive on lawyers and defendants who use courts for "show" and demonstrations, the rules are much stricter than state courts. (I was a federal law clerk for a chief US district judge many years ago.)

But jurors can be, uh, shall we say people who have their own agendas and who use the court system to further their agendas? Also, if there was waterboarding and if there was torture, then evidence might be excluded. (My trial experiences were with thousands of jurors in GA felony court, but I got to observe and testify in some federal cases too.)

I would have preferred the military court route, but the President has chosen the NY court system, and hopefully there will be no terrorist attacks before, during, or after the trial in NYC. (I wish Appleby was still there!)

As for profiling, well: If the people who commit a certain class or type of crime are episcopalians or baptists or catholics or presbys, or are of a certain race or ethnicity, then it is not profiling. Some things are race or gender or religion based: white males tend to be almost all of the serial killers, and whites tend to be our meth dealers/users and african americans tend to be our crack dealer/users. (I worked with Marconi, the creator of the "airport profile search.")

I just hope the guilty are convicted. Oh wait, all the guys from Saudi Arabia are still running around free over there.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:37 PM
Do your own research like I did. How you can disagree with a prior AG who actually tried terrorists is beyond belief.

MyGiantPony
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:39 PM
Do your own research like I did. How you can disagree with a prior AG who actually tried terrorists is beyond belief.

Ummm...when you quote someone, it's appropriate to cite the source.

Unless, of course, a valid one doesn't exist.

ponymom64
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:39 PM
Well I'm in good company with my thinking. Rudy Guiliani, over 150 people who work for my company who lost 8 workers in the towers,senators, and many 9/11 victim's relatives. Just because your Messiah wants to do it does not mean it is right.

Rudy Guiliani seemed to think that it was OK to try the suspects in the first WTC bombing in NYC but now that he is looking for higher political office his tune has changed. Opportunist, much??

In fact, if you were to do a quick search, you would find quotes of him saying all sorts of things in favor of that trial (perhaps because he was AG at the time and a successful conviction would pad his credentials?) and that completely contradict what he saying now.

A 2 second search came up with this quote by Guiliani

He also added, “I’m not saying they shouldn’t have been prosecuted. But it’s the idea that it’s the be all and end all that’s the mistake.” Giuliani, however, also once praised the prosecution of the 1993 bombers, agreeing with Obama that terrorists should have to face the U.S. legal system:

– “‘It should show that our legal system is the most mature legal system in the history of the world,’ he [Giuliani] said, ‘that it works well, that that is the place to seek vindication if you feel your rights have been violated.’” [The New York Times, 3/5/94]

– “[M]any who were bruised by the traumatic event were certain that no verdict by a jury or punishment by a judge will exorcise the pain and terror that remain. … Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani declared that the verdict ‘demonstrates that New Yorkers won’t meet violence with violence, but with a far greater weapon — the law.’” [The New York Times, 3/5/94]

– “I think it shows you put terrorism on one side, you put our legal system on the other, and our legal system comes out ahead,” said Giuliani. [CBS Evening News, 3/5/94]

lcw579
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:41 PM
I tend to think that we would give these people real trials because we are bigger than they are, and believe in justice rather than blind retribution.

I tend to think that part of being an American is believing that everyone has certain inalienable rights, and all that stuff - to free speech, to a fair trial. No matter who they are or what they did, regardless of how much I want to rip them limb from limb.

No, they are not our citizens and thus our constitution doesn't have to cover them. But from my perspective it's not enough to believe in those rights only sometimes.

Thank you, Caffeinated, for a beautiful response. My first thought at the OP's question of "Why?" was "Because we are Americans, of course, and that is what we do. This is the country where all people are treated fairly whether they are citizens or not."

Kaleigh007
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:42 PM
I have a friend who is a Chief for the NYPD (PCT 1). They fully expect a terrorist attack. The question is will it be suicide bombings of hotels in Manhattan, subways, or both. The only good out of these trials is it has made a lot of NYPD happy because of all the OT it is going to generate.

grandprixjump
Nov. 25, 2009, 02:58 PM
They are talking about moving them to a prison, possibly in Illinois even. While on an Island there is limited ability to SNEEK in to try an assault to free them. If in the US, with the Mexico border so open they could sneak in an army and try to effect a jail break..

Hopefully in NYC they will only have 2-3 at a time, not really a big group to try to help escape....

Kaleigh007
Nov. 25, 2009, 03:02 PM
Our correspondent says the alleged terror mastermind started singing an Arabic prayer, translated into English as "God is all sufficient".

Despite a warning from the judge against representing himself, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed said he could not accept any attorney "who was part of the evil US constitution".

From the BBC News. We should all be very worried.

cloudyandcallie
Nov. 25, 2009, 03:02 PM
Everyone every where should sign up for jury duty and experience first hand the responsibility for the english system of trial by jury.

One of the prices we pay for having free speech and our other freedoms is to give criminals the right to a trial by jury.

My only problem with this choice was both the president and atty general stating on tv that all are guilty and should be punished.

MyGiantPony
Nov. 25, 2009, 03:09 PM
Everyone every where should sign up for jury duty and experience first hand the responsibility for the english system of trial by jury.


You can't sign up for jury duty - you are randomly selected. Used to be registered voters...now I think most states also use registered drivers.

Susan P
Nov. 25, 2009, 03:12 PM
Now you see, if you would have put Christian Extremists in front of a comment it would have been politically acceptable. :lol: Abortion clinics bombed by right wing Christian extremist is usually how headlines are written when one whack job does some heinous act that I as a Christian would never approve of and believe they should be treated like any criminal. However they are not usually affiliated with any organization or group, they are loners. The terrorists of 9-11 were affiliated with Muslim groups not just terrorist groups.






If they were NOT Muslim's what were they????? I don't care if they had been Catholic or whatever. They are Muslim and they are extremists. Unbelievable.

ponymom64
Nov. 25, 2009, 03:26 PM
You realize, of course, that the premise of a fair trial is one of the basic tenets of our society? In fact, one of our founding fathers chose to defend soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre because he believed in this very idea that was later incorporated into our Constitution. This was also when we were involved in a military action (I think it pre dates the actual Revolutionary War by a year or two), so the precidence was established over 200 years ago. Perhaps, you should go read your Constitution

http://americanhistory.about.com/cs/johnadams/f/adamsboston.htm

cloudyandcallie
Nov. 25, 2009, 03:31 PM
You can't sign up for jury duty - you are randomly selected. Used to be registered voters...now I think most states also use registered drivers.

wrong. There are jury commissioners who pull names, some from voter registration lists. But anyone can contact his/her commissioners and get on the jury list. You might not get called, but you will be on the list from which they randomly:lol: choose jurors.
I have met and had our jury commissioners testify when we had challenges to the array. Some states may have different systems, but all allow people to "sign up."

Call your local state court clerk's office, and the regional federal district court and say "I want to sign up for jury duty!" Too many people try to escape and avoid jury duty and then come on this board and espouse the right to a trial by jury.

JoZ
Nov. 25, 2009, 03:35 PM
Our correspondent says the alleged terror mastermind started singing an Arabic prayer, translated into English as "God is all sufficient".

Yes. Singing is the root of all evil. Hide the women and children.

What do you believe the net result will be of singing an Arabic prayer? Or of refusing an American lawyer?

I said I wasn't coming back... I said I wasn't coming back... argh.

cloudyandcallie
Nov. 25, 2009, 03:38 PM
Uh oh! My horse's great grandsire was named, gasp, Inschallah.:eek:
Do you know the translation for that? (He was French though, so maybe not a terrorist?:lol:) But wait, he was part Arab!

ArthurGuinness
Nov. 25, 2009, 03:45 PM
I tend to think that we would give these people real trials because we are bigger than they are, and believe in justice rather than blind retribution.

I tend to think that part of being an American is believing that everyone has certain inalienable rights, and all that stuff - to free speech, to a fair trial. No matter who they are or what they did, regardless of how much I want to rip them limb from limb.

No, they are not our citizens and thus our constitution doesn't have to cover them. But from my perspective it's not enough to believe in those rights only sometimes.

This is part of what makes America beautiful!

Kaleigh,
I feel sorry for you. Your ignorance will prevent you from really understanding what America is about.

Huntertwo
Nov. 25, 2009, 03:49 PM
People - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured in Pakistan, NOT the U.S. -
Therefore should not be tried as a civilian, he doesn't have any U.S. rights! Why nobama didn't insist on Military Tribunal again, shows his lack of judgment and inexperience.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tribunal

Was he read the Miranda Rights in Pakistan??

Nobama and the rest of the clowns in Washington are giving these terrorist exactly the notoriety they so crave.

What a farce!

ArthurGuinness
Nov. 25, 2009, 03:58 PM
People - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured in Pakistan, NOT the U.S. -
Therefore should not be tried as a civilian, he doesn't have any U.S. rights! Why nobama didn't insist on Military Tribunal again, shows his lack of judgment and inexperience.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tribunal

Was he read the Miranda Rights in Pakistan??

Nobama and the rest of the clowns in Washington are giving these terrorist exactly the notoriety they so crave.

What a farce!

The crime happened on US soil so YES he should be tried in the US!!!!!
I hope you know how ignorant you look with that nobama crap.

cloudyandcallie
Nov. 25, 2009, 04:00 PM
Arthur is right on venue. It's not where you are caught, it is where the crime was committed that determines venue, i.e., where you will be tried. (Otherwise, one of my double murderers got caught in California, if he could have been tried there instead of Atlanta, I'd have had to have a gasp, LA jury. Our criminals fled and had to be hauled back to Atlanta for trials, no "federal marshalls" but our deputies going out to pick them up everywhere.)

But war crimes can be tried in military court, e.g. the Nuremberg Trials.

Huntertwo
Nov. 25, 2009, 04:02 PM
Rudy Guiliani seemed to think that it was OK to try the suspects in the first WTC bombing in NYC but now that he is looking for higher political office his tune has changed. Opportunist, much??

]

The first WTC terrorist were extradited from Pakistan, they were not war criminals captured on the Battlefields... What part don't you people understand?:rolleyes:

Huntertwo
Nov. 25, 2009, 04:06 PM
The crime happened on US soil so YES he should be tried in the US!!!!!
I hope you know how ignorant you look with that nobama crap.

Sorry if the facts confuse you....

But lets try again - He was captured in Pakistan. He has NO rights to be tried in a U.S. Court, as U.S. civilian would. Is that simple enough?

RedMare01
Nov. 25, 2009, 05:37 PM
I tend to think that we would give these people real trials because we are bigger than they are, and believe in justice rather than blind retribution.

I tend to think that part of being an American is believing that everyone has certain inalienable rights, and all that stuff - to free speech, to a fair trial. No matter who they are or what they did, regardless of how much I want to rip them limb from limb.

No, they are not our citizens and thus our constitution doesn't have to cover them. But from my perspective it's not enough to believe in those rights only sometimes.

I agree, very well said. It's called democracy. :yes:

Caitlin

Huntertwo
Nov. 25, 2009, 06:37 PM
This is part of what makes America beautiful!

Kaleigh,
I feel sorry for you. Your ignorance will prevent you from really understanding what America is about.

Actually, she is one of the very few who make sense on this issue.

P.S.
Can anyone tell me just how an impartial juror will be found?
Or should we call in Rev. Wright and Ward Churchill?

cloudyandcallie
Nov. 25, 2009, 06:48 PM
It's federal court, they can strike a jury elsewhere and bring it to NYC.

The defendants can move for a change of venue also.

I just hope that no one does any bombing before, during or after the trial. NYC has had enough.

Rudy needs to worry about his wives and not politics.

lcw579
Nov. 25, 2009, 07:10 PM
P.S.
Can anyone tell me just how an impartial juror will be found?
Or should we call in Rev. Wright and Ward Churchill?


I could easily remain impartial on a jury such as this. I understand our judicial system, I respect the jury system and I would be perfectly willing to listen to both sides of the argument and then make an unemotional decision based on the facts as they were presented. The right to a jury of your peers is just a small part of what makes this a great country to live in. Since I happen to look on all mankind as my peers, despite what others label them, I imagine I would be welcomed on this jury. I would assume that they will be looking for openminded people who don't make up their minds without having the facts, all the facts, presented to them.

Linny
Nov. 25, 2009, 07:49 PM
If you think of KSM and his associates as criminals then the Federal Court (civial system) makes sense.
If you think, as I do they the act undertaken on 9/11 were not a "crime" but a "war crime" or "act of war" then the Military Court is the place for the trial. In fact KSM had already entered a plea of guilty in the Military Court and was awaiting his execution. He was effectively granted not only a stay of execution but the opportunity to gain all the rights of a US citizen for the purposes of this trial. He (and his attorneys) will have access to classified informantion (which will have to be de-classified for this purpose) about our CIA and it's intelligence gather operations worldwide.
The entire reason for establishing the Gitmo detention center was to NOT bring terrorists into the US as once they were here and being held, their attorneys (many of whom are being paid for by your taxes and mine) would start clammring for a civilian trial.
Our laws allow that a non citizen accused of a crime has access to the same justice as a US citizen and I appreciate that. The point is that these are not only not citizens, they are people who are at war with the US.
Miliary tribunals work just fine. The Nuremberg Trials took place in a military court.

ArthurGuinness
Nov. 25, 2009, 08:18 PM
Sorry if the facts confuse you....

But lets try again - He was captured in Pakistan. He has NO rights to be tried in a U.S. Court, as U.S. civilian would. Is that simple enough?

Not according to the law. I am sorry it confuses you.

Chall
Nov. 25, 2009, 08:48 PM
I work 4 blocks from the federal court house and was at work 3 blocks from WTC when it was hit and was there all day, until my two hour walk to Grand Central Station.
My first thought on this was "what's the worst that can happen? Oh yeah, Lynne Stewart, who coincidentally just had a court house meeting on why she has done no jail time though she was convicted.
Second: the president made a statement that prejudged the situation (paraphrased) " American's will feel differently when they are tried, convicted and executed". That has got to be prejudicial and useful to the defendants.
Lastly, the ideal of trying them by our justice is a wonderful ideal. But then someone in the administration (attorney general Holder?) said that even if they are not convicted they will be held.
To me, if you say you are doing it for the ideal of nobility you have do the justice in full. If we want to put them on trial because that is our law and it is an ideal then you have to follow through and say if they are not convicted they must go free. Either you believe in the ideal or not. Please be consistent.
The circus will come with the media coverage - trials are a boon to reporters, the hours are 9-5, you stay in one place, little research is required. Ugh. The subways will be insanely crowded with people coming to the courthouse and security. The police and security will get extra $ for overtime, so I guess it's good for someone. I given up on personal safety, I'm pretty much resigned to dieing in a terrorist attack, I just don't want to be underground in a subway when it happens.
But then again, what do I know. Maybe it will be perfect and I am wrong.

Nottingham
Nov. 25, 2009, 09:04 PM
I tend to think that we would give these people real trials because we are bigger than they are, and believe in justice rather than blind retribution.

This.

Susan P
Nov. 25, 2009, 09:05 PM
Perhaps if the terrorists hit La La land instead of NYC you would be "singing" a different tune especially if you had something personal at stake. My family was living in Long Island and I was talking to my daughter in law on the phone when the second plane hit. She was home with my grandson, he was just a baby, my son was at work and I was on the other side of this nightmare. It wasn't long after that when a plane crashed just a few miles from their house. I'm glad they moved back to PA, but I say no mercy to the killers, NONE, no more than they showed Americans on that fateful morning or to Daniel Pearl and the others they beheaded. We are much too kind, too generous and that's why we were attacked, we were seen as weak.



Yes. Singing is the root of all evil. Hide the women and children.

What do you believe the net result will be of singing an Arabic prayer? Or of refusing an American lawyer?

I said I wasn't coming back... I said I wasn't coming back... argh.

ponymom64
Nov. 25, 2009, 09:16 PM
Perhaps if the terrorists hit La La land instead of NYC you would be "singing" a different tune especially if you had something personal at stake. My family was living in Long Island and I was talking to my daughter in law on the phone when the second plane hit. She was home with my grandson, he was just a baby, my son was at work and I was on the other side of this nightmare. It wasn't long after that when a plane crashed just a few miles from their house. I'm glad they moved back to PA, but I say no mercy to the killers, NONE, no more than they showed Americans on that fateful morning or to Daniel Pearl and the others they beheaded. We are much too kind, too generous and that's why we were attacked, we were seen as weak.

I lost friends on that day and I still believe that perpetrators deserve a fair trial.

Up until 9/11, Oklahoma City was the biggest terrorist attack in the US and Timothy McVei received a jury trial, and how is this case any different? His attack was just as much an attack on this country and let's not forget - he killed innocent children

Susan P
Nov. 25, 2009, 09:20 PM
My faith in the criminal justice system died when OJ got acquitted.

Now I hear that 3 of our Navy Seals are accused of hurting one of the poor "terrorists" oh, that's right, we don't call them terrorists anymore, LOL. Those guys should have just blown him away, he didn't deserve to live let alone stand trial, bleeding hearts for terrorists are unAmerican! I don't care what you think!!!




Kaleigh007, the Moussaoui trial wasn't a 'circus sideshow' -- despite the fact that Moussaoui was acknowledged by all to be a grandstander

You can read more about it here: First US trial of 9/11 case was full of surprises (http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/first-us-trial-of-9-11-case-was-full-of-surprises-1.1597323)

Spain and the UK have all successfully held trials of terror suspects. Why do you think the US is incapable of doing the same? Where is your faith in our justice system?

Susan P
Nov. 25, 2009, 09:23 PM
AND NOW HE'S DEAD! As it should be. He got a trial because he was an American citizen and not a foreign terrorist, and not known to be part of a group of foreign terrorists and yes, being foreign does matter.

OH, OH, dare I say foreigner, LOL, like my husband, my Mother, HA! Now call me prejudice.




I lost friends on that day and I still believe that perpetrators deserve a fair trial.

Up until 9/11, Oklahoma City was the biggest terrorist attack in the US and Timothy McVei received a jury trial, and how is this case any different? His attack was just as much an attack on this country and let's not forget - he killed innocent children

dutchmike
Nov. 25, 2009, 09:25 PM
Guilty or innocent who cares. Obama will grant them a presidential pardon anyway:cool:

Kaleigh007
Nov. 25, 2009, 09:32 PM
The one thing that I find the most frightening? That people like Ponymom and Caffeinated vote. It will be because of mindsets like theirs(weak) that we will be continously attacked. The Muslim extremists hate America and ALL who live here. So join hands girls and sing the COTH mantra "Koombya" :rolleyes::dead:

Lin
Nov. 25, 2009, 09:37 PM
It's strange - countries that are socialist give their leaders much less power. Therefore, socialism leads to more individual freedom. Which is good - go socialism.

Susan P
Nov. 25, 2009, 09:44 PM
America is already socialist, we've been falling down that hole for a few generations.



It's strange - countries that are socialist give their leaders much less power. Therefore, socialism leads to more individual freedom. Which is good - go socialism.

Lin
Nov. 25, 2009, 09:55 PM
you haven't - you've fallen down the paranoid hole. Distrust rules the US and sadly it is affecting Canada too.

Susan P
Nov. 25, 2009, 10:02 PM
HUNNY, I'm not paranoid, I'm a realist with my eyes open, try it.



you haven't - you've fallen down the paranoid hole. Distrust rules the US and sadly it is affecting Canada too.

Green Acres
Nov. 25, 2009, 10:09 PM
If you think of KSM and his associates as criminals then the Federal Court (civial system) makes sense.
If you think, as I do they the act undertaken on 9/11 were not a "crime" but a "war crime" or "act of war" then the Military Court is the place for the trial. In fact KSM had already entered a plea of guilty in the Military Court and was awaiting his execution. He was effectively granted not only a stay of execution but the opportunity to gain all the rights of a US citizen for the purposes of this trial. He (and his attorneys) will have access to classified informantion (which will have to be de-classified for this purpose) about our CIA and it's intelligence gather operations worldwide.
The entire reason for establishing the Gitmo detention center was to NOT bring terrorists into the US as once they were here and being held, their attorneys (many of whom are being paid for by your taxes and mine) would start clammring for a civilian trial.
Our laws allow that a non citizen accused of a crime has access to the same justice as a US citizen and I appreciate that. The point is that these are not only not citizens, they are people who are at war with the US.
Miliary tribunals work just fine. The Nuremberg Trials took place in a military court.

Thank you Linny!!!

These terrorists performed an act of war so the trial should be in a military tribunal not in a U.S. Court. Also, they are not citizens of the U.S., so they shouldn't be treated as you and I.

Honestly, I am quite shocked there is a debate about this here...:confused:

ArthurGuinness
Nov. 25, 2009, 10:11 PM
The one thing that I find the most frightening? That people like Ponymom and Caffeinated vote. It will be because of mindsets like theirs(weak) that we will be continously attacked. The Muslim extremists hate America and ALL who live here. So join hands girls and sing the COTH mantra "Koombya" :rolleyes::dead:

Thank goodness the majority of voters are like Ponymom and Caffeinated!!
If the majority thought like you there would be no order! A world of pure chaos. If Kaleigh thinks their guilty "off with their heads!". You have more incommon with some of the extremest groups than you think!

Lin
Nov. 25, 2009, 10:18 PM
'HUNNY, I'm not paranoid, I'm a realist with my eyes open, try it.'

Try being socialist - it's a happy place that understands the interconnectedness of all things

SpecialEffects
Nov. 25, 2009, 10:22 PM
Just curious.... all the civilians and military personnel that were beheaded by the misunderstood muslim church groups - what type of trial were they granted first? I'm just wondering what the protocol was in those cases so that the US can be completely fair. :rolleyes:

Linny.... excellent!

Ajierene
Nov. 25, 2009, 10:41 PM
My opinion is that if the United States is going to tout Democracy as the 'better way', then they have to practice what they preach. The country must lead by example.

This is why instead of taking Saddam Hussein to the US, killing him or anything else, Bush turned him over for trial.

Similarly, the people who planned out and executed the bombing of the World Trade Center, Pentagon and failed attempt that sent a plane crashing into a field in Pennsylvania should be tried in the country in which they committed those crimes, in a manner which is customary in that country.

These crimes do not necessarily follow the definition of war crime and thus trying them in a civilian court is not out of line.

Huntertwo
Nov. 26, 2009, 08:24 AM
Guilty or innocent who cares. Obama will grant them a presidential pardon anyway:cool:

Makes sense - After all, he freed the Terrorists who bombed the U.S. Cole which killed countless Navy men...:no:

Huntertwo
Nov. 26, 2009, 08:26 AM
I lost friends on that day and I still believe that perpetrators deserve a fair trial.

Up until 9/11, Oklahoma City was the biggest terrorist attack in the US and Timothy McVei received a jury trial, and how is this case any different? His attack was just as much an attack on this country and let's not forget - he killed innocent children

Because Timothy McVeigh was a U.S. citizen captured on U.S. soil.

Huntertwo
Nov. 26, 2009, 08:32 AM
Thank you Linny!!!

These terrorists performed an act of war so the trial should be in a military tribunal not in a U.S. Court. Also, they are not citizens of the U.S., so they shouldn't be treated as you and I.

Honestly, I am quite shocked there is a debate about this here...:confused:

You're right on GA. It is quite scary that many people on here believe the opposite. Either it is genuine lack of knowledge or something more frightening....

BayHorseUK
Nov. 26, 2009, 09:14 AM
This issue is so much more complex than many posts are making out. Suffice to say there is a long history of renogotiating the legal status of 9/11 suspects and Gitmo detainees which has complicated the case, not to mention the international treaty obligations of the United States. Unlike what the news networks would have you believe, it's a complex legal matter that goes far beyond emotional reactions to September 11, 2001, or political wranglings of Left vs. Right.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 26, 2009, 10:21 AM
Thank goodness the majority of voters are like Ponymom and Caffeinated!!
If the majority thought like you there would be no order! A world of pure chaos. If Kaleigh thinks their guilty "off with their heads!". You have more incommon with some of the extremest groups than you think!

Sorry Arthur but my thinking is the majority...all polls support that fact...especially in the opinion that the job BO is doing overall is one huge mess. Check the polls about the scumbags being tried in NYC and get back to us:yes:

dutchmike
Nov. 26, 2009, 10:30 AM
Absolutely Arthur you are so right. I tell you what lets just set them free so that they can try again. The only way to to fight terrorism is to terrorize the terrorist. Future terrorist need to know there is a heavy price to pay if they get caught. Since the socalled torture (which it isn't compared to what they people do themselfs) Violence has gone up. The numbers don't lie but I guess some people still think that they can capture their hearts by sitting by the fire and singing Kumbaya:cry:

Kaleigh007
Nov. 26, 2009, 10:35 AM
That would be the majority of bleeding heart Coth fanatics Dutchmike. Kumbya is their mantra!

dutchmike
Nov. 26, 2009, 10:37 AM
That would be the majority of bleeding heart Coth fanatics Dutchmike. Kumbya is their mantra!

Maybe they should go to Afghanistan and spread the love and see what happens;)

Kaleigh007
Nov. 26, 2009, 10:48 AM
Would it sound like KABOOM???? or maybe BLAM???? They are sooooooooooo ignorant it is scary.

ArthurGuinness
Nov. 26, 2009, 10:53 AM
Sorry Arthur but my thinking is the majority...all polls support that fact...especially in the opinion that the job BO is doing overall is one huge mess. Check the polls about the scumbags being tried in NYC and get back to us:yes:

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/poll-new-york-city-split-on-terrorism-trials-narrow-plurality-says-its-a-good-idea.php

I did and it is pretty 50/50 on the trial in NYC. I live 45 min from the GWB and I am comfortable with this venue.

I wasn't going to go there but you encouraged it. Obama in my opinion is doing a fabulous job trying to mend the mess he inherited. You cant fix 8 years of bad leadership in one year of positive leadership.
All presidents numbers fluctuate but Obama's numbers are not nearly as low as Bush.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 26, 2009, 10:58 AM
Yea, ok Arthur. Now crawl back into the cave you so obviously live in. Va. and NJ are now Repub....they voted for BO...or are you of the same mindset as Piglosi and they didn't matter??? I can't wait for 2010...you need to go check your polls again and post them here showing that BO's numbers are so wonderful and that the majority of ppl dont want the trials in NYC.

Huntertwo
Nov. 26, 2009, 11:04 AM
Obama in my opinion is doing a fabulous job trying to mend the mess he inherited.
.

Artie, Artie, is that all you and the other lefties got? ;)

"The mess he inherited" mantra is getting real old.

obama has been in office for 11 months and has been a dismal failure.
Time to own up, put on the big boy pants and stop blaming President Bush.

After all, the Messiah had all the answers during the campaign. Why isn't he applying those answers now?

Oh yeah, because it was smoke blowing out of his arse and the sheeple couldn't inhale it fast enough.;)

Kaleigh007
Nov. 26, 2009, 11:07 AM
:lol::lol::lol::lol: ^ I like Obamabots also.
5

lcw579
Nov. 26, 2009, 11:15 AM
The one thing that I find the most frightening? That people like Ponymom and Caffeinated vote. It will be because of mindsets like theirs(weak) that we will be continously attacked. The Muslim extremists hate America and ALL who live here. So join hands girls and sing the COTH mantra "Koombya" :rolleyes::dead:

Actually, it is people like you and Huntertwo and the others that resort to name calling rather than resonable discourse who are frightening and make me fear for the future of this country.

As for Obama, and his leadership, he has been in office for 11 months, that is not very long and Bush had 8 years to work his magic and do some major damage to our status on the world stage. To undo that can not occur magically with the change in leadership, it takes time and negotiation. All of you are just waiting for him to fail and refusing to give him a chance or even acknowledge that perhaps he may be doing some things right.

Just go back to listening to Rush and Beck .......

Huntertwo
Nov. 26, 2009, 11:19 AM
Actually, it is people like you and Huntertwo and the others that resort to name calling rather than resonable discourse who are frightening and make me fear for the future of this country.

As for Obama, and his leadership, he has been in office for 11 months, that is not very long and Bush had 8 years to work his magic and do some major damage to our status on the world stage. To undo that can not occur magically with the change in leadership, it takes time and negotiation. All of you are just waiting for him to fail and refusing to give him a chance or even acknowledge that perhaps he may be doing some things right.

Just go back to listening to Rush and Beck .......

EXCUSE ME? Name calling?

And BTW, I'm not waiting for him to fail. He already has done so on his own.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/24/obama-shatters-spending-record-year-presidents/

Kaleigh007
Nov. 26, 2009, 11:21 AM
Personally I don't like Beck but you have to admit he outed quite a few of BO's communist,marxist associates didn't he?? I believe he also had a big hand in bringing down BO's fav organization Acorn right??? I hope he keeps digging up the dirt on BO cause he sure does reek!

lcw579
Nov. 26, 2009, 11:22 AM
Artie, Artie, is that all you and the other lefties got? ;)

"The mess he inherited" mantra is getting real old.

obama has been in office for 11 months and has been a dismal failure.
Time to own up, put on the big boy pants and stop blaming President Bush.

After all, the Messiah had all the answers during the campaign. Why isn't he applying those answers now?

Oh yeah, because it was smoke blowing out of his arse and the sheeple couldn't inhale it fast enough.;)

Yeah, name calling - from one post....

Huntertwo
Nov. 26, 2009, 11:25 AM
Yeah, name calling - from one post....

LOL....that's name calling?

I've read worse on a normal COTH day.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 26, 2009, 11:26 AM
LCW are you REALLY that thin skinned??? I guess we should be offended by the words ignorant,stupid,blind??? Get over it.

lcw579
Nov. 26, 2009, 12:09 PM
No I'm not thin skinned, Kaliegh, and you are doing most of the name calling (Obamabots and the like). It seems to be something you resort to when people disagree with you or present facts that disprove your points.

I just don't think slurs or name calling of any sort are necessary when you are trying to carry on intelligent discourse. But perhaps that isn't what you are interested in?

JER
Nov. 26, 2009, 12:22 PM
Yea, ok Arthur. Now crawl back into the cave you so obviously live in. Va. and NJ are now Repub....they voted for BO...or are you of the same mindset as Piglosi and they didn't matter??? I can't wait for 2010...you need to go check your polls again and post them here showing that BO's numbers are so wonderful and that the majority of ppl dont want the trials in NYC.

This sort of name-calling is unnecessary and very ugly in spirit.

If you want to have a discussion on a political theme, statements like 'now crawl back into the cave you so obviously live in' have no place in the proceedings.

Kaleigh007, it's Thanksgiving -- a day about sharing, cooperation and gratitude. Perhaps you could raise your game just a little for the occasion.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 26, 2009, 01:43 PM
John G. is 63 years old and owns a small business. He's a
life-long Republican and sees his dream of retiring next
year has all but evaporated. With the stock market crashing
and new taxes coming his way, John assumes now that he will
work to his dying day.

John has a granddaughter. Ashley is a recent college grad.
She drives a flashy hybrid car, wears all the latest
fashions, and loves to go out to nightclubs and restaurants.
Ashley campaigned hard for Barack Obama. After the election
she made sure her grandfather (and all other Republican
family members) received a big I told-you-so earful on how
the world is going to be a much better place now that her
party is taking over.

Having lost both roommates, Ashley recently ran short of cash and
cannot pay the rent (again) on her 3 bedroom townhouse. Like
she has done many times in the past, she e-mailed her
grandfather asking for some financial help.

Here is his reply:

Sweetheart,

I received your request for assistance.

Ashley, you know I love you dearly and I 'm sympathetic
to your financial plight. Unfortunately, times have changed.
With the election of President Obama, your grandmother and I
have had to set forth a bold new economic plan of our
own..."The Ashley Economic Empowerment Plan." Let
me explain.
Your grandmother and I are life-long, wage-earning tax
payers. We have lived a comfortable life, as you know, but
we have never had the fancier things like European
vacations, luxury cars, etc. We have worked hard and were
looking forward to retiring soon. But the plan has changed.
Your president is raising our personal and business taxes
significantly. He says it is so he can give our hard earned
money to other people. Do you know what this means, Ashley?
It means less for us, and we must cut back on many business
and personal expenses.
You know the wonderful receptionist who worked in my office
for more than 23 years? The one who always gave you candy
when you came over to visit? I had to let her go last week.
I can't afford to pay her salary and all of the
government mandated taxes that go with having employees.
Your grandmother will now work 4 days a week to answer
phones, take orders and handle the books. We will be closed
on Fridays and will lose even more income to the Wal-Mart.

I'm also very sorry to report that your cousin Frank
will no longer be working summers in the warehouse. I called
him at school this morning. He already knows about it and
he's upset because he will have to give up skydiving and
his yearly trip to Greenland to
survey the polar bears.

That's just the business side of things. Some personal
economic effects of Obama's new taxation policies
include none other than you. You know very well that over
the years your grandmother and I have given you thousands of
dollars in cash, tuition assistance, food, housing,
clothing, gifts, etc., etc. But by your vote, you have
chosen to help others -- not at your expense -- but at our
expense.

If you need money now sweetheart, I recommend you call
202-456-1111. That is the direct phone number for the White
House. You yourself told me how foolish it is to vote
Republican. You said Mr. Obama is going to be the
People's President, and is going to help every American
live a better life. Based on everything you've told me,
along with all the promises we heard during the campaign,
I'm sure Mr. Obama will be happy to transfer some
stimulus money into your bank account. Have him call me for
the account number which I memorized years ago.

Perhaps you can now understand what I've been saying
all my life: those who vote for a president should consider
the impact on the nation as a whole, and not be just
concerned with what they can get for themselves. What Obama
supporters don't seem to realize is all of the money he
is redistributing to illegal aliens and non-taxpaying
Americans (the so-called "less fortunate") comes
from tax-paying families.

Remember how you told me, "Only the richest of the
rich will be affected"? Well guess what, honey?
Because we own a business, your grandmother and I are now
considered to be the richest of the rich. On paper, it might
look that way, but in the real world, we are far from it.

As you said while campaigning for Obama, some people will
have to carry more of the burden so all of America can
prosper You understand what that means, right? It means that
raising taxes on productive people results in them having
less money; less money for everything, including
granddaughters.

I'm sorry, Ashley, but the well has run dry. The free
lunches are over. I have no money to give you now. So,
congratulations on your choice for "change." For
future reference, I encourage you to try and add up the
total value of the gifts and cash you have received from us,
just since you went off to college, and compare it to what
you expect to get from Mr. Obama over the next 4 (or 8)
years. I have not kept track of it, Ashley. It has all truly
been the gift of our hearts.

Remember, we love you dearly....but from now on you'll
need to call the number mentioned above. Your
"savior" has the money we would have given to you.
Just try and get it from him.

Good luck, sweetheart.

Love,
Grandpa

cloudyandcallie
Nov. 26, 2009, 01:56 PM
This issue is so much more complex than many posts are making out. Suffice to say there is a long history of renogotiating the legal status of 9/11 suspects and Gitmo detainees which has complicated the case, not to mention the international treaty obligations of the United States. Unlike what the news networks would have you believe, it's a complex legal matter that goes far beyond emotional reactions to September 11, 2001, or political wranglings of Left vs. Right.

Yes but Americans just like to argue and fight. You are right, uh, left, both sides are too doctrinaire/stubborn/for of it!. The left says you must always be liberal, and the right says you must always be conservative. God forbid you should have some leftist leanings and some rightist beliefs on different subjects.

For some reason, Obama has chosen to have the trials in federal court not in military court. Hopefully he has not made the same error that the DA in LA, worried about riots after Rodney King, made when he chose to have O.J.'s trial in LA instead of in the venue where the murderers were committed. The DA didn't have any riots, but he didn't get a conviction either.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 26, 2009, 02:03 PM
"Hopefully he has not made the same error that the DA in LA, worried about riots after Rodney King, made when he chose to have O.J.'s trial in LA instead of in the venue where the murderers were committed. The DA didn't have any riots, but he didn't get a conviction either"

THUD! That was me passing out after realizing that I agree with something Cloudy said!.

cloudyandcallie
Nov. 26, 2009, 02:12 PM
:lol::lol:Cloudy is a German WB he is not an American, who like his Southern owner is very conservative on some issues, but very radical on others. Like if the dudes are guilty, they should be fried. But if the dudes aren't guilty, then what happens? The burden of proof is on the government, and pronouncements that they are guilty had better be backed up by proof in a court of law.
(having worked in Atlanta during the Rodney King riots, yes we had them there, and I had to escort people to their cars during the rioting, I can say that riots are bad, but justice is necessary and fair trials are important. Personally, I (owner of Cloudy and Callie) would have let the military court handle it, just in case the city of NY gets attacked during or after the trial.)

caffeinated
Nov. 27, 2009, 10:59 AM
The one thing that I find the most frightening? That people like Ponymom and Caffeinated vote. It will be because of mindsets like theirs(weak) that we will be continously attacked.

Wow.

I keep typing out responses to this but none of them seem adequate.

eta - what's sad to me is that ANY real AMERICAN would ever think another American shouldn't have the right to vote. I disagree with you, vehemently, but I would never say that to you. Variety of opinion, and the right to express those opinions through speech, the media, and voting, is what makes this country special.

Iron Horse Farm
Nov. 27, 2009, 11:44 AM
You realize, of course, that the premise of a fair trial is one of the basic tenets of our society? In fact, one of our founding fathers chose to defend soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre because he believed in this very idea that was later incorporated into our Constitution. This was also when we were involved in a military action (I think it pre dates the actual Revolutionary War by a year or two), so the precidence was established over 200 years ago. Perhaps, you should go read your Constitution

http://americanhistory.about.com/cs/johnadams/f/adamsboston.htm

What part of Military Tribunal isn't "fair"??? So if they get a military trial, they are being denied rights? If they were captured in a military action, especially outside of the US, they should get a military trial. Period. I'm really, really frightened by your thinking that if we use a military tribunal that these people won't get a fair trial.

Jumphigh83
Nov. 27, 2009, 01:23 PM
After reading some of these jaw dropping posts, I can only hope that the words of someone much wiser than myself can put these unbelievably naive and dilettante postings in a better perspective.
God Help us all.


Truth...........from a man the media has never been able to throw dirt on..amazing!!
He has certainly hit the "world" on the head!!


'Heavenly Father, we come before you today to ask your forgiveness and to seek your direction and guidance. We know Your Word says, 'Woe to those who call evil good,' but that is exactly what we have done. We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and reversed our values. We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery. We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare.. We have killed our unborn and called it choice. We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable. We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self esteem. We have abused power and called it politics... We have coveted our neighbor's possessions and called it ambition.. We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression. We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment. Search us, Oh God, and know our hearts today; cleanse us from every sin and Set us free. Amen!'

Commentator Paul Harvey aired this prayer on his radio program, 'The Rest of the Story,' and received a larger response to this program than any other he has ever aired. With the Lord's help, may this prayer sweep over our nation and wholeheartedly become our desire so that we again can be called 'One nation under God"

To avoid offending the PC crowd feel free to insert "Allah" where the word "God" or "Heavenly Father" appear.

Kaleigh007
Nov. 27, 2009, 01:28 PM
I saw a cpl bumper stickers the other day that cracked me up..."save a seal, club a liberal NOW", AND my fav "Annoy a Liberal, take personal responsability"...how true!

Huntertwo
Nov. 27, 2009, 02:20 PM
I saw a cpl bumper stickers the other day that cracked me up..."save a seal, club a liberal NOW", AND my fav "Annoy a Liberal, take personal responsability"...how true!

Annoy a liberal - Help yourself :)

Confuse a liberal - Use logic and facts

How will Democrats stand up to Terrorists when they can't even face Fox news?

Actually, no one owes you crap.

Don't spread my wealth, spread my work ethic.

:winkgrin::D