This stupid Obama/Holder trial against "alleged" terrorists will hurt downtown

Embarrassing. I'd give him a pass , but when you consider the Gates incident, refusal to go to Berlin for 20th anniversary of Berlin Wall, the CIA investigations a pattern shows.

You give him a pass?

You are an asshole.

Any New Yorker who supports this should have his own trial in Hell.

would have... your so angry you left your brain and reading glasses in the car.

so...really pissed..what would you do? public lynching?

Swift military tribunal.

why not straight to the cigarette, blind fold and firing squad? or would you skip the smoke?

You know what, the two of you are assholes. You two are just an example of how fucked up this whole thing is.

What the heck do you want? To invite them over for Thanksgiving to thank them for creating a nice intellectual debate over civil liberties for terrorists?

http://media.southparkstudios.com/media/images/1112/1112_angry_cartman.jpg

No, military court. plain and simple

Yeah you are a real gem. I'm afraid that the two of you are both the type of asses that both the defense and the prosecution would want on the jury.

so, your fear of a trial is that they will be judged innocent? you must be kidding. that won't happen. the part you're missing is the excrutiating problem caused by the bush administration's approach to this issue in the beginning.

What the heck does throwing salt in NYers' wounds have to do with the Bush administration?

What does Bush have to do with this new policy to offer American liberties to people who have worked to destroy America?

You don't like Bush, fine. Good for you. I was pleased for our country a year ago when Obama was elected. This now is shit. And it has nothing to do with Bush. This is Obama and Holder. This is disgusting. Your support is disgusting too.

Are you really so anti-Bush that you are pro-terrorist?

so, having a trial is pro-terrorist? are you really accusing the president of the united states of being pro terrorist? or just me?

Yes, yes.

Terrorists do not deserve the privileges of our American Constitution.

New York does not deserve to be punished with this trial on our ground.

so...anyone who is stupid enough to disagree with you is a terrorist? where have i heard that before?

Where have I minced words?

Obama and Holder have extended these war crimimals - who masterminded terrorist attacks against US citizens and beheaded a man because he was jewish, among many other acts - the same constitutional rights that you and I, as US citizens, have. Only, they are ***NOT*** U.S. citizens. They are war criminals and they should be charged by military tribunal. There are many many precedents for this - the nazis, Tojo, etc.

Maybe Obama feels the World Trade Center "acted stupidly" on Sept. 11, 2001...

I'm with you Dwayne.

so...why do you think they did it?

What? What is the point of your posting?

i'm asking you a question: why do you think obama made this decision? surely, he realized that many people would feel as you do. does it occur to you that there are many ramifications to this issue beyond the obvious? calling people with whom you disagree a terrorist will never get us anywhere but...it is (or was) a free country.

I didn't call you a terrorist. But I did call you pro-terrorist based on your own words expressed above.

And you've said nothing since I said that to contradict it.

What are these "other ramifications" that you feel justify doing this to New York? What are the "other ramifications" that you allude to but offer no specifics? What is your position other than this is the right thing: terrorists who destroy our way of life deserve American civil liberties? and New York be dammed?

Instead of asking me why I think Obama made this decision, why don't you tell us why Obama made this decision that you think is the right one? I can offer no explanation - it is the wrong decision

Queries for attorneys:

How will US gov handle lack of Miranda warnings? These defendants were not treated as criminal defendants from the start: Ds not given Miranda. Will enough evidence be suppressed (due to due process/bill of rights violations) to the point where the case is dismissed? How about denial of speedy trial?

Mr. Holder, along with Jaime Gorelick, et al, gave us the 'Chinese Wall' bet. FBI & CIA & warrant requirements, which, in turn, created the pre-9-11 aversion of communication bet those 2 agencies re: nascent terrorism on US soil.

It was an act of war, the trial should be treated as such.

i think he made this decision to:

1. begin the long delayed process of closing guantanomo
2. because he believes that they will be found guilty
3. because it is crucial that the United States return to being a nation of laws

What's your answer to dwell, columbicounty? What do you think Obama's answer is? Or Holders?

Do you want them to go free because they didn't get Mirandized? Should they have been offered that protection as well?

Please explain your defense.

i think he made this decision to:

1. begin the long delayed process of closing guantanomo - a civilian trial does nothing to speed this over a military tribunal
2. because he believes that they will be found guilty - and why do they deserve a civilian trial?
3. because it is crucial that the United States return to being a nation of laws - this was an act of war, not something that occurred within our legal framework. And tribunals are quite acceptable worldwide and for a long time now as Dwayne-Pipe showed.

Not surprising, you gave three "reasons" that don't explain one bit why a civilian trial is preferable to Obama and Holder over a military tribunal or why the terrorists are entitled to American civil liberties.

if military tribunals are the answer, how come bush/cheney didn't avail themselves of this course of action? its one thing to be an anonymous poster on a real estate site, its quite different to be the president of the united states.

I've had enough of you. You want to debate by using some odd pro-terrorist sympathizer position because of some other blinding political beliefs, I'll leave you to it on your own. Like you said, it is (or was) a free country.

its one thing to be an anonymous poster on a real estate site, its quite different to be the president of the united states.

yeah, brilliant.

Question is whether Khalid Sheikh Mohammed committed a criminal act or an act of war, and whether he's a u.s. citizen. This is exactly the reason closing Guantanamo was a mistake. This will cost Obama the next election.

"2. because he believes that they will be found guilty "

These Defendants were not initially treated as criminal Ds: they weren't mirandarized, among other things. They were initially treated as prisoners of war. Now, we treat them as criminal Ds, with all the protections of the US constitution & crim law precedent.

I'm not sure Obama believes they will be found guilty. IMO, a good crim defense atty could possibly get the case dismissed before it ever goes to a jury; this is often referred to as a case being dismissed "on a technicality", which, often means violation of constitutional rights. Thus, how likely that these cases would never make it to a jury? Moreover, how confident is the gov that they can prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt"?

Why need we open Pandora's box? Why not Nuremberg it?

I say hang half of them publicly and then keep the other half alive in prison until they die

Query:

Possibility of dismissal before it reaches a jury?

Unconscionable” is how Fox News’ Charles Krauthammer described the decision by Attorney General Eric Holder and the Obama administration to decide to grant 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, along with four of his al-Qaeda terrorist cohorts, the constitutional rights of an American citizen with a trial in a civilian court just blocks from the World Trade Center.

The Obama administration has essentially given the terrorists the right to conduct a show trial against the Bush administration, and more importantly, against the American people, Krauthammer said.

With what will likely be “the biggest forum in the world,” Krauthammer says the Obama administration has granted the 9/11 suspects the opportunity to commit “the second half of the terror attack,” which is to “proclaim the ideology behind” the largest terror attack ever on American soil.

I'm all for torture in front of the Court in lower Manhattan!
Agree with you Reallyp...
Obama is making one mistake after another...let's face it, he was only elected because so many people hated Bush!

Riversider, I agree w/ Krauthammer, but, looking solely at the legal issues, what are the odds that the gov will win this case? I say odds are less than 50%. So, don't bring the case. Don't bring a case where there's a high likelihood of loosing.

The rain brings me back in and online after my haircut where I had a chance to read the Post and the News.

Interesting that Bloomberg after an embarassingly thin margin for Mayor is pro Obama on this.

But Patterson isn't a fool. He knows how NYers feel about this. He knows that these terrorists don't deserve our Constititional protetions.

So this fair civil trial that is so important, if the terrorists are entitled to all of their American civil liberties, will the jury be instructed to only convict if they don't have a reasonable doubt? Are the jurors to be fair and impartial to the terrorists and listen to both sides of the evidence? Will the terrorists be entitled to cross examine witnesses and call into account the truth of evidence presented against them?

Will the terrorists, if they are convicted (after all, it is only an allegation at this point, right all you sympathizers?), will they be entitled to their appeals before any death penalty is carried out?

What a mockery. No single valid reason has been presented for this.

I mean civilian trial, not civil trial.

Here's an interesting statement from Holder,
"I fully expect to direct prosecutors to seek the death penalty against each of the alleged 9/11 conspirators," Holder told reporters in unveiling plans to try the men, including the alleged plot mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in federal court.

With just enough wiggle room in that lawyered up statement to be able to back out of it.

Why not just say, "I have directed the prosecutors to seek the death penalty and nothing less"
Why, I EXPECT to direct?

Explain this statement by Holder all you who sympathize with the terrorists.

Dwell, I would give grant sheik Kalil Mohamed rights under the Geneva convention and nothing more. Not because he's entitled to them, but because we want our u.s. soldiers to have them in other circumstances. But rights of a u.s. citizen no way.

from today's NYT:

"“Let them come to New York,” said Jim Riches, a retired deputy chief of the New York Fire Department, whose son, Jimmy, also a firefighter, died in the attack. “Let them get on trial. Let’s do it the right way, for all the world to see what they’re like. Let’s go. It’s been too long. Let’s get some justice.”"

is he pro - terrorist also?

people need to be able to disagree with out these hysterical attacks.

So what columbiacounty, was your son a firefighter who died in the attack? What is your reasoning for your terrorist sympathetic position?

pheh. It's such an unnecessary side show. How about all the $ this will cost the US & NYC? This admin makes me cringe. what next?

They've already fired their lawyers and are acting as their own.

an unnecessary circus

Why did we ever arrest these guys, just crazy. Dead men tell no tales.

Screw the trial.
They compete on one of those Japanese action packed game shows. The winner is returned to his home country to a hero's welcome, the losers are summarily executed in a televised reality type execution show. Sort of like fear factor without the bug eating. I would award the programming to NBC as long as Jeff Zucker has to compete as well. This way we save money, save face, save NBC and, show the ultimate compassion for a network whose time is over.
The kids will love it! The terrorists will love it! That killer 18-49 demographic will love it!

It's all about consumerism and ratings.
Can you just imagine the small plastic Kalid Mohammed that you'll get with your kid's happy meal?

Wonder if Ron Kuby will defend him.

sorry, falco, I can't laugh, too many died. Imagine the poor souls who JUMPED from the freakin towers & the brave firefighters who GAVE their lives.

this administration makes you cringe? so, how come your heroes, the former administration couldn't take care of this?

How is being anti-Bush more important than being anti-terrorist? Why do we need to give American civil liberties to terrorists just because you don't like the former administration? Why do we need to put New York City through this because you don't like Bush?

one has nothing to do with the other and hopefully you can take that in.

you don't accept the idea that anyone can have an opinion different than your own nor do you seem to understand where that would lead us if taken to the logical extreme.

i cited the quote from the fire chief as an example of others who clearly disagree with you and you come back with an idiotic remark about me being in the fire department.

CC prefers the sheikh to George Bush. According to cc obama wants to heal the hate the Sheikh holds for the U.S.

cc, I don't know what happened to you. I used to enjoy your posts, but, you've become this negative curmudgeon. I didn't like Bush either, but it's not tit for tat. If we're gonna try them, do a military tribunal, not a crim law proceeding. IMO, switching into crim law mode makes no sense at this point for the reasons stated above. Personally, I don't care if we never try them & they languish in legal limbo.

"because it is crucial that the United States return to being a nation of laws"

LOL. I have lived in several countries. Tell me one that bends over backwards more than the U.S. to be "a nation of laws", especially when it benefits the little guy. We ignore laws when it benefits the little guy, too - like ignoring the immigration laws.

Obama is an ultra-liberal who thinks the U.S. is an unjust country...do you think it was coincidence that he picked Holder, a black man, to be the nation's top cop. He truly believes the little guy and the non-white "can't get no justice" in the United States. That whole crowd distrusts the military, the justice system, etc. They would much prefer we cede national soveriegnty to a universal court administered by another body of weak-kneed liberals, namely, the U.N.

Obama is the most certain one-term President since Carter.

riversider: you have enough trouble putting words in your own mouth. don't put them in mine.

What is your rationale for this horrible decision, asshole?

Is it because it is anti-Bush, or is there another reason? Because you haven't given us any good reason to support this decision. Other than being anti-Bush.

Please give us a good reason why the Obama and Holder's suggested American civil liberty treatment of these terrorists is a good thing?

riversider: as noted previously, you are a lying sack of shit, dirt bag. but, you already know that.

By the way, what is your "logical extreme".

Why is an extremist position the one you support?

Obama's first words on Fort Hood, "don't jump to conclusions" exactly what he did with regard to Louis Gates.

i did...you didn't agree.

i have tried repeatedly to explain to you that disagreement is allowed. but you disagree with that as well.

no where to go with this. which is a microcosm of the problems facing us as a nation. anyone who disagrees is pro terrorist including the poor fire chief quoted above.

No, you seem to be pro-terrorist, although I take a bit of comfort that your pro-terrorist stance is just because you don't like Bush rather than because you actively want to kill Americans.

Still you are an asshole and I"m worried that assholes like you could wind up on the jury, with your supposed open-mindedness.

perhaps he learned from that situation? riversider: do you support 17 independent congressional investigations that are all political sideshows or just being endless provacative?

yes...being open minded is definitely a sign of stupidity. that's what we need---less people to be open minded.

Riversider, what does this have to do with Gates? Gates is an American. Right or wrong in that situation is not the same as right or wrong for a terrorist. Except columbiacounty seems to think that a terrorist deserves the same benefit of the doubt as the parties involved in a simple domestic criminal matter. And he-columbiacounty is wrong. And he's an asshole too.
Dwayne-Pipe is exactly correct in his assessment of our country's virtue. And the terrorists don't deserve it.

columbiacounty, I'm so happy you are open minded when it comes to terrorists.

how about the fire chief? where does he fit in the world according to reallypissed?

columbiacounty, go away asshole.

pissed: most juries are soft, thats what they do. Most "smart" people don't want to do it. Most juries are the uneducated or overeducated, not the smart.

you are a dolt---I am not open minded about terrorists. i believe however that we are a nation of laws and that they are crucial in our ongoing health as a society.

go away asshole

so...no answer on the fire chief?

Think outside the box.
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
This is my hometown so, this is where my loyalty lies.
That doesn't mean I can't consider other's views on the situation.
If I was let's say...... a disinterested Iraqi or Afghan Real Estate Agent I'm not sure I would be thrilled with the death count in my own country since the US showed up to liberate me.
You know that old adage that 'you have to break a few eggs if you're going to make an omelet'.
Well, it's not that great if you're the eggs. Why have a trial in such a densely packed region. I hear they have lot's of time, space and, TV in Ohio.

GO AWAY ASSHOLE - No one here wants your open mindedness for the benefit of terrorists.

"Dwayne-Pipe is exactly correct"

I never get tired of hearing that...

there is that problem, isn't there? the founding fathers of the u.s. were terrorists as far as the british were concerned.

reallypissed: now you speak for everyone? i'm impressed.

What's YOUR answer on why you want to give American civil liberties to terrorists?

The fire chief - he lost someone on 9/11. Are you trying to put yourself in the fire chief's shoes to support your sympathy for the rights of terrorists?

Why are you sympathetic to terrorists asshole?

Who do you speak for asshole? So far you seem only to speak for terrorists. Just great. We need a jury of 12 of columbiacounties.

no--you idiot.

i cited the fire chief as an example of someone personally involved who happens to believe that the trial here is a good idea. i am not putting myself in anyone's shoes. i have no sympathy for terrorists.

but...you clearly have little knowledge of the concept of the slippery slope. just make sure no one ever accuses you of being a terrorist. although of course in this world it has become increasingly difficult if not impossible to prevent it.

Go away asshole.

that's persuasive.

Asshole, no one is accusing me of being a terrorist.

But your sympathies toward terrorists civil rights seem to be the issue here.

Just go away. Save yourself from stating any more of your terrorist sympathies.

save myself? you don't care about me. lets be honest. you are only interested in people who agree with you. that's a scary world to me.

No I don't care about you. I'm not on the side of terrorist sympathizers.

you are only interested in people who agree with you. that's a scary world to me.

?????????????????

riversider: you have ruled yourself out because of your constant lying and exaggerations. very different than disagreeing.

Seems clear that Obama and his left wing supporters view terrorism as a law enforcement issue. That view gave us the U.S.S. Cole., World Trace Center etc.

columbiacounty is trying to defend this indefensible position of treating foreign terrorists who attacked this country as civilian criminals rather than foreign combatants, which is what they are. cc can't handle disagreeing with anything her ultra-left wing hero Obama does. This decision to try these terrorists in Federal court, in NY, is a disgrace.

If Obama keeps up pushing hard left policies like he has done this year, by 2012 Democrats will lose Congress and he will be swept out of office. I hope he doesn't do too much damage until then.

I was open-minded to Obama during the campaign, but he has been a huge disappointment as President.

What about the national security issue that could be exposed in a public trial? What about all the procedural problems? This really is awful.

What about the world perception if the guy gets off on technicality. CC is just angry at Bush, and if you disagree with her, she just comes up with a some absurd logic.

so...you both figure you're how much smarter than obama?

cc never says anything, she just ask questions and curses profanity. such clarity.. such moral purpose.

you never say anything either. You just copy and paste crap onto SE all day long.

score one for el jefe.

thanks cc for carrying the torch of patriotic reason--thank god its just the usual wacko fringe that has strayed from the fox blog

Riversider makes lots of substantive comments, and also posts on point commentary from other sources. cc babbles ultra left wing sound bites and asks stupid questions.

where does youtube fit in---is that a substanative comment or an on point commentary?