Khalid Sheikh Mohammed on Trial in NY?

Costa · 11-13-2009, 13:15

9/11 suspects face New York trial

The alleged 9/11 mastermind will be transferred from Guantanamo to New York for a trial in which the death penalty will be sought, the US has confirmed.

original story is here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8359623.stm

Gypsy · 11-14-2009, 08:37

Trying them in a civilian cout of law is wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to begin.

Shar · 11-14-2009, 08:58

Not the least of which is that some Fed Judge could throw the case out before it even begins on one of a gazillion technicalities and he could walk. Wouldn't that be fun?

Part of me almost hopes something like that happens just to see the fallout for the administration.

rubberneck · 11-14-2009, 10:01

I hate to say this but if they drop the ball on this and it becomes the jihadist circus that I think it will maybe some of our fellow citizens might awaken to the fact that administration is way out of their depth on national security issues. This is stupid on so many different levels I don't know where to start. Even the Nazi's and the Japanese war crimes trials were tried before military tribunals. Giving these animals their "day" in our Federal court system is a joke.

LarryW · 11-14-2009, 10:40

If this/these slime ball(s) walk(s), it'll probably not happen until Obama gets his seciond tour of duty. This trial will make OJ, the Lindberg kidnapping, and the impeachment of both Clinton and Nixon all rolled together look like 30 minutes with Judge Judy. It's an abomination of justice. Our Dear Leader...sweet Jesus!

Basenshukai · 11-14-2009, 14:39

My wife was so livid at hearing this that she refused to even speak while we were driving home from the PX yesterday (and she's not even a US Citizen yet; waiting on paperwork). What a lot of libs don't get is that there is a possibility that these guys may walk. Crazy.

Richard · 11-14-2009, 14:53

FWIW - I disagree. KSM and company were foreign citizens who committed crimes against American citizens which fall under federal law and - therefore - are to be tried under federal law in a federal court in New York - the most notable site of those crimes.

Here's the evidence federal prosecutors will use against them.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1114/p90s01-usju.html

It's called the 'rule of law' - and I'm certainly not 'livid' about it running its course.

YMMV...and so it goes...

Richard's $.02

nmap · 11-14-2009, 15:45

I cannot help wondering how far the rule of law can and should go. This is, of course, complicated by my emotional preference for the terrorists' fate - or, perhaps I should say alleged terrorists.

The rule of law really does give the judge enormous flexibility. It gives a single juror the opportunity to prevent conviction. The rules will give the alleged terrorists access to a great deal of information - including information that is best kept secure. All of this has costs involved.

We risk their acquittal. We gain, from that, a reputation as a society ruled by law. But we risk decreased deterrence, and thus perhaps increased vulnerability.

We spend time and money. Same gain as before. But we risk ignoring other crimes and other criminals.

We distribute information. Same gain. But we risk the increased vulnerability mentioned earlier.

And we might want to think carefully about the value gained from the perception that we are a society who upholds (at all costs?) the rule of law. Because there are those who just might exploit those rules, and our dedication to those rules, to our considerable detriment.

I think it might be worthwhile to reflect on a rhetorical question - that being, what are the limits, if any, to our commitment to the rule of law? How much should we risk and sacrifice in furtherance of this ideal?

Purely in my opinion, terrorists have the potential to extract an awful price. Maybe they cross the line and deserve the label of "outlaws" in the classic sense - outlaws being those no longer under the protection of the law. Perhaps the law of national survival can, at some point, transcend the statutory law of the courtroom. Once again, MOO, YMMV.

lindy · 11-14-2009, 15:57

Quote:

KSM and company were foreign citizens who committed crimes against American citizens which fall under federal law and - therefore - are to be tried under federal law in a federal court in New York

With all due respect Sir, if that is in fact the case, then US Mil is actually the World Police. Why is NYC a better place to try these men than The Hague? From your article, KSM planned many international attacks.

As I understand it, the definitions of asymmetric warfare and terrorism differ merely by the respective points of view.

I believe AQ declared war on the U.S. via UBL's 1996 fatwa titled "Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places."

My Muslim Brothers of The World:
Your brothers in Palestine and in the land of the two Holy Places are calling upon your help and asking you to take part in fighting against the enemy --your enemy and their enemy-- the Americans and the Israelis. they are asking you to do whatever you can, with one own means and ability, to expel the enemy, humiliated and defeated, out of the sanctities of Islam.

UBL & AQ want war. Here's the entire fatwa:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terroris...atwa_1996.html

I too am all about the rule of law. As a matter of fact, I've sworn to support it and defend it twice: at work and on the weekends.

KSM & Co are soldiers without uniforms and they should be treated as such. This is a military issue and not a civilian one. I think that Rubberneck is spot on.

Personally, I think this whole thing of a civilian trial is an intentional distraction by the White House. How many folks watched the ENTIRE OJ trial? Give Joe Six-pack something to watch on TV and talk about at the water cooler the next day. What else are we to watch since 90210 and Melrose Place aren't on?

Respectfully,
Lindy

Richard · 11-14-2009, 17:48

Astounding.

Richard

echoes · 11-14-2009, 18:16

So, let me get this straight...The Obama White House wants to bring this guy to Manhattan, to face trial? Am sure that they are "banking" on the charges being thrown out, and Mr. Terrorist will walk the streets safely proclaiming, "It was all a set-up...I did nothing blah, blah, blah...."

DISGUSTING, and shame on you Mr. President, for this outrage!!!

Holly

Dad · 11-14-2009, 18:16

It is my most heartfelt opinion there is no limit to our commitment to the rule of law. I agree with Richard, this was a crime committed in NYC and the perpetrators should be tried there. What is the matter with everyone, don't you trust all those good Christian judges with conversative values we have been loading the bench with? Plus, remember, we are at war and an act is legal if the president says it is legal because he is the president according to Dick Cheney. So with that precedent set, we can all relax.

**The Reaper** · 11-14-2009, 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dad

It is my most heartfelt opinion there is no limit to our commitment to the rule of law. I agree with Richard, this was a crime committed in NYC and the perpetrators should be tried there. What is the matter with everyone, don't you trust all those good Christian judges with conversative values we have been loading the bench with? Plus, remember, we are at war and an act is legal if the president says it is legal because he is the president according to Dick Cheney. So with that precedent set, we can all relax.

KSM did not commit a crime in NYC that I am aware of.

Should we have tried him in Pakistan?

Should we trust the courts that let OJ, Robert Blake, etc. go free?

TR

**Bill Harsey** · 11-14-2009, 19:23

Anyone want to start a betting pool on how this is going to work out?

Gypsy · 11-14-2009, 19:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Harsey

Anyone want to start a betting pool on how this is going to work out?

I think the majority of folks who are against this all have the same idea exactly how this will work out.

Beyond the simple fact that I, personally, am 100% against this terrorist bastard and his ilk having the opportunity to manipulate the system, I'm very unhappy he/they will be afforded Constitutional rights. Animals like this that attacked America, not just New York btw, don't deserve to breath the same oxygen I do.

Yeah, I know...and I don't care.

Furthermore, who the hell would consider defending these bastards? There is NO defense for what they have done, and would do again...given half a chance.