Holder and Hussein will get them jobs at the New Black Panther Party.
Posted on 11/15/2009 2:12:40 AM PST by Mount Athos
"I am absolutely convinced that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will be subject to the most exacting demands of justice," President Obama said in Tokyo. "The American people will insist on it and my administration will insist on it."
But what happens if KSM or any of the other 9/11 defendants the Obama administration is bringing to New York for criminal prosecutions -- including Ramzi Bin al-Shibh, Walid bin Attash, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali and Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi -- are somehow found not guilty?
Attorney General Eric Holder brushed off the question, saying, "I would not have authorized the bringing of these prosecutions unless I thought that the outcome -- in the outcome we would ultimately be successful. I will say that I have access to information that has not been publicly released that gives me great confidence that we will be successful in the prosecution of these cases in federal court."
Not everyone is so confident, of course. KSM, for instance, was subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques" that many consider torture. This includes being waterboarded 183 times in a one month. Could this undermine the case against him?
Fears of giving KSM the rights afforded defendants in a criminal case have led some to conclude that a military tribunal might be a better venue for him.
In September 2006, debating the Military Commissions Act, then-Sen. Obama said KSM and those like him would get "basically a full military trial with all the bells and whistles. He's going to have counsel, he's going to be able to present evidence, he's going to be able to rebut the government's case. Because the feeling is that he's guilty of a war crime and to do otherwise might violate some of our agreements under the Geneva Conventions."
"I think that's good that we're going to provide him with some procedure and process," then-Sen. Obama said. "I think we will convict him and I think he will be brought to justice. I think justice will be carried out in his case."
But when Holder announced on Friday that five defendants would face military tribunals, KSM was not among them.
In June, Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, a Tanzanian national, was brought to the Metropolitan Correctional Center to face 286 separate criminal charges stemming from his alleged role in the Aug. 7, 1998 bombing of the U.S. Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya, including conspiring with Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda to kill Americans, and a separate charges of murder for each of the 224 people killed embassy bombings.
We asked White House press secretary Robert Gibbs what would happen if Ghailani is found not guilty?
Gibbs wouldn't bite but the question is important. If he will be freed, that prompts questions of national security and whether civilian courts are as appropriate as other venues for such trials. If he won't be freed despite being found not guilty that undermines the credibility of the trial.
"We will talk about what happens about a verdict when a verdict comes," Gibbs said.
The following day, the Senate Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, asked “if we’re going to treat this terrorist detainee as a common civilian criminal, what will happen to Ghailani if he’s found not guilty? And what will happen to other detainees the administration wants to try in civilian courts if they are found not guilty? Will they be released? If so, where? In New York? In American communities? Or will they be released overseas, where they could return to terror and target American soldiers or innocent civilians?”
McConnell continued: “If Ghailani isn’t allowed to go free, will he be detained by the government? If so, where will he be detained? Would the administration detain him on U.S. soil, despite the objections of Congress and the American people?”
McConnell said the questions about Ghailani resemble the questions about Guantanamo in general.
“On the question of Guantanamo, it became increasingly clear over time that the administration announced its plan to close the facility before it actually had a plan,” he said. “If the administration has a plan for holding Ghailani if he’s found not guilty, then it needs to share that plan with the Congress. These kinds of questions are not insignificant. They involve the safety of the American people.”
I really do not think that they will be found “Not Guilty” However, they belong in a military tribunal rather than a court of law.
Then all hell will brake lose and Obama will be finished. I’d be shocked if there weren’t a contingency plan for this. These trials will be show trials, and I don’t say that derisively, that’s just a description. They are trials to “show” the world what they did and then punish them for it, it’s not a real trial where innocence is assumed. Guilt is not in dispute here, this is just because if we simply execute them without a “trial,” then for years to come it will be said that justice was not served and it will only fuel further conspiracy theories, etc.
FWIW, I think there’s a very good case to be made for simply executing them without a trial. They aren’t citizens, after all. As I said, guilt is not in dispute here.
Nothing would surprise me less. American courts found OJ Simpson “not guilty”. And American courts found Michael Jackson “not guilty”.
Why not find the 9/11 defendents “not guilty” too? YES WE CAN.
Seriously, he and his Obots will show up on every TV show saying this is a great day for America, because even the people behind 9/11 got a fair trial. Wheeee!
Holder doesn’t think oj or mikie were guilty.
These guys will not be found guilty either.
the administration is nuts.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed = the new OJ
There have been plenty of slam-dunk cases that ended up as disasters for the prosecution. If the prosecutors are picked by obama/holder...
All it will take is one muslim on the jury and you can bet there will be more than one.
OJ and the blacks on his jury showed them the way.
When judges like Sotamayor sit on the bench, it is possible that all charges could be dismissed by the trial judge. And the judiciary is theoretically independent of DOJ.
That is completely beside the point. Several points actually.
This is not a trial, it is a way to embarass the Bush administration.
Yes these murderers will probably be found guilty and spend the rest of their lives in prison. The death penalty carried out by the U.S. Govt? yeah, when pigs fly.
I was on a jury where the judge did exactly that and the guy was obviously guilty as hell! He walked out of court free as a bird.
If the case is thrown out and they are not released the trial would be an obvious sham.
We blame 0bama and his cronies, then use the pent-up anger in the City to turn a blue state to red for Sarah in `12.
smartly done....I was wondering how to say it, and those words, while less descriptive than the ones I was thinking, are better suited to a family site like this....
They are trying them in New York City. How will they get a jury that is not tainted? Any jury that is seated would be easily disqualified on appeal.
Wrap them in bacon and hang them.
“Its possible” is the operative word. Anyway, this belongs in a military tribunal rather than the federal court system.
‘smartly done....I was wondering how to say it, and those words, while less descriptive than the ones I was thinking, are better suited to a family site like this....”
A somber man, should always chose his words...carefully.
This will take years...could Palin’s AG drop the civil case in Jan/’13 and try him in military court?
“But what happens if KSM or any of the other 9/11 defendants the Obama administration is bringing to New York for criminal prosecutions — including Ramzi Bin al-Shibh, Walid bin Attash, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali and Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi — are somehow found not guilty?”
What am I saying? If Obama has his way Spanish speaking poll watchers will have election day “security” from the New Black Panther Party! We're circling the bowl. Its time to take our country back!
Yup. Same as with Bill Ayers. They could all end up teaching college in Chicago.
In the midst of this mix; am wondering what will be the determination for calling a 'jury of their peers'? (And what in 'civil Law' addresses war crimes against humanity by an act of terroristic war against our country?)
Of course, am sick of hearing how 'fitting it is' for them to be tried in the shadow of their crime - as if this was somehow, demeaning these terrorists. In truth, of course, like Br'er Rabbit going into the briar patch; this is a dream realized for these wannabe martyrs for whom their 'jihad' has just been expanded a million-fold by what is this preferred venue.
Wonder too; will the 'thank you notes' be available for show, when Obama's 'president's library' opens?
Plenty of opportunity for even a night-school lawyer to work grounds for dismissal -- denial of counsel, tainted evidence, hearsay. In a larger sense, the standing of the accused in the court is in question, as well as the authority of the court to hear the case.
Opportunity for terrorist actions to sway the case abound. As has been pointed out, if the defense empanels even one activist muslim, the case could face a hung jury, resulting in a repeated trial, or even dismissal.
Protecting the jurors and their families against terrorist influence would be nearly impossible. And holding the trials in New York would be an incredible invitation to a strike. On that thought, why not hold the trials at an Iranian nuclear facility?
The thought that KSM might be found guilty, and yet still detained, must have the ACLU gearing up already to ensure that a known terrorist might be denied Constitutional protection. And of course, he could also demand protection from the government against the people who might do him harm (all those bitter people clinging to God and guns).
Holder, in all his arrogance, patronizes the public when he says he wouldn't hold the trial if he wasn't sure of the outcome. Why take on the risk if it is unnecessary, unless it is to garner some laurels for a later book? But in his self-importance, he is too willing to place the people and institutions of America at risk.
“The jury will never get a chance to be biased if the judge throws out all the evidence and the case. Game over, they walk free.”
IMO that is a distinct possibility, although I’m not a lawyer.
Would they have to put them back into a military prison to prevent that? Could they put them back in a military prison?
They will have the best liberal lawyers Saudi oil money can buy.
Bookmark
Obama at the same time must not allow Khalid Sheik to go free. So the confessions extracted during waterboarding will have to be admissable evidence, thereby legitimizing the technique itself.
This is a no-win situation for Obama, a huge political blunder IMHO.
THEY WALK THATS WHAT. . . . . . .
My nightly prayers include asking for help in getting through the next 3 years. . . .
I don't think so, they would find a way to somehow blame it on the Bush admin and the MSM would push it......
It is plausible and it scares the hell out of me. I agree the #1 FOOL (BO) has an agenda, that is no good.
“to do otherwise might violate some of our agreements under the Geneva Conventions.”
Which agreements? The Geneva Conventions only apply to uniformed combatants (with limited exceptions — e.g. where defenders haven’t had time to organize into uniformed forces). Has anyone actually pointed to specific agreements, which require terrorists be granted full civil rights?
Holder and Hussein will get them jobs at the New Black Panther Party.
We must be politically correct in the pursuit of global justice and accommodate these poor defendants. In fact, we ought to prosecute them under Shari’a law.
That would mean decapitation before bringing them to the US.
Works for me.
Personally, I believe that 0bama really does want these terrorists running around free on the streets of the USA. There's no other possible rational explanation for his wanting to put these terrorists on trial here.
Given Eric Holder's past patterns of simply ignoring criminals of certain races, there can be no doubt that any jury in these trials will end up being stacked with people who would be biased in favor of these terrorists.
A sharia court would most likely give these terrorists a gold medal for a job well done.
They won’t be show trials except in the sense that they are used to try and paint the US as an evil torturing oppressor. The defense lawyers will demand all sources and methods of intelligence gathering be revealed. They will probably try to call Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld as witnesses. This will do irreparable harm to our ability to gather intelligence on the Jihadi’s around the world. It is an unmitigated disaster.
A military court will find them guilty and they will be executed.
Here they have a chance of saving these animals and looking good in the eyes of the world.
Let’s not forget, NYC is crawling with radical muslims. They were out on the streets of NYC spewing their hate after the Fort Hood terror attack. They are cab drivers, coffee cart vendors and students. They have huge communities in Brooklyn and New Jersey. This administration has created a potentially dangerous scenario. We know they recently broke up plots to bomb the subways with backpacks and shoot up Fort Dix. This is totally irresponsible...... and deliberate.
This will be a "show trial", but in the wrong way. This trial will place Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in the spotlight and provide radical Islam with a world wide showcase.
Terrorist recruitment will flourish during this trial and acts of violence will follow the guilty verdict. Racical Islam will rally around this event.
Not going to court - just imposing penalties first;)
He levied war against the United States, under Osama Bin Laden's 1996 Declaration of War. True, he used unconventional methods, almost as unconventional as bombing from the sea was in 1941.
But our problem with KSM and his soldiers is a war problem, not a criminal offense problem.
I think it's quite likely that he will either be found "not guilty", or that any Federal statute used to convict him will be found unconstitutional and he will be released.
He probably is guilty of murder under NY law and Virginia law, and I suppose he could be tried after the Federal farce is over in those venues.
But of course the root cause of this madness is that he wasn't shot at dawn seven years ago, and THAT isn't Obama's doing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.