I keep talking to people about this, and they keep responding, "Oh, Obama probably did it because they don't have enough evidence to win in civilian court." And that's not true, and it's not even the point. The point is, George W. Bush pushed the dangerous idea that the 9/11 attacks were acts of terror by states, not individuals - and that was the rationale for invading Iraq. Trying the 9/11 attackers in military tribunals is saying the Bush-Cheney doctrine was right, and lays the groundwork for bipartisan support of pre-emptive attacks:
The Justice Department's restoration was among the most important tasks facing the Obama administration: The Bush administration's political appointees had dismantled the hiring practices that allowed career attorneys to make hiring decisions, and gave more weight to ideological conformity than legal expertise. The result was a Justice Department where incompetent ideologues with political interests in mind were given more power than career attorneys concerned with upholding the law. Michael Mukasey began the process of de-politicizing Justice after he replaced Alberto Gonzales; Eric Holder has continued it.
In light of this, I think Andrew Sullivan's observation of the conflict between Rahm Emanuel and Holder over the prosecution of the alleged September 11 conspirators is especially important:
But whatever your view, this must not, it seems to me, be a politicized decision. It should be a matter of justice. And to go from a Rove-driven Justice Department to an Emanuel-driven Justice Department is not the change most of us who supported Obama wanted to see. Or believe in.
I'm not interested in going from a Justice Department whose behavior is driven by Republican political interests to one whose behavior is driven by Democratic political interests. That's going nowhere at all. Retreating on the decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in civilian court won't undo all the important changes the administration has made to the Justice Department, but it would reinforce the idea that the Department is a political fiefdom rather than an entity that exists to enforce the laws of the United States and secure the rights of its citizens.
A separate point is that Republicans won't budge on Gitmo anyway, no matter what Lindsey Graham says, so Emanuel's choice isn't even smart politics.
to some degree or other, been different?
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Even Bobby Kennedy had more autonomy than Holder or Gonzales.
.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
but you cannot appoint anyone to be your brother.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
poeple with a political agenda have always complained about the political adminsitration of justice.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Laws are for little people.
said that no decision has been made. I asked the other day if anybody has heard an official response from the Whitehouse. the response????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Crickets.
I still think it's a rumor to try to make the Obama administration look weak.
"I still think it's a rumor to try to make the Obama administration look weak"
Obama doesn't realize how all of his decisions to make him seem tough are what make him look terribly weak. The republicans and ignorant independents will never love you, stop courting them.
Goodness, you're all so bent out of shape.
It's jusst politics.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
The Rule of Law is losing out along with the Bill of Rights. Torture and secret trials are becoming normal in our society. We need to keep speaking out on this stuff.
"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." ~ Eleanor Roosevelt
Ho hum. I worked a long day and besides..the Academy Awards ran late. I'm too tired and besides, this shit doesn't really impact me.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
If we stop torturing people, 24 will not seem as "real"
that is advertised as fiction and still people believe in it. I never watch it.
And theres so much to this that we don't know.
But it seems to me that a good defense could get him off because of torture. Simple as that.
We know who to thank for this.
What is your conceptual, continuity?
Torture the lawyers!
Enrich the rich!
Nuke the whales!
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
I think the whales might have a problem with that.
What is your conceptual, continuity?
if we just armed the whales with nukes. They are highly intelligent and would probably use them more wisely.
We would then have to arm the dolphins and pinnipeds to maintain the balance of power. I'm sure polar bears and penquins would want a say also.
Hmmm....this could be a very profitable venture.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
It has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence. BTW, consider this:"Trying the 9/11 attackers in military tribunals is saying the Bush-Cheney doctrine was right..." This could exonerate BushCo for EVERYTHING. Think about it.
damned if you don't, is what the exalted one is faced with.
the problem with the cookie jar is that sometimes you get caught with your hand in it, it is especially a bitch when someone else stole the cookies, like maybe the sociopath who preceded you.
what to do, what to do.
could maybe give a primetime speech and tell the country the truth, that ksm was tortured by cheneys gang, and the evidence against him is tainted?
no, won't do, won't do, start telling the truth about one thing, could lead to other things.
damn, damn, damn, damn that pesky oath,
i used to, used to know this, it was in the constitution, something like,
"He shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed... "
The reds and blues are way too similar in the way they operate, being part of the "system". So...either change the System or vote in a party not part of the system.
go GREEN, please!
"Do you see creamed corn on that plate?"
And I'm afraid that Barack doesn't have the stones to deal with it.
If we try these guys in open court, they will bring up the fact that the previous administration tortured them. And the government will be required by law and by treaty to arrest them and either try them or ship them off to the Hague. I have no problem with that, but I suspect that our president has already had meetings with those involved and a fly on the wall would have heard lines like, "It's a shame what happened to those Kennedy boys."
Folks, I'm afraid we're not in America anymore, if we ever were. We're Rome.
That's a great idea! Let's stone them! We'll gain the fundie vote! Brilliant!
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
threats up 400%. I think there is some of that involved in some of the decisions being made but I still think that this is a rumor, a distraction from the other things going on.
Lacks the stones because he lacks the convictions. Obama and crew have become part of the problem, instead of a source of solutions. Thanks, Barack and Rahm.
We are a failed state, at this point, and just about out of time to turn it around.
Family Of Secrets by Russ Baker. Short version, the CIA and the MIC and the elites did the Kennedys and Nixon in. Recommended reading...
had the stones, and then came the shot. true story, and we all want our president to be safe, however, there does come a time when you do the right thing.
the right thing in this case is to tell the truth, and let the chips fall where they may, obama took an oath to protect and defend the constitution, part of which states
"He shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed... "
the previous administration broke the law by violating the u.n convention against torture, signed under none other than ronnie reagan, and ratified under slick willie, this is the law of the land.
if our elected officials do not want to fulfill their oath of office they should resign, we have had 40 years of malfeasance since nixon, this is the test, either we establish the rule of law, or we will go down.
no one forces anybody to run for public office, barack obama ran for president, and he won, it is time for him to do his job, uphold his oath of office, or resign - it is just that simple - once again, he, like all the others before him ran of his own volition, no one forced him into this job - it is time for the american people to demand that our elected officials do their jobs, and stop begging like beaten dogs for the scraps that are thrown to us.
and yeah, i am going green, supergreen.
then it will represent a defeat for the US in the eyes of the whole world, because it will be seen that the entire US justice system was intimidated by Al Qaeda.
Personally, I don't believe that KSM's role in 9/11 was anything substantial, even if he claims to have been the mastermind.
If the US is afraid to try him publicly in NYC, that would be a large part of the reason.
Why would KSM have to be tried in Manhattan?
Seems to me that there are at least two other districts where this trial could be held- PA and VA. Hell, I don't see clearly why the trial couldn't be held in DC, where the security infrastructure is permanently in place (as opposed to Manhattan, where Bloomberg and Schumer think security would be a nightmare).
All that said, this is still a rumor. Don't commit to being pissed off yet, DFHs.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
Instead, this looks for the most part to be Bush's 3rd term. Won't make that mistake again in 2012.
take the message of the messenger as fact?
has reported on something that accurately fits the larger, established pattern.
all speculation. The whitehouse hasn't made a decision on this.
if we shut the fuck up on the matter, the government will magically/telepathically figure out the will of the people and make the right decision.
RED, or ORANGE or whatever it was, just to distract us from the real issue. Then it would a military tribunal for sure.
And someone already mentioned it -- trying KSM in civilian court provides a forum for the publication of facts concerning how he was treated.
BTW Why would anyone cite Andrew Sullivan? He was one of the doorknobs supporting Bush until just before the end, when it became obvious that his presidency was a complete (and not simply an utter) failure.
The truth? OMG. Anything but that.
November 26, 2008:
"I voted for Obama, but I knew this was going to happen, starting with when he voted for FISA and ..... The more things change, the more they reamain the same.
The Obama administration is not going to be liberal or progressive. It is shaping up to be a straight-up corporatist entity, which in my book means it is going to be a Republican administration.... If Americans wanted true change, they should have elected Kucinich."
Paul
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Such as completely ignoring corporate media sources for information, referencing independent sources, and thinking.
Americans are conditioned contrarily.
Besides, didn't you hear, Kucinich believes in UFOs!
He said he saw an unidentified object in the sky.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Kucinich was sandbagged with that question in order to discredit him, as he was the only candidate in the debates who was making sense.
1) They make a mockery of our system of justice.
2) They legitimize the terrorists.
3) The acts that can be legally committed in warfare are actually quite broad. We terror-bombed German and Japanese cities in order to disrupt their society/economy and pressure them to surrender. Wiping out a major commercial building and attacking a military building as happened on 9/11 would seem to be valid strategic targets if the terrorists are considered to be engaging in warfare rather than crimes.
But they're reeeeallly coool...uniforms and all that stern military protocol. It's makes the right wing pundits hard and they love it so.
Who are we to deny them their enjoyment.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Given the circus that is likely to result, it is probably a hardship on NYC to hold the trials in Manhattan. Also, it would likely be consider a prejudicial venue; defendants usually petition for a change of venue when being tried for notorious crimes and that petition is normally granted. Using both of these arguments, hold the trials somewhere in the west or midwest. As a bonus, the lucky state will get a healthy boost to its economy from both extra Federal dollars and money from the various media circus companies. Just like their were states that begged to have the prison that will hold convicted terrorists, there will be states lining up to be the site of the trials.
n/t
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
NYC is a circus every day. We tried the blind sheik here. As a New Yorker, I'm quite tired of pathetic pants wetting Senators and representatives from half assed States speaking for NY.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Bring it!
Just think of all the jobs. Lots of security jobs what they were talking 200 million worth. Seems like kind of gravy jobs in tough times. I smell a rat someplace in all this. Its all posturing and bullsh*t.
Madrak: The point is, George W. Bush pushed the dangerous idea that the 9/11 attacks were acts of terror by states, not individuals - and that was the rationale for invading Iraq. Trying the 9/11 attackers in military tribunals is saying the Bush-Cheney doctrine was right.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Maybe I'm wrong, but iirc, Bushco attempted to rationalize the GWoT- and the Gitmo detentions- on the fact that AQ was stateless.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
It is a preposterous leap.
A. 9/11 attacks happened.
B. KSM, an individual, is captured and charged with 9/11 and a host of other things.
C: GWB uses the 9/11 attacks in part to foster climate allowing invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, actions taken against states.
D. KSM is to be tried. Choice includes either 1) civilian or 2) military court.
There is a relationship between A. and B.,C., and D. But how does
the choice of D(1) or D(2) say the actions Bush took in C. were right.
And how does making that charge not smack itself of inserting a political view on how a trial should be conducted?
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
.
does not say attacking Iraq was right or that the Bush doctrine is right. It is like saying because Dennis Kucinich agreed that he saw something in the sky once which he could not identify that he therefore believes in UFO's and extraterrestrials.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
The point is that it is crucial to the health of the republic that the Attorney General and D.O.J. represent THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES, not the motherfucking President, whoever that may be.
The President should not interfere with this type of decision, particularly after letting it appear for so long as though the decision was Holder's to make.
If Obama overrules his A.G. on this, I will not vote for him in the next election.
That is a ship that has sailed when Obummer decided he wouldn't prosecute War Crimes. It was basically a decision that it was politically better to ignore crimes.
wasn't any LEGAL reason to not prosecute the worst crimes in our legal codes!! Although that doesn't necessarily mean it was a political decision. It could have been a personal favor or financially motivated.
Obummer cited it as the reason didn't want the conflict I think was the stated objective.
"...We Thought We Were Getting Rid Of That."
I THOUGHT I was getting rid of a lot of crap when I voted for Obama.
How wrong I was!!
... why the DOJ can't simply handle Arabs like Israel handles Palestinians in the Occupied Territories: round them up and throw them in jail forever, without charges or trials. I mean, Israel being a "democracy" and all, why wouldn't we want to emulate them? Rahm served in the IDF and has an Israeli passport, so he should know.
I'd say it was pretty obvious what we ended up with at the DOJ a year ago when Cheney, Rumsfeld and all the rest were still not arrested and charged. If they couldn't uphold laws on our books that are much more grievous then terrorism then it's not the least bit surprising they can't handle that either.
When it comes to punishing the Bush regime for their crimes, "The past is behind us!" When it comes to following in Bush's footsteps, "What's past is prologue."
The Supreme Court Appointed president and the Coward and American TRAITOR are gone.
The purpose of ELECTING the present President was so America could be taken Back. being a retired Military combat Vet., i9t was a sense of Pride knowning the COWARDLY and FEARFUL right were pushed to a corner where there were no shadows to scare them.
The trail MUST be held in AMerica doing it any other way signals AMERICA is DEAD and the CORPORATIONS rule. The COWARDLY White Trailer Trash ,KKK,Racist Nazi, Socialist Fascists are NOT in power. If the Jelly spined Dems would realize that and move along.
but, here is a question to ponder is the President a member of a college secret organization and doing payback for the Presidency, why is HOLDER so AFRAID to STANDUP for what is right. Why is the COIWARDLT and SPINELESS Emmannuel cow toeing to the RIGHT.
I want to walk with my head high I am NOT afaraid of the TRAILS being held in America.
I am afraid of the Wacko right selling us out to prove their point with the party and Corporate interest that DO NOT want this to happen.
Comments are closed on this entry