These terrorists will admit their crimes but will plead "not guilty" so they can put the U.S. on trial.

quote:

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."

Ali, also known as Ammar al-Baluchi, is a nephew of professed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Mohammed, Ali and the others will explain "their assessment of American foreign policy," Fenstermaker said.

"Their assessment is negative," he said.

Fenstermaker met with Ali last week at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. He has not spoken with the others but said the men have discussed the trial among themselves.

This is precisely why it was better to put these terrorists on trial under military law.

This trial will serve no purpose than to provide a stage for anti-American rhetoric, and will be used as a recruiting tool by other terrorists. This will be an anti-American propaganda platform and we are footing the bill.

I have been through a court room MANY times.
Most judges that are any good are very used to people trying to bring a dog and pony show with them. Most judges are also drama queens (respectively of course) Let me explain this further, they are all drama out (them talking) not drama in.
They can want to do this all they want but 1 simple question will be raised... relevance? Obviously the US isn't on trial here and like it or not they won't be able to scape goat any one. I am not sure what the format for this particular set of events will be. I will say this much most people have a very "law and order" perspective on how the system works. It is not that way.

Holder's Gift to A Terrorist

The architect of 9/11 wins a starring role in a media circus at the scene of the crime.

By Charles Krauthammer

For late-19th-century anarchists, terrorism was the "propaganda of the deed." And the most successful propaganda-by-deed in history was 9/11 - not just the most destructive, but the most spectacular and telegenic.

And now its self-proclaimed architect, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, has been given by the Obama administration a civilian trial in New York. Just as the memory fades, 9/11 has been granted a second life - and Mohammed a second act: "9/11, The Director's Cut," narration by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Sept. 11, 2001, had to speak for itself. A decade later, the deed will be given voice. Mohammed has gratuitously been presented with the greatest propaganda platform imaginable - a civilian trial in the media capital of the world - from which to proclaim the glory of jihad and the criminality of infidel America.

So why is Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. doing this? Ostensibly, to demonstrate to the world the superiority of our system, where the rule of law and the fair trial reign.

Really? What happens if Mohammed (and his codefendants) "do not get convicted," asked Senate Judiciary Committee member Herb Kohl. "Failure is not an option," replied Holder. Not an option? Doesn't the presumption of innocence, er, presume that prosecutorial failure - acquittal, hung jury - is an option? By undermining that presumption, Holder is undermining the fairness of the trial, the demonstration of which is the alleged rationale for putting on this show in the first place.

Moreover, everyone knows that whatever the outcome of the trial, Mohammed will never walk free. He will spend the rest of his natural life in U.S. custody. Which makes the proceedings a farcical show trial from the very beginning.

Apart from the fact that any such trial will be a security nightmare and a terror threat to New York - what better propaganda-by-deed than blowing up the entire courtroom, making Mohammed a martyr and the judge, jury, and spectators fresh victims? - it will endanger U.S. security. Civilian courts with broad rights of cross-examination and discovery give terrorists access to crucial information about intelligence sources and methods.

That's precisely what happened during the civilian New York trial of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers. The prosecution was forced to turn over to the defense a list of 200 unindicted coconspirators, including the name Osama bin Laden. "Within 10 days, a copy of that list reached bin Laden in Khartoum," wrote former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, the presiding judge at that trial, "letting him know that his connection to that case had been discovered."

Finally, there's the moral logic. It's not as if Holder opposes military commissions on principle. On the same day he sent Mohammed to a civilian trial in New York, Holder announced he was sending Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, mastermind of the attack on the USS Cole, to a military tribunal.

By what logic? In his congressional testimony Wednesday, Holder was utterly incoherent in trying to explain. In his Nov. 13 news conference, he seemed to be saying that if you attack a civilian target, as in 9/11, you get a civilian trial; a military target like the Cole, and you get a military tribunal.

What a perverse moral calculus. Which is the war crime - an attack on defenseless civilians or an attack on a military target such as a warship, an accepted act of war that the United States has engaged in countless times?

By what possible moral reasoning, then, does Mohammed, who perpetrates the obvious and egregious war crime, receive the special protections and constitutional niceties of a civilian courtroom, while he who attacked a warship is relegated to a military tribunal?

Moreover, the incentive offered any jihadi is as irresistible as it is perverse: Kill as many civilians as possible on American soil, and Holder will give you Miranda rights, a lawyer, a propaganda platform - everything but your own blog.

Alternatively, Holder tried to make the case that he chose a civilian New York trial as a more likely venue for securing a conviction. An absurdity: By the time Obama came to office, Mohammed was ready to go before a military commission, plead guilty, and be executed. It's Obama who blocked a process that would have yielded the swiftest and most certain justice.

Indeed, the perfect justice. Whenever a jihadist volunteers for martyrdom, we should grant his wish. Instead, this one, the most murderous and unrepentant of all, gets to dance and declaim at the scene of his crime.

Holder himself told the Washington Post that the coming New York trial will be "the trial of the century." The last such was the trial of O.J. Simpson.

They have a "state of the art" courthouse down in GITMO built for the purpose of holding these military trials and now it won't be used?

This corrupt AG Holder is a mind-blowing mess of never-should-have-been. He should be on trial in a NY court instead of these terrorists. The defense attorneys will find a way to "accidentally" say something incrimiting about the CIA and then that will spark charges against them.

let the side show begin, and what a better big top than NYC Barnamen and baily would be impressed.

quote:

Originally posted by Cadiz1:
let the side show begin, and what a better big top than NYC Barnamen and baily would be impressed.

Side show indeed. And the liberal media won't make it any better. They will give every square inch of media space to these terrorists. They will ignore the fact that 3000+ died as a result of their attacks. They will try to humanize these terrorists.

This is my belief only but I think when you compare what they say about the U.S., you won't find much difference between what they say about the U.S. and what Obama has been saying in his bad-mouthing the U.S. on his world trips. It will be interesting to see a comparison between their words and obama's.

I've looked and had no luck so now I will ask you...
does any one know if these will be closed proceedings? If this judge hearing it has any sense at all he will make sure it is closed which is allowable for this type of circumstance.
In my opinion though, this is just a gimmick to prolong this nonsense. No where in the USA can this man get a "fair" trial.. which we are bound to give him like it or not. I think there will be a change of venue request that will take months and months and months (you get the picture) It's sad really because the media is giving him the hype that he wants, its like his own personal pep rally!
In my humble opinion, if you want these articles to stop, boycott them!

Obama gets what he wants, a freak show. I had a cousin die in the world trade center that day, This is almost mocking all those that died as far as i am concerned.

These terrorists are permitted to have a trail by a jury of their peers, what peers do terrorist have but other terrorists...

Obama cannot remove an order for closed proceedings whether he likes it or not.
I am not dismissing any ones loss here, however I would say at this point, the souls that we lost on that horrible day should be allowed to rest in peace and remembered forever.
We are all well aware of the events of the world trade center no matter what the defendants say, they will not find themselves with any mitigating circumstances.
You mentioned a jury of their peers, do you know how jury selection works? Perhaps it is something you should look into. It isn't JUST a letter in the mail.
If anything, I think you guys will be surprised to know that there is a LONG list of victim impact statements that will be read. Victim impact statements are very powerful things. While they hold no power for the court is still allows for a venue for the victims to explain what they experienced as a result (loos, physical, emotional, financial etc) I have cried more than once when I listened to them personally. Not only that, but I have heard very bad I would say inherently evil men cry when they had to listen as well. This circus may have been allowed for this reason.
I know there is a lot of Obama hating here. I am not going to give my personal view at this time, I will say this much though, when it comes to the law and legal proceedings he really doesn't have a lot to do with anything!

Thats right ips, only the dummies in DC didn't know it or they just don't care.

DJ1956