One thing can be said for Eric Holder’s decision. It’s controversial.
The Obama administration said Friday that it would prosecute Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, in a Manhattan federal courtroom, a decision that ignited a sharp political debate but took a step toward resolving one of the most pressing terrorism detention issues.
The decision, announced by Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., could mean one of the highest-profile and highest-security terrorism trials in history would be set just blocks from where hijackers for Al Qaeda destroyed the World Trade Center, killing nearly 3,000 people.
Mr. Holder said he would instruct prosecutors to seek death sentences for Mr. Mohammed and four accused Sept. 11 co-conspirators who would be tried alongside him.
But while the civilian system would handle those cases, he said five other detainees would be prosecuted before a military commission.
Those facing a military trial include Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who is accused of planning Al Qaeda’s 2000 bombing of the Navy destroyer Cole in Yemen. All 10 detainees are being held at the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
“Today’s announcement marks a significant step forward in our efforts to close Guantánamo and to bring to justice those individuals who have conspired to attack our nation and our interests abroad,” Mr. Holder said.
No decision has yet been made about where to hold the military trials, Mr. Holder said. But the administration’s decision to bring five Sept. 11 detainees onto United States soil for prosecution in the civilian legal system drew immediate fire from members of Congress as well as relatives of victims and neighbors of the federal courthouse.
They argued that Qaeda suspects did not deserve the protections afforded by the American criminal justice system, that bringing them into the United States would heighten the risk of another terrorist attack, that civilian trials increase the risk of disclosing classified information, and that if the detainees were acquitted they could be released into the population.
“We should not be increasing the danger of another terrorist strike against Americans at home and abroad,” said Representative Peter T. King, Republican of New York…
Inserted from <NY Times>
I support Holder’s decision. I consider holding the trials in the neighborhood of ground zero poetic in its appropriateness. To hold the trials of these men in a closed Military Commission, although legal, will create the appearance before the world that US justice is just a kangaroo court. While it is true that these terrorists do not deserve the protections afforded by the US criminal justice system, look at the statement that giving them these protections anyway makes about the US before the world. Dispensing justice in full transparency can go a long way toward undoing some of the damage that eight years of torture and abuse of prisoners under Bush and the GOP did to our world prestige. The risk of another terrorist attack is minimal. When we have been prepared, we have prevented such attacks well. We have only been caught with our pants down when we have let our guard down. The 9/11 attack could have been easily prevented had Bush and the GOP not been asleep at the switch. We need not worry about disclosing classified information. The GOP will task Hoekstra do that regardless of any trial. It is on the question of a detainee being acquitted and released in the US, that I got the biggest laugh.
Here’s John Boehner’s (R-OH) reaction to the announcement that the United States government is capable of administering justice in accordance with our laws:
The Obama Administration’s irresponsible decision to prosecute the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks in New York City puts the interests of liberal special interest groups before the safety and security of the American people. The possibility that Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his co-conspirators could be found ‘not guilty’ due to some legal technicality just blocks from Ground Zero should give every American pause…
Inserted from <Daily Kos>
Boner is limp with fear that a 9/11 terrorist will be released in the US. This will not happen. First, if the government did not already have an air-tight case, they would not be following this path. Second, if a suspect were to be acquitted, the government would charge him with a whole new set of offenses that are being held in reserve just in case such a scenario were to occur. But if it did happen, I have a couple satisfactory solutions. First would be to move the terrorist next door to Boner. That will keep him shaking in his boots to such an extent that he will have no energy left to disrupt the nation’s business. The other solution is to move the terrorist into C-Street to live with the family. When he discovers that he has so much in common with the residents there, he would probably convert and become a proud part of the American Taliban, Rumor has it that Boner was only able to stand again after an emergency intervention from Pfizer.
20 Responses to “9/11 Terrorists to be Tried in US – Boehner Goes Limp”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I agree with Holder also. The petrified rethugs are just showing their true colors. If the decision was a secretive military tribunal then they would cry foul on that too. Theres never going to be a decision by this administration the right agrees with. NEVER!
Consider for a moment, Gentlemen that Al Quaeda may not have done it. This is the great inner contradiction.
There could be 14 billion completely legal technicalities and loopholes that could free them, and all 14 billion would be ignored. Spray-on, you're so funny.
I agree with Randal. The case is undoubtedly air tight, and they prolly won't allow any rebuttal testimony anyway. After all, how well could they speak after all that torture?
You get what you pay for.
And aren't they all in hock to Big Pharma's ministrations (heh, heh) already?
S
Rumor has it that Boner was only able to stand again after an emergency intervention from Pfizer.
Love the analogy of Boehner "going limp" – LOL!
I agree with the decision as well for the same reasons you cite. And, as my husband says, if by any chance they did get off, just let them go in Manhattan – how long would they live? 😉
Love the analogy of Boehner "going limp" – LOL!
I agree with the decision as well for the same reasons you cite. And, as my husband says, if by any chance they did get off, just let them go in Manhattan – how long would they live? 😉
M-Girl, Boehner has always been "limp". And he didn't get that phony suntan on Maui, either.
Sue, your point is well taken. Congrats on being visitor 14,000.
Ivan, I don't buy the inside job conspiracy theory. I think it far more likely that the Bush/GOP Regime knew it was coming down and opted to let it proceed in order to use it as the 'Pearl Harbor" hoped for bu AEI and PNAC to use as an excuse to institute oppression at home and wars abroad. Also, these guys bragged about it on Al Jazeera.
Randal, I'm glad it was low enough for you. 🙂 But you're right.
Suzan, Boner is certainly in debt to big pharma now.
Maui, I hadn't thought of that but you're so correct it was worth saying twice. 🙂
Dang, Vig! Of course he didn't get that suntan on Maui. She's married! And even if she weren't, she had better taste!
"Boner is limp"
In more ways than one!
I know, MY BAD!! :o)
"Junket John" Boehner is always limp. Constant drinking will leave you that way. His liver, however, is granite-hard.
Trying these scums in a US Court, in front of the world, affirms the best aspects of our system. Why is it the Rushpubliscums are so against the American way?
Still, most of the 27 (28?) highjackers were Saudis or Yemenites. What up? I know that Al Jazeera is reputable in its facts, but….
Maybe I have bad research tools.I couldn't find one Afghan.
Bomb King Faud? the mind boggles.
To hell with that insane Boehner. PISS on him! I say, try the terrorists IN THE BACK YARD OF HIS HOUSE!
It shouldn't be long now when the Reich Wingers start reporting, "KSM to be invited to the White House."
My bad too, Karen.
JR, they hate our freedom.
Ivan, there were no Afghans. That invasion was about a pipeline, not 9/11.
That works for me, Jack.
They hasven't yet, Dave? 😉
"That invasion was about a pipeline, not 9/11"?
Rubbish. It was about 9-11. Our invasion, anyway. I don't know what our occupation (attempts) are about.
Vig, prior to our invasion/occupattion of Afghanistsn, the Taliban offered to turn over Osama and the Bush Regime refused. They immediately installed a a Unocal employee as puppet president.
I'm glad you didn't put any credence into this offer by the Taliban thugs, Tom. Only a complete idiot, if a more complete idiot than Bush could be conjured up, would have believed these thugs.
Vig, at the time I didn't know that much about the Taliban. I knew that Bush had been courting them regarding the pipeline and had run into trouble when human rights groups exposed the negotiations. I thought that the best option was to accept the offer, because force was still available if the Taliban did not immediately comply. After the occupation, US forces were used to install the Unocal government and to secure the route (unsuccessfully) for the pipeline, not to go after OBL or AQ, allowing most to escape into Pakistan. That's why I say that the pipeline, not getting AQ was behind Bush's invasion.
And just how long do you think you would have been content to negotiate with the Taleban, Tom? 1 day, week, or month? Long enough for OBL to get to where he had to go?
In retrospect, I'm saying the only mistake was GWB's abandoning the pursuit/search for OBL, in favor of his illegal invasion of Iraq. That, and the subsequent occupation of Afghanistan were the errors which have led us to our Nadir.
Bombing the shit out of Afghanistan and invading it initially was not a mistake but a warrented retaliation. Fully.
Vig, in retrospect how long we might have waited didn't matter. OBL had time to get where he had to go anyway. If Bush had cared, he could have centered the invasion on the capturing bin Laden instead of conquest.