911 Planners to air views at trial!?!?!?!

[Cygnus]

Screw this! Lawyer: Sept. 11 defendants want to air views - Security- msnbc.com


"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'. "

Hell no!


I really don't mind if they are tried in federal court and given the death penalty after the conviction (they did confess and according to this still will not fight the charges) but this is BS!

They don't have a right to air their policitcal views and why they did it. Someone better figure out how to stop this part or things may get ugly.

What...The....Funk?????

 

[phrozen5100]

As much as you may not want to hear it, it would be naive to simply ignore them. The 'why' is often the most difficult to answer, and it's being offered to us in this case.

The insights of these men can give us knowledge on the mindset of 'the enemy'; and knowledge is power.

 

[Cygnus]

As much as you may not want to hear it, it would be naive to simply ignore them. The 'why' is often the most difficult to answer, and it's being offered to us in this case.

The insights of these men can give us knowledge on the mindset of 'the enemy'; and knowledge is power.

I think we already know the why?

Don't take this the wrong way but do you really not know? That would be the definition of naïveté
here.

I think there were a few videos released expliaing it by their boss. The why is already a known case. All this will do is give them a forum and free advertising to recruit more "martyrs"

Do you really think me or most people don't already know the why?

Google their boss Osama. You'll see the "why" in his Al Jazeera vidoes.
We already know their mindset from their confessions. They were very happy and proud to explain it all. AT this point the are breathing all the good air.

Also you get to defend ypourself ina trial. Not make a political speech.

 

[Bill of Rights]

...
They don't have a right to air their policitcal views and why they did it. Someone better figure out how to stop this part or things may get ugly.

What...The....Funk?????

Actually, they DO have that right. It's one of our nation's basic principles. "...that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..."

At the same time, YOU have the right to not listen. We, the sovereign individuals of this nation, have the right to react to their airing of their political views. We each have the right to ignore or to learn from, this or any other speaker. Our nation has a court that has the power to punish these people... not for their views, opinions, and political thoughts, but for their criminal actions against the people of our nation.

They wish to offer those views as their defense; to defend the indefensible... So be it. Let them do so. Let the TV stations ignore them, or broadcast their testimony at 3AM. Those who wish to watch can set their VCRs.

We cannot deny the rights we enjoy as men (humans) to others, or our own are meaningless.

And once they're done and we've got all we can get from them, I'll happily pay for the bullets to take their criminal butts out to "Boot Hill".

 

[Cygnus]

Actually, they DO have that right. It's one of our nation's basic principles. "...that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..."

At the same time, YOU have the right to not listen. We, the sovereign individuals of this nation, have the right to react to their airing of their political views. We each have the right to ignore or to learn from, this or any other speaker. Our nation has a court that has the power to punish these people... not for their views, opinions, and political thoughts, but for their criminal actions against the people of our nation.

They wish to offer those views as their defense; to defend the indefensible... So be it. Let them do so. Let the TV stations ignore them, or broadcast their testimony at 3AM. Those who wish to watch can set their VCRs.

We cannot deny the rights we enjoy as men (humans) to others, or our own are meaningless.

And once they're done and we've got all we can get from them, I'll happily pay for the bullets to take their criminal butts out to "Boot Hill".

Bill,

From what I read it sounded like they were just going to speak on their beliefs.
If they are offering their beliefs as their defense well then I am wrong in my statements. Apologies to all.

 

[BloodEclipse]

Actually, they DO have that right. It's one of our nation's basic principles. "...that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..."

At the same time, YOU have the right to not listen. We, the sovereign individuals of this nation, have the right to react to their airing of their political views. We each have the right to ignore or to learn from, this or any other speaker. Our nation has a court that has the power to punish these people... not for their views, opinions, and political thoughts, but for their criminal actions against the people of our nation.

They wish to offer those views as their defense; to defend the indefensible... So be it. Let them do so. Let the TV stations ignore them, or broadcast their testimony at 3AM. Those who wish to watch can set their VCRs.

We cannot deny the rights we enjoy as men (humans) to others, or our own are meaningless.

And once they're done and we've got all we can get from them, I'll happily pay for the bullets to take their criminal butts out to "Boot Hill".

Prisoners of war are not entitled to the same rights as criminals.

Freedom of speech?
Do we let them write letters back to their units telling them what intel they know?
Call Mom and tell her to order the next attack?

People who have attacked our Nation do not get to benefit from the rights enjoyed by citizens. Truth is they are afforded more rights in our military tribunals, than in most countries.

If everyone could simply attack us to gain a platform in which to spew their reasoning, for their hatred, we would soon be attacked by many.
People lose rights all of the time due to their actions.

Holder has even said if they are acquitted, they will be held indefinitely as ENEMY COMBATANTS. They are not just innocent citizens of the world.

So what did they do to earn the "RIGHT" to tell us what compelled them to strike us? To tell us how AMERICA is the big bad SATAN.
They plotted and killed to get that right. Sorry I would argue their action forfeits that right.

 

[phrozen5100]

You assume their motives completely and exactly mirror that of their 'boss', but I find that difficult to believe given their desire to testify. Nor will it give them a 'forum', as this is simply a statement - not a discussion. Proposing that viewing such a statement would influence others to become 'martyrs' is akin to proposing that kids who play violent video games will go out and emulate actions seen in the games.

I think you, as well as many others, have formed some idea as to 'why' and have chosen to settle firmly with that belief - disregarding conflicting views - instead of maintaining an open mind. Wars are won through information; you can't shoot first and ask questions later in hope of defeating an ideology.

Prior to execution, those on death row are given the opportunity to say some final words. Given the gravity of the situation and number of people affected, one could easily consider these statements the final words of the terrorists.

If you don't like it, then just don't watch.

I think we already know the why?

Don't take this the wrong way but do you really not know? That would be the definition of naïveté
here.

I think there were a few videos released expliaing it by their boss. The why is already a known case. All this will do is give them a forum and free advertising to recruit more "martyrs"

Do you really think me or most people don't already know the why?

Google their boss Osama. You'll see the "why" in his Al Jazeera vidoes.
We already know their mindset from their confessions. They were very happy and proud to explain it all. AT this point the are breathing all the good air.

Also you get to defend ypourself ina trial. Not make a political speech.

 

[Cygnus]

You assume their motives completely and exactly mirror that of their 'boss', but I find that difficult to believe given their desire to testify. Nor will it give them a 'forum', as this is simply a statement - not a discussion. Proposing that viewing such a statement would influence others to become 'martyrs' is akin to proposing that kids who play violent video games will go out and emulate actions seen in the games.

I think you, as well as many others, have formed some idea as to 'why' and have chosen to settle firmly with that belief - disregarding conflicting views - instead of maintaining an open mind. Wars are won through information; you can't shoot first and ask questions later in hope of defeating an ideology.

Prior to execution, those on death row are given the opportunity to say some final words. Given the gravity of the situation and number of people affected, one could easily consider these statements the final words of the terrorists.

If you don't like it, then just don't watch.

I think you're misguided and lack an understanding of the real issues. They don't have any "rights" o shouldn't have as they are not citizens or residents, or visiotrs here. They were caught on a battlefield.
I do agree that they shold be allowed to speak. To a small group prior to the death sentence.....
As for open minds, mine gets me grief constantly here and elsewhere.

As for changing the channel, where's that ignore feature???

 

[SavageEagle]

Prisoners of war are not entitled to the same rights as criminals.

Freedom of speech?
Do we let them write letters back to their units telling them what intel they know?
Call Mom and tell her to order the next attack?

People who have attacked our Nation do not get to benefit from the rights enjoyed by citizens. Truth is they are afforded more rights in our military tribunals, than in most countries.

If everyone could simply attack us to gain a platform in which to spew their reasoning, for their hatred, we would soon be attacked by many.
People lose rights all of the time due to their actions.

Holder has even said if they are acquitted, they will be held indefinitely as ENEMY COMBATANTS. They are not just innocent citizens of the world.

So what did they do to earn the "RIGHT" to tell us what compelled them to strike us? To tell us how AMERICA is the big bad SATAN.
They plotted and killed to get that right. Sorry I would argue their action forfeits that right.

This right here ^! They are prisoners of war, not criminals. They should be tried in a military tribunal. They have no rights like we American's do, but the military tribunal will give them all the rights they deserve. Their basic human rights will be honored there. In our court system, they will cause much havoc and not get a fair trial regardless. I say that because no one in America besides other terrorists would consider anything BUT the death penalty.

The bigger question is more troubling. We all know that our Court System has a tendency to set policy and case law.

What does this trial mean and how will it effect our domestic law? That's what troubles me.

 

[dross]

As much as you may not want to hear it, it would be naive to simply ignore them. The 'why' is often the most difficult to answer, and it's being offered to us in this case.

The insights of these men can give us knowledge on the mindset of 'the enemy'; and knowledge is power.

Respectfully to your opinion, I don't care why. I say that, not because I have a lack of curiosity, but I believe we're past the point of root causes.

The schoolyard bully most likely had poor parenting of some type. He's probably insecure, and tortured inside, and a good psychologist and some decent caregiving at home could turn him around. Yet, when he beats me up and takes my lunch money, it goes against everything human in me to care one bit about his pain, and his issues. Unless I wish to be beaten, humiliated, and go hungry, there is only one way for me to deal with the bully. I must raise the cost of taking my lunch money to a level he no longer is willing to pay.

Even if the bully has a legitimate beef with me, I'm still not going to let him beat me up and take my money. In short, I don't care about him, or his issues. If every time he tries to take my money, he ends up with a broken nose, less teeth, or perhaps a gouged out eye, he will soon decide it's not worth it to bother me.

I don't care why these people did what they did. I don't care if it's because we did something "wrong" in the past. Like every issue, this one has layers and complications. Big deal. Kill us, we will kill you. More efficiently. Send your sons and daughters to kill us, your life is forfeit. Cheer when our towers collapse, or live amongst those who do, wake up with the knowledge that today you may become collatoral damage. Live in our country not as citizens but as legal guests and look, dress, and subscribe to similar beliefs as our sworn enemies, expect extra scrutiny at our airports.

Plan the destruction of the most prominent feature in our most prominent city, killing 3000 non-combatants, and reap the whirlwind of flying lead, predator drones, Apache helicopters, and yes, military trials where you are not afforded the same protections as American citizens.

Why did you do it? Interesting trivia, and the subject of academic papers by sociology Phds that no one will read.

Ancient Romans walked the known world in safety because Rome would kill 100 of the local populace for any Roman harmed. They weren't conflicted about bullies.

 

[chraland51]

I will be very pleasantly surprised if the bammer and his idiot attorney general do not get embarassed over something that happens that eric holder and his ivy league trained idiots did not see coming. I am shocked that holder is allowing many of the same attorneys who were working hard for the rights of the Gitmo detainees to now be the ones who are preparing the prosecution's case against those same prisoners that they previously defended. It would seem that they might have just been a little compromised. We will just have to wait and see what happens. There is no use in arguing about whether or not they should have ever been brought into this country for the same kind of trial as would be given to a citizen or a legal alien. Anything that happens outside of the courthouse to any innocent citizen will be on the head of the bammer and his minions.

 

[dross]

I will be very pleasantly surprised if the bammer and his idiot attorney general do not get embarassed over something that happens that eric holder and his ivy league trained idiots did not see coming. I am shocked that holder is allowing many of the same attorneys who were working hard for the rights of the Gitmo detainees to now be the ones who are preparing the prosecution's case against those same prisoners that they previously defended. It would seem that they might have just been a little compromised. We will just have to wait and see what happens. There is no use in arguing about whether or not they should have ever been brought into this country for the same kind of trial as would be given to a citizen or a legal alien. Anything that happens outside of the courthouse to any innocent citizen will be on the head of the bammer and his minions.

I think this is exactly the point. I think these trials will allow all the stuff about the Bush administration that they want in the headlines (rather than their complete screwing up and restructuring of the economy) to come out, without them having to bring it out.

 

[SavageEagle]

I think this is exactly the point. I think these trials will allow all the stuff about the Bush administration that they want in the headlines (rather than their complete screwing up and restructuring of the economy) to come out, without them having to bring it out.

It doesn't matter what Bush did. What matters is what this trial will do to domestic law. Cases like these have a tendency to make policy in this Country and that's what I fear will happen. Either that or they find some technicality and they end up getting off scot free.

 

[dross]

It doesn't matter what Bush did. What matters is what this trial will do to domestic law. Cases like these have a tendency to make policy in this Country and that's what I fear will happen. Either that or they find some technicality and they end up getting off scot free.

Of course. I was addressing what I believe is the motivation for having these trials in civilian court - so that the Obama administration and the Dems can make Bush the issue for another election. Since Bush has become irrelevant, the approval ratings for the Dems have steadily dropped, not to mention the ominous message of the off-year elections in November. They won the last elections on being not-Bush, and they're quickly realizing that's the only strategy they know how to execute.

 

[rambone]

When a murderer is on trial, he is not typically given a public forum to rant about the thing in his past that turned him into a deviant. His anger issues should have been aired out in a counseling session, not a courtroom. The victims' families are not supposed to be subjected to him preaching his message, in a place where he is supposed to be answering the details of his involvement in the crime.

Maybe the Government is giving them national attention so that they can present their case on why America is guilty, and ease people into accepting the notion that some of the 9/11 planners will walk free.

This reminds me of the 9/11 Victims' Memorial Museum that dedicates a section to the mass-murderers.

 

[SavageEagle]

Of course. I was addressing what I believe is the motivation for having these trials in civilian court - so that the Obama administration and the Dems can make Bush the issue for another election. Since Bush has become irrelevant, the approval ratings for the Dems have steadily dropped, not to mention the ominous message of the off-year elections in November. They won the last elections on being not-Bush, and they're quickly realizing that's the only strategy they know how to execute.

I think you may have a point since the now-trial-of-the-century is coming so close to the elections, but I think it hold far greater damage to be unleashed.

And as Rambone said, it's awful the victims families have to sit through this crap.

Did we give WWI/II, Korean, Vietnam, Desert Storm prisoners American Courtroom trials? Why are these *******s any different?