If he is not, the question is; what would he do different if he was?
We have film.
By de Andréa
I can think of a dozen ways that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed could get off scott free and I am not a lawyer.
CSI New York was not immediately on scene at what was left of the twin towers after 9/11 so there is no forensic evidence for show and tell. Then there is that nasty stickity wicket of Miranda. Oh! And just how can Khalid get a jury of his peers without putting some terrorist Muslims on the jury. The Defense attorney is most certainly going to ask for a chance of menu. Then we can’t forget that we have defined water-boarding as torture, so Khalid can bring brutality charges against the U.S. military. And of course everything that Khalid might have said was obtained under duress and without his lawyer present
Moreover reminiscent of the Manson trial when President Nixon said that Charles Manson was guilty before the trial, his lawyers nearly got him off because of prejudice. Do you think that Obama just accidentally made the same Mistake when he said that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would be found guilty and executed?
Holder lied when he said that he alone decided to try Khalid in a civilian Federal Court. He doesn’t have the authority to do that. You see this gives Obama deniability, which he has already done, so he lied as well.
As I said, what would the administration do different if it was purposely trying to pull an O.J. ? Nothing!
There are countless reasons to oppose Holder’s illegal decision, not the least of which is the potential for compromising our intelligence assets in a public, criminal trial where Mohammed’s attorneys will demand release of such classified information.
As I have so often said “there is nothing new under the sun” every mistake that is made has already been made at least once, including this one, read on.
The trial of Omar Abdel-Rahman comes to mind, the perpetrator of the 1993 New York trade center terrorist bombing, exactly the same mistake was made. In a civilian court Rahman’s attorneys among other things forced the release of the list of unindicted co-conspirators developed by the prosecution. One of the names on the list was Osama bin Laden. Soon after, bin Laden fled Sudan. More over, he reputed history again on 9/11. One gets caught in the loop of stupidity of one ignores history no matter how ancient or resent.
Some Americans are justifiably outraged by Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, in a civilian criminal court in New York. The perversity of this defies description. This is just one more in a long line of decisions by the Obama administration that is putting America—and our lives—at greater risk.
The question is; was this done purposely by our Muslim president, or is this just another stupid decision in a long line of stupid decisions? Do you really think that Obama is that stupid? Could be!
You may be one of those Americans who are asleep, and no matter what King Barrack Hussein Obammah does it is fine with you, because after all, you are asleep and have no Idea what is going on in Washington anyway. Obama says we are not a war with Islam. Well of course, if this was 1943 and he was a Nazi, he would say we are not at war with Nazis.
Obama is a Muslim, Muslims are terrorists, and so Obama is a terrorist. If you have any doubt that your president is the deceptive enemy that threatens America, then watch and listen to him tell you in his own words. Oh! But first wake up, so you can at least hear the truth, believing it is up to you. Click and Watch Notice how he lies about the Muslim accomplishments of the Iranian Muslim culture. If you know your history, (which he is betting that you don’t) you will know the Muslim cultural accomplishments of Iran he mentions, were actually done by the Persian Empire long before the existence of Iran and Islam. The truth is that Islam has not contributed anything good to the world.
Nothing good has ever come out of Islam.
When it comes to terrorists, you would think that an al Qaeda terrorist who targets an American mom sitting in her office or a child in a school is many degrees worse than a Taliban terrorist picked up after a roadside bombing in Iraq.
Your instinct would be correct, because at the heart of this demonic terrorism is the monstrous idea that the former is as legitimate a target as the latter. Unfortunately, by dispatching Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other al Qaeda leaders to federal criminal court for trial, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder will be undermining this distinction. And the perverse message that this decision will send to Allah’s demonic terrorists all over this world is this: If you kill civilians on American soil you will have greater protections than if you attack our military overseas.
The fundamental purpose of rules such as the Geneva Convention is to give those at war an incentive for more civilized behavior—and not targeting civilians is arguably the most sacred of these principles, It demolishes this principle to give Khalid Sheikh Mohammed even more legal protections than the Geneva Conventions provide a uniformed soldier fighting in a recognized war zone.
We don't often speak of incentives in war. That's a loss, because the whole idea of, say, Geneva rights is based on the idea of providing combatants with incentives to do things that help limit the bloodiness of battle. These include wearing a uniform, carrying arms openly, not targeting civilians, and so on.
Muslim terrorists recognize none of these things. They are best understood as associations of people plotting and carrying out war crimes, whether that means sowing fear with direct and indiscriminate attacks on marketplaces, offices and airlines—or by engaging enemy troops without distinguishing uniforms, so that the surrounding civilians essentially become used as human shields. Muslim terrorists reject both the laws of war and the laws of any civil society. To put it another way, they reject both the authority and the obligations their legal rights imply.
None of this seems to bother Mr. Holder. Since he dropped his bombshell last Friday, much commentary has focused on the possibility that KSM might be found not guilty. The perversity here is that the overwhelming evidence of their war crimes gain them protections denied a soldier fighting in accord with the rules of war.
Andrew McCarthy has a unique perspective on the move to criminal trials. As an assistant U.S. attorney in 1993, he successfully prosecuted Omar Abdel Rahman (the "blind sheikh") for the first bombing of the World Trade Center. Even though the cases were somewhat different—that plot was conceived, plotted and carried out on U.S. soil—Mr. McCarthy says the experience persuaded him that federal trials are a bad way of handling terrorists.
"At first, I was of the mind that a criminal prosecution would uphold all our high-falutin' rhetoric about the constitution and majesty of the law," says Mr. McCarthy. "But when you get down to the nitty gritty of a trial, you see one huge problem: The criminal justice system imposes limits on the government and gives the defendant all sorts of access to information, because we'd rather have the government lose than unfairly convict a man. You can't take that position with an enemy who is at war with you and trying to bring that government down."
By going down this road, says Mr. McCarthy, Mr. Holder has invited any number of dangers: making the Manhattan courtroom a target for terrorist attack, inviting the disclosure of sensitive intelligence, and opening the possibility that some al Qaeda operatives will be acquitted and released within the U.S., etc. It is foolish to think that al Qaeda does not train to our system and look for our vulnerabilities.
THE BOTTOM LINE: As I said this move was done either to carry out the Muslim agenda to make a mockery of our justice system and our military, or it has been done out of pure ignorance and stupidity.
Remember what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed told his captors when we got him, “I'll see you in New York with my lawyers”
It seems he knows our weaknesses better than our government does…
de Andréa
We have film.
By de Andréa
I can think of a dozen ways that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed could get off scott free and I am not a lawyer.
CSI New York was not immediately on scene at what was left of the twin towers after 9/11 so there is no forensic evidence for show and tell. Then there is that nasty stickity wicket of Miranda. Oh! And just how can Khalid get a jury of his peers without putting some terrorist Muslims on the jury. The Defense attorney is most certainly going to ask for a chance of menu. Then we can’t forget that we have defined water-boarding as torture, so Khalid can bring brutality charges against the U.S. military. And of course everything that Khalid might have said was obtained under duress and without his lawyer present
Moreover reminiscent of the Manson trial when President Nixon said that Charles Manson was guilty before the trial, his lawyers nearly got him off because of prejudice. Do you think that Obama just accidentally made the same Mistake when he said that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would be found guilty and executed?
Holder lied when he said that he alone decided to try Khalid in a civilian Federal Court. He doesn’t have the authority to do that. You see this gives Obama deniability, which he has already done, so he lied as well.
As I said, what would the administration do different if it was purposely trying to pull an O.J. ? Nothing!
There are countless reasons to oppose Holder’s illegal decision, not the least of which is the potential for compromising our intelligence assets in a public, criminal trial where Mohammed’s attorneys will demand release of such classified information.
As I have so often said “there is nothing new under the sun” every mistake that is made has already been made at least once, including this one, read on.
The trial of Omar Abdel-Rahman comes to mind, the perpetrator of the 1993 New York trade center terrorist bombing, exactly the same mistake was made. In a civilian court Rahman’s attorneys among other things forced the release of the list of unindicted co-conspirators developed by the prosecution. One of the names on the list was Osama bin Laden. Soon after, bin Laden fled Sudan. More over, he reputed history again on 9/11. One gets caught in the loop of stupidity of one ignores history no matter how ancient or resent.
Some Americans are justifiably outraged by Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks, in a civilian criminal court in New York. The perversity of this defies description. This is just one more in a long line of decisions by the Obama administration that is putting America—and our lives—at greater risk.
The question is; was this done purposely by our Muslim president, or is this just another stupid decision in a long line of stupid decisions? Do you really think that Obama is that stupid? Could be!
You may be one of those Americans who are asleep, and no matter what King Barrack Hussein Obammah does it is fine with you, because after all, you are asleep and have no Idea what is going on in Washington anyway. Obama says we are not a war with Islam. Well of course, if this was 1943 and he was a Nazi, he would say we are not at war with Nazis.
Obama is a Muslim, Muslims are terrorists, and so Obama is a terrorist. If you have any doubt that your president is the deceptive enemy that threatens America, then watch and listen to him tell you in his own words. Oh! But first wake up, so you can at least hear the truth, believing it is up to you. Click and Watch Notice how he lies about the Muslim accomplishments of the Iranian Muslim culture. If you know your history, (which he is betting that you don’t) you will know the Muslim cultural accomplishments of Iran he mentions, were actually done by the Persian Empire long before the existence of Iran and Islam. The truth is that Islam has not contributed anything good to the world.
Nothing good has ever come out of Islam.
When it comes to terrorists, you would think that an al Qaeda terrorist who targets an American mom sitting in her office or a child in a school is many degrees worse than a Taliban terrorist picked up after a roadside bombing in Iraq.
Your instinct would be correct, because at the heart of this demonic terrorism is the monstrous idea that the former is as legitimate a target as the latter. Unfortunately, by dispatching Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other al Qaeda leaders to federal criminal court for trial, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder will be undermining this distinction. And the perverse message that this decision will send to Allah’s demonic terrorists all over this world is this: If you kill civilians on American soil you will have greater protections than if you attack our military overseas.
The fundamental purpose of rules such as the Geneva Convention is to give those at war an incentive for more civilized behavior—and not targeting civilians is arguably the most sacred of these principles, It demolishes this principle to give Khalid Sheikh Mohammed even more legal protections than the Geneva Conventions provide a uniformed soldier fighting in a recognized war zone.
We don't often speak of incentives in war. That's a loss, because the whole idea of, say, Geneva rights is based on the idea of providing combatants with incentives to do things that help limit the bloodiness of battle. These include wearing a uniform, carrying arms openly, not targeting civilians, and so on.
Muslim terrorists recognize none of these things. They are best understood as associations of people plotting and carrying out war crimes, whether that means sowing fear with direct and indiscriminate attacks on marketplaces, offices and airlines—or by engaging enemy troops without distinguishing uniforms, so that the surrounding civilians essentially become used as human shields. Muslim terrorists reject both the laws of war and the laws of any civil society. To put it another way, they reject both the authority and the obligations their legal rights imply.
None of this seems to bother Mr. Holder. Since he dropped his bombshell last Friday, much commentary has focused on the possibility that KSM might be found not guilty. The perversity here is that the overwhelming evidence of their war crimes gain them protections denied a soldier fighting in accord with the rules of war.
Andrew McCarthy has a unique perspective on the move to criminal trials. As an assistant U.S. attorney in 1993, he successfully prosecuted Omar Abdel Rahman (the "blind sheikh") for the first bombing of the World Trade Center. Even though the cases were somewhat different—that plot was conceived, plotted and carried out on U.S. soil—Mr. McCarthy says the experience persuaded him that federal trials are a bad way of handling terrorists.
"At first, I was of the mind that a criminal prosecution would uphold all our high-falutin' rhetoric about the constitution and majesty of the law," says Mr. McCarthy. "But when you get down to the nitty gritty of a trial, you see one huge problem: The criminal justice system imposes limits on the government and gives the defendant all sorts of access to information, because we'd rather have the government lose than unfairly convict a man. You can't take that position with an enemy who is at war with you and trying to bring that government down."
By going down this road, says Mr. McCarthy, Mr. Holder has invited any number of dangers: making the Manhattan courtroom a target for terrorist attack, inviting the disclosure of sensitive intelligence, and opening the possibility that some al Qaeda operatives will be acquitted and released within the U.S., etc. It is foolish to think that al Qaeda does not train to our system and look for our vulnerabilities.
THE BOTTOM LINE: As I said this move was done either to carry out the Muslim agenda to make a mockery of our justice system and our military, or it has been done out of pure ignorance and stupidity.
Remember what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed told his captors when we got him, “I'll see you in New York with my lawyers”
It seems he knows our weaknesses better than our government does…
de Andréa
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment