Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film
View Poll Results: Should Khalid Sheikh Mohammed be put on federal civilian trial or Military Tribunal?
Federal civilian trial
16
25.40%
Military Tribunal
47
74.60%
Voters: 63. You may not vote on this poll

9/11 trial

Old 11-13-09, 04:43 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,489
9/11 trial

Lawmakers differ on Gitmo trial decision
McCain warns of 'mixed message' sent by trying detainees in civilian court

WASHINGTON - The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Friday that the decision to take Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other Guantamao detainees to New York to put them on trial in a federal civilian court is the right one.

Democrat Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said that federal courts are capable of trying high-profile terror cases.

Putting the self-proclaimed 9/11 mastermind and the other suspects on trial in federal courts demonstrates to the world that "the most powerful nation on earth also trusts its judicial system," he added.

But former Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said that suspected terrorists should be treated as war criminals and tried in military tribunals.

The Obama administration's decision to bring the detainees to trial in civilian court "sends a mixed message about America's resolve in the fight against terrorism," McCain said in a written statement.

Republican Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona said that bringing Mohammed to New York is an "unnecessary risk" that could also lead to the disclosure of classified information.

He said the trial of Omar Abdel Rahman the man known as the "blind sheik" in a plot against New York City landmarks caused "valuable information" to be revealed to al-Qaida.

Republicans are not the only lawmakers voicing concerns about the decision.

Democratic Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia, who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee, also supports the use of military tribunals in terrorism cases.

Bringing Mohammed and the other detainees to New York for trial could be "disruptive, costly, and potentially counterproductive," Webb said Friday.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33913564/ns/politics/

-First of all how the fuck has this guy not been on a military tribunal for years? He should've been executed a long time ago. This just makes it look like Obama wants to put the Bush administration on trial.
mhg83 is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 04:44 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 36,981
Re: 9/11 trial

He said the trial of Omar Abdel Rahman — the man known as the "blind sheik" — in a plot against New York City landmarks caused "valuable information" to be revealed to al-Qaida.
Do we know if this really happened? What info was revealed?
Venusian is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 04:51 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,579
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by Venusian View Post
Do we know if this really happened? What info was revealed?
Great journalism there, right? No effort to confirm or deny what politicians tell us. We just get their words verbatum, either presented as truth or offered as if statements like that exist in the realm of opinion.

Whenever I'm feeling sour about Obama, McCain comes out and says something ridiculous and self-serving to remind me it could have been much worse.
Nausicaa is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 05:01 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Re: 9/11 trial

How will waterboarding affect a trial in a U. S. Federal Court?

I would have preferred a military tribunal.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 05:12 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,579
Re: 9/11 trial

I'm fine with a civilian trial. Mostly because I'm still not comfortable with the military being able to grab anyone they want and ship them halfway around the world, locking them up indefinitely without charge. The whole point of a military tribunal seems to be to circumvent what we would consider normal criminal justice procedures. Why would we need to do that if we had solid evidence against the accused?

As it stands, I think the evidence against KSM is strong enough that the Govn't feels comfortable following through with this. I won't give the administration credit for doing the right thing, because there are several other high profile cases still being held up.

And why should waterboarding be an issue? It's not torture, right? No different than getting hit with a water balloon!
Nausicaa is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 05:13 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
Re: 9/11 trial

Republican Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona said that bringing Mohammed to New York is an "unnecessary risk" that could also lead to the disclosure of classified information.
Would a civilian trial be open to regular discovery by both sides, and wouldn't that be a huge risk in something like this?
kvrdave is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 05:15 PM
  #7  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 36,981
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by Nausicaa View Post
Whenever I'm feeling sour about Obama, McCain comes out and says something ridiculous and self-serving to remind me it could have been much worse.
how was it self serving?
Venusian is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 05:26 PM
  #8  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 39,525
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by mhg83 View Post
This just makes it look like Obama wants to put the Bush administration on trial.
Take your slanders elsewhere, good sir! I'm no fan of President Bush , but to say that putting al Qaeda on trial means putting the Bush administration on trial is beyond the pale. I am confident that this trial -- whether before an Article II court or a military tribunal -- will make it clear that the Bush administration was not involved in the 9-11 plot.
JasonF is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 05:33 PM
  #9  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by Nausicaa View Post
I'm fine with a civilian trial. Mostly because I'm still not comfortable with the military being able to grab anyone they want and ship them halfway around the world, locking them up indefinitely without charge. The whole point of a military tribunal seems to be to circumvent what we would consider normal criminal justice procedures. Why would we need to do that if we had solid evidence against the accused?
It's been normal criminal justice procedure for years & years.

A military tribunal is not necessarily a kangaroo court.

'Locking them up without charge' - that was our mistake. We should designated them as POWs and there would no problem with 'locking them up without charge.'
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 05:33 PM
  #10  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,739
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by Venusian View Post
Do we know if this really happened? What info was revealed?
I don't know what was revealed, but he had his attorney passing messages to the outside world before and/or during the trial.
X is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 05:34 PM
  #11  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Land of the Lobstrosities
Posts: 10,300
Re: 9/11 trial

I heard a sound bite of Holder saying that he wouldn't have brought the case to a civil court if he wasn't confident they would prevail. My question is, should the Feds be able to cherry pick which cases go to which court based on the strength of their evidence or likelihood of conviction? If not, then what criteria do they use to decide who gets a civil trial and who gets a military tribunal? And doesn't selective civil prosecution undermine the legitimacy of the entire military tribunal process?

EDIT: I'm trying to find the exact quote. I heard it during a top of the hour news update on the radio.

I think this is it, from this article, but I would like to see it in context:
"I would not have authorized the bringing of these prosecutions unless I thought that the outcome ... would ultimately be successful," he said. "I will say that I have access to information that has not been publicly released that gives me great confidence that we will be successful in federal court."

Last edited by wmansir; 11-13-09 at 07:28 PM.
wmansir is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 05:34 PM
  #12  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,739
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by classicman2 View Post
How will waterboarding affect a trial in a U. S. Federal Court?
Yeah, no problem with a jury there. "My client was repeatedly tortured by the government!"
X is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 05:35 PM
  #13  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,489
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
Take your slanders elsewhere, good sir! I'm no fan of President Bush , but to say that putting al Qaeda on trial means putting the Bush administration on trial is beyond the pale. I am confident that this trial -- whether before an Article II court or a military tribunal -- will make it clear that the Bush administration was not involved in the 9-11 plot.
I'm not saying Bush administration was involved in 9-11. That's crazy conspiracy shit. I'm talking about when this trial happens more details will come out about Bush that will add more hate towards him and his staff and humiliate the u.s.
mhg83 is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 06:05 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Re: 9/11 trial

This is going piss off a bunch of folks that lost family members on 9/11.

I just heard Ed on The Ed Show say he's all for this move. 'This will show the world that we are a nation of laws.'

1. Does he really believe that?

2. Much of the world doesn't care.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 06:06 PM
  #15  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 39,525
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by X View Post
Yeah, no problem with a jury there. "My client was repeatedly tortured by the government!"
I'm sure a jury in the Southern District of New York is going to feel sorry for the guy. Probably they'll declare him super-double-plus not guilty, and then sentence George Bush to death.
JasonF is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 06:11 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
I'm sure a jury in the Southern District of New York is going to feel sorry for the guy. Probably they'll declare him super-double-plus not guilty, and then sentence George Bush to death.
It's a possibility.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 06:42 PM
  #17  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,739
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
I'm sure a jury in the Southern District of New York is going to feel sorry for the guy. Probably they'll declare him super-double-plus not guilty, and then sentence George Bush to death.
It will be great having each "torture" session explicitly described along with the demonization of the previous Administration (which is probably a big part of the decision to take this out of military court).

Not to mention that the guarantee Holder is making about getting convictions sounds an awful lot like "we're going to give them a fair trial and then we'll hang them."
X is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 09:11 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 39,525
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by X View Post
It will be great having each "torture" session explicitly described along with the demonization of the previous Administration (which is probably a big part of the decision to take this out of military court).

Not to mention that the guarantee Holder is making about getting convictions sounds an awful lot like "we're going to give them a fair trial and then we'll hang them."
1. Evidence of torture will be irrelevant unless the prosecution seeks to introduce confessions obtained through torture. The government almost certainly won't do so. It's a non-issue.

2. Even if the evidence of torture is relevant, the government will have a strong case to bar its introduction under FRE 403, which prohibits the itnroduction of evidence whose prejudice outweighs its probative value.

3. Prosecutors always talk about the fact that they are going to convict defendants. Holder's statements are nothing unusual; nor are they suggestive of prejudice.
JasonF is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 10:59 PM
  #19  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,739
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
1. Evidence of torture will be irrelevant unless the prosecution seeks to introduce confessions obtained through torture. The government almost certainly won't do so. It's a non-issue.

2. Even if the evidence of torture is relevant, the government will have a strong case to bar its introduction under FRE 403, which prohibits the itnroduction of evidence whose prejudice outweighs its probative value.

3. Prosecutors always talk about the fact that they are going to convict defendants. Holder's statements are nothing unusual; nor are they suggestive of prejudice.
So we can forget about any mention of torture coming out of this case?

Of course there will be the daily commentaries by reporters talking about it, but you are absolutely assuring us that torture will not be mentioned in the courtroom. Right?
X is offline  
Old 11-13-09, 11:39 PM
  #20  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 39,525
Re: 9/11 trial

I'm not particularly interested in playing another round of "Follow X's moving goalposts." Have a great weekend.
JasonF is offline  
Old 11-14-09, 02:25 AM
  #21  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
funkyryno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,791
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by X View Post
I don't know what was revealed, but he had his attorney passing messages to the outside world before and/or during the trial.
Lynne Stewart, convicted on charges of conspiracy and providing material support to terrorists and sentenced to 28 months in prison.
funkyryno is offline  
Old 11-14-09, 07:57 AM
  #22  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Land of the Lobstrosities
Posts: 10,300
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
I'm sure a jury in the Southern District of New York is going to feel sorry for the guy. Probably they'll declare him super-double-plus not guilty, and then sentence George Bush to death.
Wouldn't any competent defense attorney's first move be to request a change of venue? IIRC, McVeigh got his trial moved from Oklahoma City to Colorado.
wmansir is offline  
Old 11-14-09, 08:41 AM
  #23  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
1. Evidence of torture will be irrelevant unless the prosecution seeks to introduce confessions obtained through torture. The government almost certainly won't do so. It's a non-issue.
Even if torture is brought into the trial it might very well not work since the jury members might not give a damn whether they were tortured or not. They want some measure of revenge.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-14-09, 01:16 PM
  #24  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Sean O'Hara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vichy America
Posts: 13,535
Re: 9/11 trial

Originally Posted by classicman2 View Post
'Locking them up without charge' - that was our mistake. We should designated them as POWs and there would no problem with 'locking them up without charge.'
No, we should've tried them as spies and saboteurs, sentenced them to death, and then offered them life imprisonment in return for information.
Sean O'Hara is offline  
Old 11-15-09, 06:10 AM
  #25  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,982
Re: 9/11 trial

This DVDTALK poll made history. 1st poll to favor what conservatives feel.
wm lopez is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.