Re: Accused 9/11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed faces New York trial
Greegor
1. In the Obama Administration, WHOSE idea was this?
2. Is this man entitled to a US Civil Court vs Military Courts
martial?
3. Is a civil court conviction possible after delay and waterboarding,
etc.?
4. Was this trial INTENDED to fail?
5. Why would the President do that?
6. Is this Constitutionally required?
7. Why is Khalid entitled to US Constitutional rights?
8. When this gets thrown out of civil court, who will Obama blame?
9. Did the Presidential Administration need a distraction?
Put down your anonymous mailers and your script kiddy code
and explain your logic, Davey!
Davey the ""Anonymous"" wrote ( in triplicate and invisible ink )
WHAT "sympathies for them in the administration", you stupid prick??
Are
you referring to the fact that (unlike our previous president) this
one
wants to follow the law and protect the rights of the accused as
outlined by our Constitution? Oh, I'M SORRY, you poor, poor
brainless
thing. Leave it to an idiot like you to protest THAT. EVERYONE is
entitled to a fair trial in this country, moron. EVERYONE, even
people
who are highly suspected BEFORE the trial to be innocent. That's
just
the way it is and if you non-patriotic PRICK don't like the way we
run
things around here, you are WELCOME to go to your wife's native
island
of CUBA. Do it. Stay there. Every line you wrote above was based in
ignorance and stupidity. Every single line.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.security.terrorism/msg/82a3bfef6e076304
Newsgroups: alt.law-enforcement, alt.true-crime, alt.conspiracy,
misc.legal, alt.security.terrorism
From: "krp" <kr...@tampabay.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 17:03:26 -0500
Local: Fri, Nov 13 2009 4:03 pm
Subject: Re: Accused 9/11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed faces New
York trial
"NOMOREWARS_FORISRAEL" <sharkseek...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:34caf9a7-fb98-4bde-
a98e-1e3...@g22g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Accused 9/11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed faces New York trial
He absolutely WILL NOT stand trial in New York! You see he has
been
denied a "speedy trial" and that mandates a dismissal - AND it
mandates
COMPENSATION. So not only will there be NO trial and KSM be released
back
home, he will be handsomely paid. There are at least two dozen issues
that
demand a dismissal under regular American criminal law. Not the least
of
which is the water boarding issue. But then the Obama administration
KNOWS
this. The REAL agenda here is to release the terrorists because of
the
sympathies for them in the administration. They may even put him on a
767
with a personal set of box cutters. For me? I'd just put their asses
on a
plane and fly them to Saudi Arabia and tell THEM to deal with these
people.
And tell the Saudis that if they let them go, Riyadh will be nuked.
Deadrat
news:005afc71-46a5-4c91...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
> Point by point:
>
> 1. In the Obama Administration, WHOSE idea was this?
Presumably, the AG in consultation with POTUS.
> 2. Is this man entitled to a US Civil Court vs Military Courts
> martial?
The least you can do is get your terms straight. It's a *civilian*
court. And the choice is entirely up to the executive.
>
> 3. Is a civil court conviction possible after delay and waterboarding,
> etc.?
The AG thinks so.
> 4. Was this trial INTENDED to fail?
No.
> 5. Why would the President do that?
Assumes facts not in evidence.
> 6. Is this Constitutionally required?
What? A trial? Of course. A trial in federal court? No.
>
> 7. Why is Khalid entitled to US Constitutional rights?
Because Khalid is within the territorial jurisdiction of the Constitution
of the United States of America.
> 8. When this gets thrown out of civil court, who will Obama blame?
Nobody. Unlike you, Obama trusts the US legal system.
> 9. Did the Presidential Administration need a distraction?
Yeah, just like health care, Afghanistan, and the economy, this is just
one more distraction left to us by the WPE.
<snip/>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.security.terrorism/msg/82a3bfef6e076
> 304
>
> Newsgroups: alt.law-enforcement, alt.true-crime, alt.conspiracy,
> misc.legal, alt.security.terrorism
> From: "krp" <kr...@tampabay.rr.com>
> Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 17:03:26 -0500
> Local: Fri, Nov 13 2009 4:03 pm
> Subject: Re: Accused 9/11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed faces New
> York trial
>
> "NOMOREWARS_FORISRAEL" <sharkseek...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:34caf9a7-fb98-4bde-
> a98e-1e3...@g22g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Accused 9/11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed faces New York trial
>
> He absolutely WILL NOT stand trial in New York! You see he has
> been
> denied a "speedy trial" and that mandates a dismissal - AND it
> mandates
> COMPENSATION.
Although it's clear that KSM has been denied a speedy trial, this will
turn on the length of time between *indictment* and trial.
> So not only will there be NO trial and KSM be released
> back
> home, he will be handsomely paid. There are at least two dozen issues
> that
> demand a dismissal under regular American criminal law. Not the least
> of
> which is the water boarding issue.
No, the waterboarding will taint any evidence so obtained, but it won't
get the charges dismissed.
> But then the Obama administration
> KNOWS
> this. The REAL agenda here is to release the terrorists because of
> the
> sympathies for them in the administration. They may even put him on a
> 767
> with a personal set of box cutters. For me? I'd just put their asses
> on a
> plane and fly them to Saudi Arabia and tell THEM to deal with these
> people.
> And tell the Saudis that if they let them go, Riyadh will be nuked.
Why do you hate this country?
Greegor
On Nov 14, 8:27 pm, Deadrat <a...@b.com> wrote:
> Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote innews:005afc71-46a5-4c91...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
G > Point by point:
G >
G > 1. In the Obama Administration, WHOSE idea was this?
DR > Presumably, the AG in consultation with POTUS.
G > 2. Is this man entitled to a US [ Civilian Criminal ]
G > Court vs Military Courts martial?
DR > The least you can do is get your terms straight.
DR > It's a *civilian* court.
Thanks for that correction.
DR > And the choice is entirely up to the executive.
Which executive? GW Bush or BH Obama?
If one decided, does the latter have a right to change that course?
G > 3. Is a [civilian criminal ] court conviction
G > possible after delay and waterboarding, etc.?
DR > The AG thinks so.
G > 4. Was this trial INTENDED to fail?
DR > No.
How do you KNOW that? Or just an opinion?
G > 5. Why would the President do that?
DR > Assumes facts not in evidence.
Goes to motive.
G > 6. Is this Constitutionally required?
DR > What? A trial? Of course.
DR > A trial in federal court? No.
G > 7. Why is Khalid entitled to US Constitutional rights?
DR > Because Khalid is within the territorial jurisdiction
DR > of the Constitution of the United States of America.
OK, so IF TRUE, then the Judge will be automatically
obligated to throw it out because of waterboarding,
lack of speedy trial, and abduction overseas by CIA.
But merely being IN the USA does not confer
the rights of citizens under the US Constitution, does it?
G > 8. When this gets thrown out of civil court, who will Obama blame?
DR > Nobody. Unlike you, Obama trusts the US legal system.
To follow the Constitution for a foreign national who
is an enemy combatant pulled off foreign soil?
If they do, they will have to let Khalid walk.
If they DON'T, they will then be trampling
on the meaning OF the Constitution.
Which is worse?
This Khalid guy should have NEVER had
access to a civilian criminal court process.
G > 9. Did the Presidential Administration need a distraction?
DR > Yeah, just like health care, Afghanistan,
DR > and the economy, this is just one more
DR > distraction left to us by the WPE.
From further down in response to KPR:
DR > No, the waterboarding will taint any evidence so
DR > obtained, but it won't get the charges dismissed.
Please explain how the Federal Civilian Court
Judge will have the authority to overlook the
lack of speedy trial, waterboarding and
overseas abduction.
If the Judge DOES overlook those things, then
the Judge violates the US Constitution in such a
big way as to be a threat to every US Citizen.
If the Judge does NOT overlook those things
then an admitted mass murder conspirator goes free.
That is a threat to US Citizens as well.
Do you REALLY think that BH Obama and
his legal experts didn't realize this would happen?
Which outcome did BH Obama not expect?
violating Constitution to get him?
or
honoring the Constitution and letting a mass murderer walk?