Since Bin Laden had no trial, they dont deserve a trial either! Off with their heads!! Sharia style!

The families of the victims deserve justice and closure!

What has been "holding up justice" as you say
is that justice is an illusion in this country.

The MAIN WITNESS has been tampered with in the 1st degree. Bin Laden was allegedly killed by a SEAL raid during which "he" (whoever he was) didn't even resist. Then the body was thrown mafia-style overboard to the bottom of the ocean.

The MAIN WITNESS who could counter (or support) the torture induced state of mind of KLM was Bin Laden himself. But by our own confession we tampered with that witness and silenced him forever.

Ten years we have held KLM and no trial. That is "American justice".

If you recall Bush/Cheney resisted ANY 9/11 investigation. When they finally relented they put Henry Kissinger (who's name is synonymous with backroom cloak-and-dagger powerplays) in charge of their first commission. Henry backed out from pressure from the 9/11 Families and we got one stealth led by Karl Rove. No objective person respects the work of that 9/11 Commission.

All this was happening while we were invading Afghanistan where we conveniently let Bin Laden escape at Tora Bora to become the useful boogeyman for promoting our illegal invasion of Iraq.

Even before this and the original Afghanistan invasion the Taliban had offered to hold Bin Laden in custody and put him on trial, but we insisted that THEY the Taliban were supporting Bin Laden. We REFUSED to show the evidence that we claimed to have on Bin Laden. After we began to bomb the crap out of Afghanistan the Taliban relented and offered to have Bin Laden put on trial in a third-party country. But STILL we refused because at any trial we would have to show evidence. We wanted a decade and more of war.

Even before this, and days after 9/11, Colin Powell went on television and said before the world that the US in a few days would put down in writing for the world to see the evidence we had on Bin Laden. The very next day Powell was embarrased by Bush who said that no one was going to see the evidence that it was "classified". To this day we have not seen the evidence we invaded with.

Good luck with seeing evidence at any "trial" -- military tribunal or otherwise -- except "evidence" coerced through torture or presented through forced hearsay.

So you asked, "what is holding up justice for 11 years". The answer my friend is "American justice".

Defense lawyers had long argued that conspiracy was not recognized as a war crime when the attacks occurred in 2001.

Lawyers at their finest. They want their clients tried in the same courts as you and I, but not subject to the same charges as you and I.

Lawyers at their finest. They want their clients tried in the same courts as you and I, but not subject to the same charges as you and I.

You have to differentiate the type of trial these people are getting. If these people were in a Federal Court system then I believe that the conspiracy issue could be valid (but I'm no lawyer) under common law; however, this is a military war tribunal.

The problem lies in the fact that conspiracy to commit the crime would have to have been committed during the war. Defense lawyers can claim these charges are false because the conspiracy to commit the crime occurred before the U.S. was at war. At debate is when exactly did the war on terrorism begin? Was it when Bush declared it in October 2001 or was it prior to that when Osama Bin Laden declared war in his Fatwa in 1996 (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/military/july-dec96/fatwa_1996.html) on the U.S. long before the 9/11 attacks? I'm not going to get into the law stuff because I don't know jack about it but that's my understanding of the issue.

Before consipiracy in international law of war will hold up, we have to first define when did that war actually start?

Why spend money keeping alive those terrorist let them go , follow them up , and kill them with a drones, we are good on that, 99 % of the terrorist that where prosecute and let them free for insufficient prof, went back to join terrorist groups.

Defense Lawyers are crooked , they don't care about if their clients are terrorist or not, for those selfish , it is all about to win.

"The five suspected militants killed by U.S. drones Thursday were in an area considered the main sanctuary for the Taliban and al-Qaida."

No capture , no wather bording, no GITMO, no trial, just straight to hell. If Bush/Cheney do the same, the left will be calling them criminals.

These people were not soldiers in any way. They wore no uniforms and fought for no country. What they are guilty of is conspiracy to commit murder of over 3,000 people. That is a conspiracy charge that will stick. Cut out this nonsense about what is legal or not in war, there was no declared war and these are not soldiers. They are civilian terrorists who were involved in one of the largest murder conspiracies in history. Try them on those charges and, after they are convicted, take them out in the courtyard and put a bullet in each of their heads.

denver bill 2

From article: Defense lawyers had long argued that conspiracy was not recognized as a war crime when the attacks occurred in 2001.

denver bill 2: Lawyers at their finest. They want their clients tried in the same courts as you and I, but not subject to the same charges as you and I.

If you and I were waterboaded 183 times until a confession was obtained (as was the case with defendant Khalid Sheikh Mohammed), prosecutors would have close to a 100% conviction rate.

I suspect that a majority of the gleeful people celebrating the killing of unarmed bin Laden were unaware that the FBI never put this alleged mastermind of 9/11 on its most wanted list for 9/11 because it said that it had NO hard evidence connecting him to it. The raid on bin Laden's compound produced evidence that he liked porn, but apparently no detailed plans for using novice pilots on just 2 planes to knock down 3 skyscrapers that all burned up and fell right into their own footprints as if professionally demolished; or how 4 or 5 hijackers per plane could be capable of overpowering whole planeloads of passengers with just box cutters.

As pointed out in an earlier post by J.P, Bush tried strenuously to prevent any investigation of 9/11. Why? When Bush finally yielded to intense pressure from families of the victims, he permitted only a severely limited one in which crucial evidence (like the hijackers' American support structure) was off-limits to investigators. Citing a pattern of lying and other non-cooperation by Bush administration officials, half of those investigators have called their own report a cover-up by that administration, with several calling for a new, independent investigation.

Don't look for such an investigation under Obama who has to be aware of the doubts of the investigators. Rather, as pointed out by poster J.P, Obama (or his underlings) had the most important 9/11 witness possible eliminated, thereby avoiding the embarrassment of a trial in which bin Laden would be acquitted of all 9/11 charges--witness tampering at its finest by our constitutional lawyer president.

they believe that they are instruments of GOD, cleansing the world of all wo do not follow the Koran; they believe that if they are killed by the infidel, then all their sins are forgiven and they go straight to Paradise;we are in a world war, for some reason we do not understand the enemy; they believe in what they are doing, convert to Islam or you will die; we are bringing over 10 thousand per month into our country, paying them to get started, giving them government guaranteed loans to start a business free health care, ; they do not want to adopt our ways, they demand we adopt their ways; look at Detroit, Minneapolis, new community's all over the country, we will pay a heavy price for our refusal to understand what we are up against.

John4711

denver bill 2, If you and I were waterboaded 183 times prosecutors would have close to a 100% conviction rate.

I agree. What's your point?

I suspect that a majority of the gleeful people celebrating the killing of unarmed bin Laden were unaware that the FBI never put this alleged mastermind of 9/11 on its most wanted list for 9/11 because it said that it had NO hard evidence connecting him to it.

The videos he posted are sufficient evidence for me.

Saxon said:

they believe that they are instruments of GOD, cleansing the world of all wo do not follow the Koran; they believe that if they are killed by the infidel, then all their sins are forgiven and they go straight to Paradise;

What you're describing is the viewpoint of the extremists. Here's what their Prophet actually said:

a3.3 The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

(1) "The first person judged on Resurrection Day will be a man martyred in battle. He'll be brought forth, Allah will reacquaint him with His blessings upon him and the man will acknowledge them, where-upon Allah will say, 'What have you done with them?'

To which the man will respond, 'I fought to the death for you.'

"Allah will reply, `You lie. You fought in order to be called a hero, and it has already been said.' Then he will be sentenced and dragged away on his face to be flung into the fire."

they do not want to adopt our ways, they demand we adopt their ways;

We have had Muslims in our country for all 200+ years of our history and when the attack came i was not from American Muslims who hold America in their hearts as their home country with pride--it was from outside. After 9/11 Muslims signed up for the military and fought, many making the ultimate sacrifice,to defend this country and what our elected leaders perceived as a threat to us. to lump all of them in with the extremists who hate us and what we represent--freedom, democracy, literacy, freewill and rule of the people for the people instead of rule by a religious leader for the ultimate benefit of the religious leader.

To lump our Muslim soldiers in with the extremists is to dishonor their service and their sacrifice. And most of them are American born.

AMANDA...: the first of the verses from the Koran are different from the latter verses; are all Muslims terrorists, of course not; however the Muslim way of life has now been hijacked by the extremists , all over the world; the younger generation are following the extremists version; when any religion believes there way is the only way , then the conflict will become all out war, (Catholics in the middle ages, Cromwell in England are but two examples) ; we are now and have been for over 30 years at war with the new radical Muslim movement, it can only end one way all out total war !

denver bill 2

John4711: denver bill 2, If you and I were waterboaded 183 times prosecutors would have close to a 100% conviction rate.

denver bill 2: I agree. What's your point?

The point, which I thought was obvious, is that after 183 water boardings, you, I, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Bush, Obama and just about everybody else would be willing to admit to having participated in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. In other words, a confession after that much torture is highly suspect.

John4711: I suspect that a majority of the gleeful people celebrating the killing of unarmed bin Laden were unaware that the FBI never put this alleged mastermind of 9/11 on its most wanted list for 9/11 because it said that it had NO hard evidence connecting him to it.

denver bill 2: The videos he posted are sufficient evidence for me.

The video showing a heavyset man who is supposed to be the always thin bin Laden is a fake. The FBI didn't buy this production which possibly came from the same people who produced Colin Powell's Iraq WMD 'evidence.' But if it's good enough for you, the people in government who duped us on Tonkin Gulf, Saddam's WMD, Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman are quite pleased and extremely grateful that there are quite a few others like you.

9/11 was an inside job. True, there were terrorists with Muslim backgrounds involved, but their identities were known to the CIA and the Mossad long before 9/11, though wiretaps and other means. There is ample evidence that Mossad operatives were living next door to them. We had warnings from Russia in the days before 9/11. The CIA and NORAD were conducting air defense drills, simulating a plane hitting a building on the day of and day preceding 9/11, called Operation Vigilant Guardian. Wow, what an amazing coincidence. There was also another drill called Vigilant Warrior going on at the same time.

Imagine a fighter pilot's dilema, "is it a drill or is it real". We have always had planes on patrol for these kinds of things, but they were nowhere to be found when 9/11 was actually happening. The plane that allegedly hit the Pentagon, took off more than an hour after the planes that hit the towers, yet no intercept.

There are so many questions that were never answered or addressed by the 9/11 Commission. The Commission never asked about how Bldg 7, which was not hit by a plane, fell into its own footprint in a controlled demolition, shortly after the owner, Larry Silverstein" said "pull it". Silverstein had leased all 3 buildings and insured them against a terrror attack for billions just month before 9/11. Wow, what luck.

Here is a little more about the reason NORAD did not respond.

OPERATION VIGILANT GUARDIAN: This exercise simulated hijacked planes in the
north eastern sector and started to coincide with 9/11. Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins,
NORAD unit's airborne control and warning officer, was overseeing the exercise.
At 8:40am she took a call from Boston Center which said it had a hijacked
airliner. Her first words, as quoted by Newhouse News Service were, "It must be
part of the exercise." This is another example of how the numerous drills on the
morning of 9/11 deliberately distracted NORAD so that the real hijacked planes
couldn't be intercepted in time.

4) OPERATION NORTHERN GUARDIAN:
The details of this exercise are still scant but it is considered to be part of
Vigilant Guardian, relating to simulating hijacked planes in the north eastern
sector.

5) OPERATION VIGILANT WARRIOR:
This was referenced in Richard Clarke's book 'Against All Enemies'. It is
thought to have been the 'attack' component of the Vigilant Guardian
exercise.

Another example of how air
defenses were purposefully kept preoccupied so they couldn't protect New York
was reported by this website in December of 2003. The Air
National Guard's 177th Fighter Wing, based at Atlantic City International
Airport in Pomona, were just eight minutes away from New York and could have
intercepted both Flight 11 and Flight 175.

Under NORAD procedures that date
to the Cold War, two F-16 fighters from the 177th were parked around the clock
on the Atlantic City runway. Pilots waited in a nearby building, ready to
scramble.

But on the morning of 9/11, the
F-16's were performing bombing runs over an empty stretch of the Pine Barrens
near Atlantic City after being decommissioned from their usual role of
protecting the skies of the east coast.

It was only after both trade
towers were hit that the two F-16s landed and were refitted with air-to-air
missiles, then sent aloft.

Now that we have established how
NORAD were confused, delayed and distracted by the numerous wargames, the next
question to ask is who if anyone was aware of which planes were 'real world' and
which planes were 'exercise'? The answer to this question will provide us with
the name of the individual who ran the operatonal execution of the 9/11
attack. Dick Cheney.

A charge of jaywalking will not result in a hanging. They have to be tried for capital crimes that result in capital punishment. Jaywalking is a misdemeanor and carries no criminal penalties. If your eventual goal is the death of these terrorists, then one has to make sure that the charges brought against them (and proven!) must be of such nature as to clearly demonstrate the appropriateness of capital punishment. The goal here is to close Gunatanamo Bay's prison facilities, so that means:

1) No more detainees arriving at the facility

2) Hold trials for the ones who are there

3) Carry out sentence on those proven guilty

4) Figure out what to do with those proven innocent but whose countries/governments don't want them back.

The first three are easy to do, simply takes time. The fourth...not so easy.

The only plausible solution for your number four is to transfer them to the Federal prison system where they would be held indefinably for life on the tax payers dollar. Won't get approved. The only other solution is to find a country that is willing to take them instead. There have been cases where allies have taken custody of their own citizen to carry out their sentence, Omar Khadar (was it?) went back to Canada where he served out his sentence.

If the U.S. could find countries willing to either imprison on their soil (probably with some economic incentive) or for release in another country willing to provide visa/citizenship (other than a known terrorist sympathetic country or similar), then they would be able to get them off the island.

Many people (sadly) don't realize that GTMO is actually a Naval Base we have had there for decades. People only associate GTMO now with the military commissions and even when all this is said and done, GTMO will likely continue to hold a sour spot in people's minds even though GTMO actually has very little hand in the detention operations down there beyond providing detainee security and logistics support (http://www.mc.mil/FACILITIESSERVICES.aspx)

Amanda-2017567

A charge of jaywalking will not result in a hanging.

Look up "hyperbole" in the dictionary.

4) Figure out what to do with those proven innocent but whose countries/governments don't want them back.

The first three are easy to do, simply takes time. The fourth...not so easy.

The fourth ..... impossible. Courts do not prove anything. They find people "guilty" or not "guilty." I may not be guilty of any crimes, but I am far from innocent.

It's the Prosecutions responsibility to prove (via the burden of proof) that a defendant is guilty. Judge/Jury verdict is a finding. But must we really slow the conversation on the definition when I'm pretty sure we know exactly what's being relayed?

GM Denver Bill

Our court system is unique in that innocent is never a finding and your analogy is dead on. However, in the French or Italian courts, the defendant has to prove their innocence. The good news is these B*stards are being tried in military tribunal court system, so convictions, no matter what the charges they are tried on should come back "guilty".

As for the ones that their own country does not want returned, perhaps they will be selected for the "mission to Mars" experiment! (sarc)

so all you care about is someone dying for your bleeding heart...thats called murder. Good to know that you have not one ounce of testimony and your already chanting murder..

Amanda-2017567

Actually, number four is also very easy.

Make a public announcement in NY regarding the exact time and place near ground zero they might be released. Ensure it is when there is a NYPD shift change, and the remaining patrol officers are on break.

Open the doors of a van and push any "innocent" out. Ensure they are wearing attire sufficient to identify them.... maybe hotpink jumpsuits emblazoned with "I'm a 911 TERRORIST" on front and back.

Then let things work themselves out.

XD - not all detainees in GTMO are related to the 9/11 attacks. Only 6 are. You also have Al-Nashiri (USS Cole bombing) and other enemy combatant who are related to Al-Queda or some other terrorist organization supposedly.

Denver Bill:

You're right, so let me correct number 4:

4) Figure out what to do with those who have been proven to have nothing to do with 9/11 but whose home countries refuse to take them back/don't want them back.

XDM:

The thing is, some of the people held there are just political dissidents in their own country, guilty of nothing except disagreeing with their government--the US put out a reward for the information/capture of anyone associated with 9/11 and many countries just handed over those political prisoners they didn't want in their country. These were later tried and proved to have had nothing to do with 9/11, but their country won't accept them back, and we will not allow them to stay. They are stuck.

If you have a solution to that that does not involve death for these people, I'm sure the government would like to hear it.

@SharpeinDC / Amanda-2017567,

You're both correct and I should have noted that only those involved with 9/11 should be treated as my post 2.7 indicates.

As far as the others, we could get them back if we wanted to. We were very good at renditions and could just reverse the process. Of course, that means ultimately pissing some "friends" off, but they're not really our friends to begin with and they'll get over it anyway with the next Foreign Aid check.

If we packed these people on a plane and shipped them back and their government knew about it, they could shoot that plane out of the sky.

If we sneaked them back over their border we'd be guilty of facilitating criminality (remember these people are considered criminals in their home countries, some simply because they don't happen to agree with how the government is run.) This could cause an international incident with said countries if one of their citizens, supposedly locked up in the US's Guantanamo Bay prison, suddenly pops up back on his country's radar.

Since we would have to maintain plausible deniability in the repatriation of this guy to his country, at best we would look incompetent to the world community (allowing a prisoner to'escape') or at worst it would be a beacon to every terrorist organization that Guantanamo has security holes and our Naval Base there would be the target of attacks endangering US military forces.

Not to mention which we would be morally guilty of sending a person to their death--the person would likely be killed instantly upon being spotted by his home country authorities. again, simply for the crime of disagreeing with the government.

Only in the US would a State (Texas) be permitted to submit a petition to secede from the government of the country without having the government of said country respond with military force to prevent the secession, and that is because our laws prevent it (specifically, Posse Commitatus, preventing US military from being used against US citizens) . We are the exception in the world rather than the norm.

Amanda - there are plenty of territories around the world that want and express their desire to secede from their respective countries. You're right: military force is used in some (eg: Northern Ireland, Chechnya) - but I expect that diplomacy and democracy are just as prevalent. Consider the Flemish, the Corsicans, the Quebeckers, the Scots, the Welsh, the Basques (may be a bad example), even Greenland.

(Not sure if these other countries' citizens regularly speak an oath that contains the phrase "one Nation under God, indivisible"...)

They are not dead yet because our Constitution guarantees them a trial, and the evidentiary process has been slow and difficult.

And because some of the people in Guantanamo Bay prison facilities are innocent of complicity in 9/11, have had a trial to prove their innocence, but their country does not want them back. If you have a solution that doesn't involve execution of those innocents, the government would love to hear it.

i cant believe how many of you peeps have blinders on, well yes i can, look who yall voted for. 2 planes hit 2 building but 3 building fall perfectly straight down, then they find paper passports to identify the so called terroists. its just unbelievable how stupid people are.

They are not dead because there is no evidence to convict them. Did you know Bin Laden was never formally charged for 9/11 on the FBI most wanted list because they had no evidence to charge him with???? How can a bunch of people on the other side of the planet and a $100,000 budget and box cutters outsmart the largest military complex in the world? Do you still want to pour taxpayer dollars into a military that at best allowed 4 hijacked planes to fly around the US for an HOUR AND A HALF and at worst was complicit in allowing the tragedy that ensued?

Amazing how many people think the Bin Laden 9/11 video was faked.

That's because Bin Laden died in 2002 of complications from Marfan's syndrome.

According to our Constitution, these men, accused of a capital crime, have the right to a trial. Same Constitution that guarantees our right to bear firearms.

Yes, President Obama campaigned on the promise he would close Guantanamo Bay's prison facilities. However, that issue has been slowed by the fact that many people still in there have not yet had trials, as evidence-gathering has been slow and difficult, and what holds the determination up even more is that some of the people held there have been tried, found not guilty, but they cannot be released because their countries don't want them back. Some of the Guantanamo detainees are people who are political dissidents in their own country, guilty of nothing except disagreeing with their government--a result after the US put out a reward for the information/capture of anyone associated with 9/11. Many countries just handed over those political prisoners they didn't want in their country. These were later tried and proved to have had nothing to do with 9/11, but their country won't accept them back, and we will not allow them to stay. They are stuck.

If you have a solution to that that does not involve execution for innocents, I'm sure the government would like to hear it.

Yes it was a campaign promise that he presented an Executive Order on. Congress hardly steps in on EO's and this is one that they cock blocked him on. Blaming it being open still should fall on Congress for blocking the EO.

But why did they block it? They didn't want these people tried in Federal courts. A few years ago they tried to put these people in Federal court and what happened? Look that one up, and thus why they are back in Military Commissions. www.mc.mil

"I'm Secretary of State, brought to you by Carl's Jr."

After taking office, he signed an executive order on Jan. 22, 2009, directing that Gitmo be shut down within a year. The order also called for an immediate case-by case review of detainees at the facility with an eye toward either repatriating them or bringing them to trial in U.S. civilian courts.But the president’s efforts to shutter the camp were blocked by Congress out of concerns that transferring the detainees to U.S. jails would pose a security risk and invite escape attempts or terrorist attacks on the facilities.

Thanks for the further clarification verno, you are exactly right. I was being lazy looking into the other reasons :P

The president did not lie, Americans were to chicken to take them in prison. NY pooped its pants when it was proposed for them to go there. I guess the terrorist won.

Just one of the wonders of the Constitution: Congress does not have to fund something just because it is decreed by executive order.

I think you mean KSM. As for your "not one piece of evidence" I assume you have direct insight into what they do and don't have so I'll have to take your word on it that they have absolutely jack diddles on these people.

The real charade is in the politics that have occurred between the beginning of commissions and 2010 when politicians spent countless time and money keeping commissions running while bickering about whether or not to try these people in a Federal system or war tribunal. Once 2010 hit and they decided commissions, things started rolling. Now that things are rolling there have been various hearings and motions. Once the defense/prosecution finish going through there motions (such ridiculous things as work conditions in GTMO or the defense motion requiring all women present to where the face garments (sorry don't know what those are called)) then the real trial can begin. Look up those motions and the history on this MC and see where the actual holdup was.

Joe....which is why we need to keep bringing it up. Every time there is a another 9/11 lie in the MSM we need to present the facts. We can't let the neocons win this time, Obummer included.

WOW! So "Obummer" is a neocon?

Who'da thunk? (you voted for your own post, didn't you?)

mpa - Obummer is following the same agenda. He is just filling a suit in the White House. You could have thought about that a little more.

Not limited to this admin. I have a ne'er-do-well nephew (drug sentences, GTA, theft, vandalism, etc.)

When he is out of jail, he gets disability (for his drug use) and other forms of public assistance (hard to get a job, ya know?).

Is this a great country or what?

You said :

Why are they permitted justice when the 3,000 people that were murdered on 9/11 weren't afforded any "justice"? And check your documents, the US Constitution doesn't say a &*^%ing thing about the rights of war criminals or terrorists. The US Constitution protects the rights of US citizens - these low lifes are not protected by our Constitution. As far as I'm concerned, they can rot in Gitmo while continuing to be tortured.

After saying:

I'm as far left as they come....

Who are you trying to kid?

Why are you so quick to assume that the people in custody are guilty of anything except being in custody?

rswall said:

...the US Constitution doesn't say a &*^%ing thing about the rights of war criminals or terrorists. The US Constitution protects the rights of US citizens - these low lifes are not protected by our Constitution.

The Constitution's 5th amendment states:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

And the 6th amendment:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Note these Amendments don't make the distinction between 'US Citizens' or 'non US citizens' or 'terrorists'. The 5th amendment simply says 'no person' and the 6th amendment simply says 'the accused.' Nowhere does it say these rights are only for US Citizens.

very nice Amanda, I'd also like to add that in the U.S. a foreign visitor or illegal immigrant get those same constitutional rights whenever they are accused of a crime.

sharpe:

Remember Homeland Security now owns the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties as well as the Office of Legislative Policy.

USCIS is a division of Homeland security, as well as CBP, ICE, TSA, FEMA, USCG(Coast Guard) and the Secret Service and a whole host of other offices and divisions. Homeland Security,by legislative policy,is authorized to do what they feel necessary in order to ensure national security, and are indemnified against lawsuits arising from infringement of civil/Constitutional rights.

Yeah, I wish I could agree with you that these rights belong to everyone, but when I was in the deportation camp the guards would hit me whenever I brought up the Constitutionality of my indefinite detention for missing paperwork. The subject of constitutional rights for those accused of (and those who are illegal) and even those who are simply undocumented (here legally, just missing paperwork) is vaguely defined and misinterpreted at will depending on convenience of the agency making said accusation.

"Remember Homeland Security now owns the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties as well as the Office of Legislative Policy."

While that sounds dramatic and threatening, Amanda, it really isn't. The DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties was created in 2004 by congress (subtitle C of Public Law 108-58).

That (DHS OCRCL) is an advisory group designed specifically to advise the department. Likewise for the Office of Legislative Policy. Other departments have similar offices within their organization. All part of government bloat.

Criminal elements inside the US government knew of the impending attacks and allowed them to happen. And WTF happened to WTC7?

Sir Kit, people don't want to know the truth. People believe WTC 7 was just a casualty of fire. They don't know anything about basic physics, or even that the BBC reported WTC 7 collapsed when it was STILL STANDING in behind the "journalist" reporting it!! People think jet fuel burns super hot when it is basically kerosene. Kerosene (or jet fuel) do not burn hot enough to melt structural steel or cause that structural steel to still be red hot 3 MONTHS LATER!!! Nobody dares to do a search for WTC 7 collapse because it will change their world view.

It is much easier for people to hate an accused group of people than have to think for themselves or question anything. Bunch of armchair quarterbacks when it comes to geopolitics.

Nothing to do with 9/11, but plenty to do with other things... besides, anyone with their head not buried in the sand knows W. invaded Iraq as a smokescreen for not even wanting to look for long-time family friend Osama bin Ladin.

After all, he did put the other bin Ladin family members on the only flight after the events of 9/11 to fly them out of the country "for their protection", when they were safe and sound sitting around the Bush ranch, planning the future price of oil.

Nothing to do with 9/11, but plenty to do with other things...

Like what?...I was talking about the civilians killed

All terrorists are technically civilians - they are not part of any uniformed military.

They're also criminals and in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions and the Rules of War.

Now, when you can figure out how to tell a terrorist from an innocent visually, I'll care a little about the number of dead Iraqis.

People need to do a search for the PBS special, "Cheney's Law". It spells it all out for you. Keep looking until you can find an attorney general (Gonzalez) who knows how to write the legal language to usurp the Constitution and create the Patriot Acts I and II, warrentless wiretapping, etc.

I am a tree hugger by nature and not one who goes for vengence, but....

Another troll claiming to be a leftie. Transparently pathetic.

The LEFTIE committee hereby revokes your membership.

@Frances - conspiracy charges are a drop in the bucket compared to the capital charges they face and would not suffice for a sentence of life or the death penalty. By dropping the conspiracy charge, it will keep the defense from slowing the trial down by submitting motions requesting it to be thrown out, delaying the trial yet even longer.

We just needed some stooges so we can keep our narrative moving down the road.

Bingo!

DRAGO - You are my new favorite poster.

why and how are the defense/prosecutors obstructing justice?

These terrorists would not be where they are if they had not been involved. Just execute them and move on.

Here, try out this new tooth file...you can pay by Paypal, pal. let me know how it goes.

I don't think US buys much oil from SA anymore. For your plan to work, you'd need to get Europe on board - then there's the Chinese as well...