E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSNBC's Pete Williams reports on Sulaiman Abu Ghaith's not guilty plea to charges of plotting to kill Americans in New York federal court.
A son-in-law of Osama bin Laden who served as an al-Qaida spokesman and warned Americans after Sept. 11 that “the storm shall not stop” pleaded not guilty Friday in a civilian court to plotting to kill Americans.
Handcuffed and in a blue prison suit, Sulaiman Abu Ghaith wore earphones to listen to a live translation of the hearing in a heavily guarded federal courtroom in Lower Manhattan, walking distance from the World Trade Center site.
He entered the plea through a court-appointed lawyer and was ordered to return to court April 8. Abu Ghaith himself spoke only twice, answering “Yes” when he was asked whether he understood the charge and whether he wanted representation.
Prosecutors disclosed that Abu Ghaith was captured Feb. 28 overseas and flown to New York the following day. They said he had yielded enough information after his capture to fill 22 pages. They did not give details of what he said.
Jane Rosenberg
Courtroom sketch of Sulaiman Abu Ghaith in New York federal court.
An indictment unsealed Thursday accuses Abu Ghaith of taking part in al-Qaida plots to kill Americans, both before and after the 2001 terror attacks. It describes him as such a close confidant that bin Laden summoned him for help on the evening of Sept. 11, 2001.
Abu Ghaith gave a speech after Sept. 11 and warned Americans that “the storm shall not stop, especially the airplanes storm” and suggested that Muslims and opponents of the United States should not fly or live in high rises.
Jordanian sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, told NBC News that Abu Ghaith was captured by Turkish officials in Ankara, where a court ruled that he had entered the country with a fake passport.
The Turkish government ordered him deported to Kuwait, where he was born, but arranged for him to travel through Jordan, where he was taken into custody by American law enforcement, the sources said.
NBC News exclusive: Iran was holding Abu Ghaith, U.S. officials say
Rep. Peter King of New York, a Republican who sits on the House Homeland Security Committee, announced the capture Thursday and credited the FBI and CIA.
Some Republican members of Congress expressed surprise that they had not been consulted, and said that Abu Ghaith should have been prosecuted as an enemy combatant and held by the military at the U.S. facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
They issued statements Friday denouncing the decision and saying that the Obama administration was weakening the nation by not having al-Qaida figures like Abu Ghaith detained and interrogated at military facilities.
“The administration risks missing important opportunities to gather intelligence to prevent future attacks and save lives,” Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire said in a statement.
In November 2009, the administration announced plans to try five people accused of plotting the Sept. 11 attacks in civilian court in New York. The White House backed off that plan a year and a half later after a political backlash.
Josh Earnest, a White House spokesman, said civilian courts have “a pretty good, strong track record” in handling terrorism prosecutions. He cited the men convicted of trying to blow up an airliner in December 2009 and detonate a car bomb in Times Square in May 2010, both of whom got life sentences in civilian courts.
“It is the consensus view of the president’s national security team and of agencies all across the federal government that this is the best way to handle bringing Abu Ghaith to justice,” Earnest said.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who chairs the Intelligence Committee, said she expected that Abu Ghaith would be put away for life.
“The bottom line is the federal criminal court system works,” she said.
Reuters and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
This story was originally published on Fri Mar 8, 2013 8:11 AM EST
Leave a Comment:
I guess terrorism stays in the family. Oh as for the 'rain of planes' - yes it did stop.
Note that the Obama administration decided to run this guy into our civilian court system rather then Gitmo where he belongs. Obama must be satisfied we have learned everything from this man possible, and it only took a couple days. I wonder how much testimony will not be allowed because of national security concerns. Or how putting this man in a US prison will raise the stakes for Islamic extremists to attack. The Obama administration still refuses to say that we are in a war on terror, and that stance certainly benefits radical Islam that doesn't care what call it.
Rick, what nation does Al Quada fight for? Which nation were we in a declared war with on 9/11/2001? What nation did we declare war on afterwards that Al Quada is the military for? What military battlefield was this man on as a commander when he was captured?
Under International law and International treaties, military courts should not and can not be used to try foreign nationals who are not enemy combatants. In order to be an enemy combatant, the person must either be the commander of troops in a declared war or must be captured on a battlefield where our military is engaged in a fight against the person captured. This scumbucket does not fit either definition for enemy combatant and we have not declared war on any nation at this time. Therefore, this scumbucket must be tried in civilian courts for the charges of conspiracy to commit murder (times approx. 3,000) and terrorism.
Rick- he's now a political prisoner, a tool to be used for PR purposes.
If we can drone American citizens, why should he be able to make the trip?
Cat, the terrorists did declare war on America, by name.
This guy identified himself as a combatant.
The battlefield region has expanded to everywhere on this planet.
Therefore, the conditions you state are satisfied.
Either way, I hope he spends many years in prison. In his and his affiliates' perception, that is worse than the death penalty.
Civilian court is where this guy belongs. Why legitimize al Quada as a political or military entity?
The guy's a criminal scumbag and shouldn't be treated as anything more. There's also established precedent for bringing foreign terrorists to the US to stand trial: the blind Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman was convicted of the 1993 WTC bombings and disappeared somewhere into the federal prison system, and hasn't been heard from since.
We're a nation of laws and have a very secure federal prison system. This guy will be tried, found guilty then will be locked up and the key thrown away.
And it will cost less than $30,000 a year to warehouse this guy at Supermax, compared to $800,000 a year to keep him indefinitely at Gitmo.
inMYday, wars are between COUNTRIES by definition. Individuals can NOT declare war on a country. Therefore, Al Quada could not be in a DECLARED WAR with the US. This is by INTERNATIONAL LAW and if we hope to continue to be players on the International stage we can not deviate from the definition of war that all countries follow. Maybe it's growing up as a military dependent or my minor in Law, but I assure you that I am quite correct when it comes to what war is defined as and why this man is NOT an enemy combatant and can NOT be tried in a military court.
costs very little to put him up against a wall and SHOOT him...
try him first, then execute the bustard
fork - it would have been fine with me if they'd used a 50 cent bullet on the guy when he first turned up in Turkey last week. It would have saved a lot of headaches. But now he's here and we're going to have a public trial to show the world we're a nation of laws, then we'll bury him in a federal prison somewhere.
madone,
Where are you finding bullets for fifty cents?
Only in Obama/Holder bizarro world are known terrorists given undeserved due process rights, while American citizens abroad can be killed without such protection if merely SUSPECTED of aiding the enemy? There is something dreadfully wrong here and you liberals better wake-up to the realization that Obama is very dangerous to our freedoms.
The people clamoring for terrorists to go to Gitmo have a bizarro view of things, considering they're also the ones clamoring for simply icing these "detainees" instead. Let me put it this way: exactly how long do you think these guys are going to last in an actual American prison? The GP would eat them alive. A convicted pedophile would probably feel safer. Just a thought...
Now that he's in a civilian jail and a civilian court does that mean he will be tried by a panel of his peers? If so what civilians in america will be his peers.The dictionary says our peers are people with the same legal status so how is that going to work. If he is not an american citizen will we be forced to bring his jurors from the sands? If we know enough to take him into custody why waste the money on a trial just put him in the luxury housing our prisons have become
Bin Laden son-in-law captured, this is a significant victory for President Obama and his fight against Al-Qaida !!!
This is a Big Big Win for "OUR" President and "OUR" Country !!!
President Obama is Commander-in-Chief. He does not have to consult with anyone else regarding this particular matter.
Too bad for this guy that George W isn't in office. He would have let him fly home just like he did with Bin Laden's family just days after 9/11. I guess that was because he was such good friends with the family, after all he was in business with the brother, Salem Bin Laden, look it up.
Republicans seem to be as baby like about their fears as the Democrats of old.
Wear your pink skirts, Repukes. You could have been tougher than the Dems. But instead you decided to be little cowards. Good on you making sure it is a race to the bottom for American political parties!
Poor Reagan. If he knew how chickens**t pukes would be, he'd be sad.
Jimmy Carter, the new president that Pukes love!
ter·ror
/ˈterər/
Noun
Extreme fear: "people fled in terror"; "a terror of darkness".
How do you fight a war on fear Rick? By perpetuating that fear? At what point does the Republican Party as a whole quit running around crying "be afraid...be very afraid"? Some of us still believe that the United States of America is the "Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave". We refuse to cower under our beds and we believe that such things as our system of justice is a shining example of what separates us from the likes of al-Qaida. If you want to gather your "stuff" around you and fearfully wait for death...feel free. Most of the rest of us won't follow.
Do you really want to know what benefits radical Islam? Your fear. They have changed our lives since 9/11 because we let them. We gave them a victory they couldn't otherwise have achieved. It's people who can't get past their fear...that is what will defeat us in the end. Not some nut job with an AK-47.
The US cannot by fiat unilaterally declare the entire planet as it's battlefield.
What you don't seem to grasp is that the three branches are independent for the most part and the executive is not required to check in with congress every time it goes about enforcing law, which is it's job.
Blutowski wrote:
How has this been hidden from Congress. It's been widely reported on the web and in the news. I assume Congressmen can read.
@ Ol Doc. You summed it up perfectly. But I doubt that Rick ever studied history or may have listened to FDR's 1st inaugural speech where he said: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Kudos.
I would not assume that, they may be able to read, although in some cases it is doubtful, but they sure as h*ll cannot understand what they read or they would understand the American public is fed up with their political antics.
Welcome to America beotch. If I was the judge. No amount of Ali Akbars would ever save him. I say we put him in the same cell as Jerry Sandusky and let the coach have a field day with him. And when he is screaming like pig because he is getting man raped for the 1000th time. Justice will then be served.
lets send him to gitmo where it will take a decade to try him. we have never failed to get a conviction in regular court of any foreighn terrorist. but gitmo has failed to convict hardly any people at all. he will be sent to colorado just like vevery other terrorist we have arressted and he will spend the rest of his life there. and it could be a short life since this carries the death penalty
Hm. This is easy.
Step 1) Ask him all the questions we want to ask.
Step 2) Deport him to Afghanistan/Pakistan/[insert middle eastern country of choice]
Step 3) Drone strike him 100 yards from the jeep that drops him off.
He's a self-proclaimed enemy combatant. Put him back on the battlefield and let him have it.
Instead of celebrating another bad guy rounded up the usual righties are trying to turn it into a negative for President Obama. Any wonder why repubs are viewed so negativly. Not everything our government does needs to be viewed thru your foxnews glasses. No one ever expects the righties here to ever give the Pres any credit, but honestly it just sound silly when you try to bend events like this into a mistep for the current administration
reffey - because the lefties were so much better about giving credit for anything to Dubya?
I think it is extremely appropriate to try this terrorist in New York. The people of N.Y. responded heroically after 9/11 (I've never been so proud of WE THE PEOPLE). They suffered the majority of the destruction and death-by all means have this coward tried and found guilty and let NEW YORK decide his fate............
Peace
Lets hope it works out just like that.
Leroy, Might want to look up what "Commander in Chief" means before posting:
According to Article II, Section 2, Clause I of the Constitution, the President of the United States is commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Force.
So what does him being "Commander in Chief" have to do with not informing Congress
hardtostarboard.....you said:
....and, you said elsewhere:
It is your (tantamount to) seditious statements that are "very dangerous to our freedoms". Rest assured, we (liberals) are very "waked-up" to it. Domestic terrorists are, practically, in league with the Islamic sort.
Sedition = "Conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of a state."
I just want to know how this is gong to go.. Is someone really defending him? Is he in isolation and unable to make contact with @#* other terrorists? No confidence in this at all.. Tired of all the compromises.. Tired of all the blaming.. Tired of the people not being represented.. Tired of allowing anyone to do whatever they want in our country.. Tired of the deceit.. Tired of private agendas.. Tired! Tired! Tired!
Ian Emdee-
hardtostarboard's post is not seditious in anyway. He's expressing the hope that we won't become embroiled in a civil war. That's called free speech. I imagine many smart people were expressing the same opinion in the years leading up to the Civil War.
Now if he had said: I'm calling upon everyone here who disagrees with President Obama to grab any guns you may have and meet me at such and such a place at this time so we can talk about overthrowing the government and replacing it with a new one, that would be considered seditious speech.
So going by your premise of sedition how is that any better when anyone here from both sides wishes for the deaths of either the President or any member of Congress?
@Ol_Dic...I see you are attempting your corrective bs rhetoric once more! You continually attack conservatives and now state America has nothing to fear from any terrorist group? We all see how far that got us on 911! We see how far that got us in Benghazi! We see how far that got us in...Etc, etc, etc!!!!People like you, that walk around with blinders on, are what's wrong with society today! You live in an American bubble of safety without seemingly much chance of attack when nuts like this guy, are trying to think of ways to cause America harm! You think everything is a conspiracy, because you are drowning in your own self loving conjecture, unless it's shoved in your face! When everyday, in many places around the world, people are training to attack and kill Americans! Tell you what Ol_Dic, I dare your sorry liberal *ss to go over to.... let's say Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, etc...and spout off your bs and let these people know your an American! I'll bet you wont live beyond a day!! If your gutless tail doubts me, hell I'll buy the ticket! They way I see it, you'll be one less self-loathing liberal we will have to deal with! By the way....never got the answer if you ever served? WELL?
“The bottom line is the federal criminal court system works,” she said.'
She left out the ( not all the time part ). With enough money even politicans walk why not this guy if given the chance .
Guilty
Faerieschyld......you said:
Read the comment history here-->http://brianlangum.newsvine.com/_more/users/comments
Then reconsider your comment. These folks are not so dumb that they don't speak in coded language.
Show me where I stated that America has nothing to fear from any terrorist group. Come on big-boy, show me the quote. Being weary of hostile groups; maintaining situational awareness and preparedness are not the same thing as acting like a frightened child.
So by changing the "American Way" to some kind of paranoid police state, that will keep us safe? "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
I am under no illusions. I retired from the US Army having served from the Vietnam War (with a 9 year break in service), to our involvement in Kosovo. I served during the Cold War and I do understand a threat. But mindless paranoia will never keep us safe. It's just a victory for the terrorists.
That's quite a paragraph. So do I suffer from self loving or self-loathing? You can't seem to make up your mind. It's interesting to read the ramblings of someone off their medication. How do you get through the day?
Idiotic story. Get your facts straight - he faces charges of conspiracy to commit murder, not the act itself. As such, under international law, he is not classified as a combatant and should not be sent to GITMO to be tried by a military tribunal.
We'll get him, but the right way.
Actually, the reasons he's not an enemy combatant is that 1) we were not in a declared war against any nation at the time of the murders, 2) he was not a military leader for any national troops, 3) he was not captured on any battlefield. If someone from a different country shoots someone on our soil, they are tried for murder on our soil. The distinction is not conspiracy vs. murder, it's the fact that we have not declared war on any country and he was not captured on a battlefield, but more it's because we are not in a declared war against any nation for which this scumbucket was a commander of armed forces.
Cat, please refer to 1.5, above.
inMyday, please refer to 1.7.
Just to you.
Bluto must still be puking at the toga party or he's deaf and blind? What part of congress already knows don't you get? Good Christ! If silly little you knows. I'm damn sure congress knows. Or maybe they didn't the classified memo you got? Good grief! Get real.
"After the detention became public, some lawmakers were caught by surprise and said that the Obama administration was dodging Congress."
This administration "dodge Congress"? That can't possibly be! It strikes me as very odd that we can smoke a couple of American citizens in a foreign country, without due process, and have this animal captured by the Turks, only to have him face a civilian trial as a foreign national with no Constitutional rights whatsoever. When you silly liberals finish peeing down your trousers, just think about that for a little while.
The situation is not military or criminal,it is entirely political
Cat-
Just a question not a fight. You mentioned above you had a minor in law. So how would you prosecute him if you were the prosecuting attorney, and then how would you defend him if you were his defense attorney?
Also how does a civilian lawyer distance himself from his personal views when he does have to defend someone like Bin Laden's son-in-law? I couldn't do it.
You also said you have a military background, why wouldn't it be better to be tried by a military court which is my opinion in this discussion? I believe he does fall under a war crimes act. I think a military court, might, might not let it become a circus the way a civilian trial could.
cat, your legal definitions of combatant might be correct, but your "in my day" gives away the fact that war is no longer a black and white scenario as evidenced by the fact that congress did not officially declare war on any country after 9/11
headhunter, my "inmyday" was the name of the poster to whim I was replying.
inMYday
The definitions of WAR have not changed one iota. I also am not THAT old. The reason we did not declare war after 9/11 is that the people who attacked us were NOT forces of ANY Nation attacking us on behalf of that nation. War is ONLY between Nations.
As I do not have an actual Law Degree I can provide very little in terms of strategy for either prosecution or defense. But - he is on tape inciting people to attack us as a nation (and he is being prosecuted at the Federal level, not the state level) and admitting his part in planning the 9/11 attacks. The defense may try to play a religion card or an insanity card or even a procedural issue such as venue - none of which will work.
He is not an enemy combatant. He was not arrested on a battlefield in direct conflict with our National troops. He is not a member of any military for a country against whom we have declared war. Trying him as an enemy combatant in a military court gives his words LEGITIMACY to his followers and gives him the dignity of recognizing that they have a legitimate argument for being at war when they know no National or Regional ties. It elevates his actions to actual war activities, which they are not. We are not at war with ANY nation, the only enemy combatants are those captured while in ACTIVE conflict with our troops in a battle, engagement or skirmish or even captured planting an IED. THOSE people are more likely to get a military trial. But a man who was arrested while he was in a luxury hotel is NOT an enemy combatant since we're NOT AT WAR WITH ANY NATION. You can not have a "War Crime" without a DECLARED WAR.
Shouldn't the charges have to do with abetting "workplace violence" - ala the Ft. Hood shooting?
Just another criminal illegal alien set for release here.
Yeah, that's exactly what he is.
*facepalm*
If you would care to wager on that, let's have at it.
Bob-1585806,
Thanks for highlighting that distinction. That is very helpful.
The article is pooply written. By that I mean poorly structured. It mixes all of the information together in a haphazard way.
To me it isn't so much a matter of what the facts are (the facts are pretty clear) but rather what the question is.
I noticed too the poorly written article has much to be desired for a news article. I suppose that Pravda NBC is not use to actually writing something on their self without a pre-approved report from Media dontmatter and the O administration approval..
"Pravda NBC."
LOL. I love it!
Charles, since you seem to think the journalist that wrote this article doesn't know his job, maybe you feel you are better qualified to do it. Stop yelling from the cheap seats and grow some gonads. And to all of you that claim that his threats make him an enemy combatant, be careful of how you talk. Many of your inflammatory comments could be looked at the same way. He is no more than a criminal, and should be treated as one. Treating him as more than that legitimizes him to his followers.
Blutowski please enlighten the board and explain the difference between a criminal and a terrorist. You may want to refer to how the State of Israel handles these people. Hint Hint (they are treated like criminals, tried, convicted, and locked away) which is what they are. BTW Israel does not have death penalty. (Exception: Adolph Eichmann).
I realize there is a DNA component in play, but don't you get just a little bit tired of being frightened by the bogyman?
Bluto must have left his helmet at home which caused him to missed the short bus today?
ter·ror·ist
/ˈterərist/
Noun
A person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims.
crim·i·nal
/ˈkrimənl/
Noun
A person who has committed a crime.
Adjective
Of or relating to a crime: "criminal damage".
Synonyms
noun.
felon - malefactor - delinquent - offender - culprit
adjective.
felonious - guilty - penal - flagitious
Read: ALL terrorists are criminals, while very few criminals are terrorists. You liberals that don't see this animal as a TERRORIST are complete idiots, and have the audacity to give Mr. Obama yet another pass for circumventing our Legislative Branch.
John (Post #4.3),
With the current administration, that is a real fear. To Obama and most of you lefties, the Constitution is a mere annoyance and is not to be taken seriously. The rule of law is something to be enforced when is suites him.
This guy is not a US citizen and is part of an organization that has declared it's intentions to kill as many "infidels" (non-muslims) as they possibly can. He should not be afforded any of he rights that someone in the US is entitled to, period.
This guy should be taken to Gitmo and water boarded until he breaks. Interrogation is how Bin Laden was ultimately found.
If Obama was in the White house during the Bush years, Bin Laden would be still plotting to kill Americans and most of the Al Quaeda leadership would be Obama's advisers!
Of course this poor excuse of a human isn't a US citizen, but the constitution is an affirmation of natural rights. He has a right to a fair and speedy trial, no matter his beliefs or residence. Hope he gets death by some hideous means after being found guilty, though.
Im more interested in why this slug will get to spend the rest of his life chillin on our tax dollars, because god forbid terrible ppl actually be put to death.
Also, theres a reason Gitmo still exists, though the POTUS wont admit that maybe it was a good idea after all, which is why its still open. And guess who made out: all the civil liberties lawyers that tried the hell out the combatants civil rights. But its cool, you all hated that because Bush did it. But dropping bombs on actual americans? Continuing every other Bush policy? Naw, its cool now. Because Obama did that.
It occurs to me that every mass murderer is a terrorist...and every mass murderer is a criminal. Is the President's responsible to stop everything in the middle of a covert operation and brief Congress? Please provide the name of a President who has placed a covert operation on hold to brief Congress. If you can't, then what makes this President different?
Does it really matter if our tax money is spent on trying him in NYC, or if our tax money is spent trying him in Gitmo?
Come on lap dogs, YOU low informed Gop base people, tell us why you really don't want him tried in NYC. If Obama would have sent him to Gitmo, you would be complaining about that. We all know it, in your feeble little mind, Obama can't do anything right. And you lap dogs try to take it to the extreme. ARF ARF, good doggie.
I feel it matters more so, the cost and delays will run in the millions and the opportunity for a terrorist to set off an attack in New York around this nut is more probable then on Gitmo, so again more cost for security. Not bad for a GOP lap dog seems we lap dogs have more of a ability to think outside the box instead of liberal lap dogs regurgitating Demofear talking points.
meetoo, I like your use of the term demofear. It seems to me that you're pointing in the wrong direction, since Bush loved to elevate the terror alert level every time he wanted to distract attention away from something else. The Repukes are the ones that use fear to try to control the public.
John Bryant thank you. :) Oh BTW ummmmm Bush has been gone 4 years and two months. I didn't approve with all that Bush did either and spoke of that. I'm not a how you say RepukesI need no identity of a group but a self identity of a independent, see I'm one of the few who thinks for him self with no need of talking points. What I will say I am conservative when it comes to fiscal responsibility. FEAROCRATS has a great sound though....makes you want to obay.
I see you are using the "projection" argument. You expressed fear in the first sentence of your post then you go on to accuse Democrats of "...fear talking points". Do you really not see what you are doing? I doubt there's an actual effective treatment for enlarged amygdalas, still there must be some type of compensation therapy available.
You silly liberals seem to have an extremely short memory. It was only three weeks ago when Mr. Obama, and his lap dogs went out on a fear mongering camaign about the sequestration. I do like the "fearocrats" label though, although I can think of many more suitable adjectives to describe any liberal.
Well Ol_Doc then I suppose if we now cant talk about the cost or possible scenarios then we all best put our heads in then the sand like all progressive that are afraid to say other things then the approved narratives of the progressive liberals. Mine wasn't a fear tactic its more of an observation of why Gitmo than in New York...
NPCDan
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201104/conservatives-big-fear-brain-study-finds
meetooboo
So, you are on record publicly opposing the over 300 "terrorist" trials (and convictions) in civilian court during the Bush administration?
The success rate at Gitmo, last time I checked, was 3 or 4 convictions during the same time period.
LOL.......With all the sequester cuts I wonder if they flew him to the U.S. in economy class....probably not :-)
Word! Pretty sure it was a top of the line Lear Jet. Wouldn't want to disrespect any of those animals.
Is this guy an American? If not, then the judge should rule that the court has no jurisdiction. If he throws the case out, do they release this guy onto the streets? Another stupid decision by a stupid president..
The US has jurisdiction for ALL crimes committed on American soil by foreign nationals. If someone comes from another country and commits a rape, robbery, murder or any other crime, we have jurisdiction despite the person not being an American citizen. That is the way the law works and it is International law that the sovereign country has jurisdiction for all crimes committed on their soil. So Americans who commit crimes in other nations are to be tried for those crimes in that nation.
This is Obama changing the war on terror into another Vietnam, a "police action". More failure by a failed president. This guy should go to Gitmo with all of the other terrorists and be tried as a POW not as a common criminal. He doesn't have a right to a public defender paid for by the taxpayers. He's not a purse snatcher..
The same applies to Bin Laden's son in law too..
Cat #'s
Are you a lawyer or a wannabe-lawyer? What part of these people want to kill us don't you understand? This man should not be afforded the rights of the very people he wishes dead!
levi, actually I minored in law in college and I grew up in the military. How we treat our enemies defines us as a nation. If we treat them within the rule of International Law, we rise above them and continue the upper hand and the high road. If we stoop to their tactics, we become just as bad as them. Trying him as an enemy combatant gives their tactics and feelings legitimacy and affords them a dignity they are not entitled to.
Cat,
Sorry, I think were going to disagree on this. I fear that having this man's trial held in civilian court will be nothing short of a media circus. The mere fact that he should be tried in a military court is more than the 3000 American civilians received on 9/11.
And what trial did Cheney and Bush offer the 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed prosecuting their illegal war?
Hmmm ... 3000 Americans killed = 1000,000+ Iraqis who had nothing to do with 9/11 killed... not to mention 6000+ US soldiers..that sound fair to you?
culheath
I fail to see the relevance as to where this trial is held. Oh and Cheney and Bush.....really, still stuck there?
One more thing before I go. How many Iraqi civilians died under Saddam's reign?
My comment was regarding your appeal to a bizarre logic that the American justice system should not be used to try this terrorist because the terrorists didn't allow any trial for the 9/11 victims.
So Cheney and Bush adding another 100K to the pot somehow makes sense to you. The solution to Saddam is to kill off even more Iraqis? That's really weird.
And then, as with all POWs release him as soon as we "cease hostilities" correct? Just let this POS go? I think I'd go with the criminal trial in Federal Court. Do us all a favor and keep your brilliant suggestions to yourself.
When one of you Republicans win the White House you can make the decisions. Until then stop bitching and start contributing.
Like you would stop bitching if there was a republican in the white house? I don't care if there's a Dem or Rep in the white house, as far as I know there's still freedom of speech in this country so you shadup gramps :-)...
When will you end
So now I have to shadup because there's freedom of speech in this country. Talk about revisionist.
I had no idea that Obama was now a dictator...
Gramps, note the smiley face. I was kidding. You have a right to spew just like the rest of us. Now be quiet!....LOL...
smiley face my arse. End it by be quiet. LOL! You apologize just like a Republican.
Good news Gramps, Obamacare care covers colonoscopy's. You should take advantage of this because you obviously have a severe blockage.
Gramps, I'm not a republican or a democrat. I belong to the troll party. Have a good weekend and yack your arm off and try not to burst a vein. I've got to go play on the boat...
Gramps,
With all due respect. This is not republican/democrat thing. This is purely a common sense thing. Bringing this man to New York for trial will be nothing short of a circus and we all know it!
lev
Guess we will have to wait and see. I believe the circus is Grahm and his buddies. In the meantime the President has the legal power to do this his way. He does not have bow down to Congress as they seem to think he should. By the
Grandpa-2986035you have a lot to learn about DEMOCRACY, we have no dictatorial Messiah here in America. We have a constitution, that is being pushed aside by a liberal progressive ideology, soon though the constitution rights itself and you ll see a fall of a president if he so chooses dictatorial thoughts.
this will turn out like the fort hood shootings. That guy stopped the court by not shaving and we let it happen. How can we think of giving this guy our rights when he wants to kill and as I said before how will his peers be chosen
When you say "we all know it" you are making the typical right wing error of assuming most Americans agree with you, which is false. You represent a minority which is why you lost the last election and why it surprised you so.
If Congress didn't want the DoJ enforcing 18.USC.2332(b) and 18.USC.3238, perhaps they shouldn't have passed those laws against terrorism in the first place?
Funny how you teabaggers don't believe in the rule of law and have no faith in the US justice system. Even funnier that you want to grant al-Qaeda the honor of being noble warriors, rather than treating them as the common criminals that they are.
Domestic murderers are getting bogus sentences by county, state, and federal courts. When a 1st degree muderer can be let free after 10 years we have a problem. Another problem is caring for these piles of feces, as the ACLU wants us all to do. Fry these crap piles and save the American people from having to support them
Why bring this trash to NY so we can now have a media circus. They should have brought him to Gitmo, water board the $hit out of him, find him guilty and execute him.
okie58
Are you aware that the Fort Hood shootings are being conducted by a military court?
evithewonderdog, jack-1792739
I remember those 300+ media circuses during the Bush administration (# of "terrorist" trials held in civilian court). Yeah, we don't want a repeat of that!
Wait a minute,... never mind.
How did that storm of rag heads go after 9/11??? Apparently the rag heads god is not impressed and refused to help them.
Sorry for the racial overtone, but they don't care about us and I am returning them the same favor.
The rag-head god? Islam, Christianity and Judaism all stem from Abraham, therefore have the same god. A god that apparently doesn't give a @!$%# about his/her/whatever followers otherwise, we'd all be holding hands and singing Kumbaya.
It seem mans hijacked gods will for man, by branching off different ideologies. Its a free choice to choose a path in life. What ideology fits your inner sole, is your inner sole at peace or is it troubled. If you chose the Islamic ideology and really enjoy the death and hate of mankind that goes against your believe that is ordained by the ideology to kill non-believers, or do you chose the ideology of peace and caring of what Christ has taught to spread the word and convert non-believers by showing good deeds.
Here we go again!
November
19, 2010
New York (CNN) -- Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani was acquitted Wednesday of all but one count of
conspiracy-related charges in a landmark civilian trial involving the first
Guantanamo detainee to be tried in civilian court. Ghailani was convicted by a federal jury on a
charge of conspiracy to destroy buildings and U.S. property in connection with
his role in the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.
The trial had been widely considered a testing ground for the Obama administration, which has said that it could try some terrorism suspects outside military tribunals and in civilian courts.
Ghailani faced charges of conspiracy and murder in the 1998 attacks on U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. The bombings, for which al Qaeda claimed responsibility, killed 224 people, including a dozen Americans, and wounded thousands of others.
By contrast, Rep. Peter King, R-New York, said he was "disgusted at the total miscarriage of justice today in Manhattan's federal civilian court." King, who is the House's incoming Homeland Security Committee chairman, blamed Attorney General Eric Holder for the trial's outcome. "He assured us that 'failure is not an option,'" King said in a written statement.
The greater relevance has been the debate in this country of whether [alleged] terrorists held in Guantanamo can effectively be tried in a federal district court even though there may be problems with government witnesses," said Scott Silliman, executive director for the Center on Law, Ethics and National Security.
FYI, the federal courts have a far higher conviction rate in terrorism cases than does the kangaroo court at Gitmo.
And since this guy hasn't been tortured by the US there won't be a need for the court to throw out the evidence.
...and cue the liberal defense of the
Clown Showcurrent Administration...DaForce - I notice you left out an important detail in your posting above... He was sentenced to life in prison, regardless of the acquittals - as were 4 more people that had similar trials in Manhattan.
Another candidate for Yellow Cab
How dare some of you use this politically. How dare you. You are pissing all over the 2958 victims and there families and children as well as the rest of americans by bringing one of the orchestrator's of the al qaeda former leadership here who helped plan the 911 attack. What a damn slap in the face to us. Al Qaeda was just given a victory, they are back on our soil.
cit liberty...the Obama administration doesn't CARE about pissing on US Citizens.....Obama is such a huge egotistical maniac that the only thing that matters is his narcissistic objectives. If it takes 100 times of getting it wrong before he gets LUCKY and it comes out right, that is perfectly OK with him. Then he gets to raise his arms in victory and declare "See....I was right all along"! This is one of those cases. And what does he say when this monster walks, perhaps get released on to the streets of NYC, and establishes a cause for sanctuary in the US?? Another one of those " shovel ready jobs that weren't so shovel ready" moments???
You should not speak for the victims of 911. Many of the surviving family members are demanding answers on the truth of 911, particularly with respect to what was most certainly a controlled demolition of World Trade Center Building 7. A controlled demolition proves non involvement by AlQuida and proves it could only have been an Inside Job.
Sign the AE911Truth
FAMILY MEMBER PETITION
Help us reach 1 Million Signatures!
Looking for a quick, easy way to support the 9/11 family members' call for a real WTC investigation?
The new 9/11 Family Petition, sponsored by AE911Truth, has slashed the time needed to support our vital mission. It takes only 20 seconds to sign! In fact… stop… read it… and sign it now!
Do you have just 20 seconds to support the family members of the 9/11 victims in their quest for truth? Do you have just 20 seconds to support restoring the civil liberties that were taken from the American people as a result of the official story about 9/11? Do you have just 20 seconds to support preservation of liberty for the generation to come? Do you have just 20 seconds to promote a lasting peace that will come from the end of the 9/11 wars?
Sign the 9/11 Family Petition Now! It will take only 20 seconds to sign. Sign It, Tweet it, and Post it on your Facebook Page!!
Let's act in unison – right now – by signing the 9/11 Family Member Petition!
This petition beseeches President Obama to watch 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out, review the evidence presented, and call for a scientific investigation.
(The 9/11 Family Petition is not to be confused with the AE911Truth Petition. If you haven't already done so, please sign the AE911Truth official petition as well.)
After you have signed this petition, please make sure to tweet it and/or post it your website and your Facebook Page.
9/11 Family Member Petition Description
http://webmailb.netzero.net/webmail/new/5?session_redirect=true&userinfo=4032435a9527ce8915c9c3f6e2de3d3a&count=1362760389&randid=1323926869
And thus the people of New York can now see justice done rather than watching American values be eroded by Gitmo.
Sounds like it's you teabaggers who are politicizing the issue, and who want to elevate al-Qaeda to the status of noble warriors rather than treating them as the common criminals they really are.
Look! See?! We must take away your rights and freedoms American in order to protect you from these guys. It's for your own good...
"......and can NOT be tried in a military court."
So don't try him. Throw him in Gitmo and interrogate him.
danonforce
If you are going to throw stupid insults out you should know its colonoscopies.
You mean play with your boat.
Geezerpa, try and at least reply to the string you were in. Your comments will get disconnected and lost....much like yourself. OK, I really have to leave...have a good weekend...
when will
I keep waiting for you to end.
The last thing I want this country to do is raise the status of these terrorists to soldiers of a battlefield. They are common criminals and due to be tried in a common public court. They are thugs, not "brave captured jihad soldiers" as the republicans want to make them. Try them in the same court system as other thieves and murderers. And it doesn't hurt to tell the world that this is exactly why we do this. Let the terrorist know we don't consider them a valiant enemy due for reward by "allah". They are simply murderers.
I understand the gop enjoys the concept of the communist gulag system but we aren't communists and I don't enjoy the republicans wanting to turn us into another russia or iran. We have American principles we value and tout to the world as righteous. Don't make our justice system any more of a joke than it already is.
Leave your brain in that dirty Pampers your Mom just flushed out for re-use Freddie????
So let me see if I have this right....we drone an American citizen (not that he didn't deserve it) abroad. Then we turn around and bring a non-American citizen to our country and give him a trial. hmmmmm
fred
if you had any knowledge about the dems you would know they are the ones backed by the communist and socialist parties. You can also look it up and the dem party is known for a more socialist vision for america. I was trying to find a nice way to say you are really mixed up in your stupid little mind and should not be allowed to even vote since you don't know your parties aim.Please do some research before you put your misinformed thoughts out for all to see and laugh at your mindless thinking
Fred is exactly right.
It's funny how the cowardly teabbaggers have no faith in the US justice system, and want to elevate al-Qaeda to the status of noble warriors rather than treating them as the common criminals they really are.
I really like your repetition of that very obvious, yet salient point.
Maybe they will eventually get it, Shrekk.
"brave captured jihad soldiers" as the republicans want to make them. Wrong again. The proper term is "enemy combatant", not "brave captured jihad soldiers". That's what the programmers at
al JeezeraCurrent TV calls them. I personally think "filty animals" would be much better suited to people of this particular ilk. And just like all other filthy animals, he should be caged, not afforded a civilian trial that was denied to our own citizens, despite how loathesome they were...culheath and skrekk
Love how you both go to the "right winger and teabagger card" it makes you both sound so.....simple. ;)
Generally truth is very simple. It's the liars and apologists or merely ignorant who usually complicate things.
Can't argue? I thought so. Thans for your support
But still no valid argument to the contrary? Come on, you can do better than a little immature name calling.
These are not enemy combatants any more than a child molester is. Again, you show their cohorts that you acknowledge the battle aspect. Exactly what they want.
Sort of like if they had put Hitler on trial in Tel Aviv.
You mean like the way the Israelis tried Adolph Eichmann in a civilian court and then convicted him???
Ozzie - just muddies the waters when the guy's defense attorney is going to make the first thing on his list of things to do, to get a change of venue. Claiming an unbiased jury cannot be found in New York. It's not the same thing as Eichmann, but, I get your point. I think it should be a military court. I feel he doesn't have the right to be tried in a civilian court if he is an enemy combatant.
Yes indeed, the ACLU is going to have a field day with this trial. lol
The difference is the Israelis actually wanted to convict Eichmann. They were not worried about impressing the Germans.
I agree with trying him in NYC. The US prides itself on being a country of laws and upholding the rule of law. Too many people would rather send these people to Gitmo and torture them to get as much information out of them to secure their own safety.
Benjamen Franklin once said, "He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security."
I will not, I refuse, to sacrifice one person's liberty for my own security. I don't care how "bad" that person is. I don't care about what he may "know". It doesn't matter if they are an enemy combatant or not. I will not allow our country to become no better than the people who are out to destroy us.
If we let our own fears destroy our scene of justice and liberty then the terrorists have won.
Nobody is saying we shouldn't give this P.O.S. a trial...just not in a civilian court.
So you want to elevate the status of al-Qaeda to being noble warriors?
Maybe Congress shouldn't have passed the anti-terrorism laws? Was it not their intent that 18.USC.2332(b) and 18.USC.3238 be enforced in federal court?
skrekk
So you want to elevate the status of al-Qaeda to being noble warriors?
Why do you repeat yourself? Why do you repeat yourself?
I'll repeat the point until you teabaggers understand that people who violate federal laws should be tried in federal court.
skrekk
There you go with that teabagger card again. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that what happened on 9/11 violated a bit more than federal law. And again your use of the phrase teabagger....simple is as simple does.
have a great weekend :)
Really? So you're saying that Congress didn't want terrorism treated as a federal crime when they passed 18.USC.2332 and 18.USC.3238? Why didn't they say so at the time?
Would you say we were attacked on 9/11 by enemy combatants?
I'd say those terrorists were no different from Timothy McVeigh, the guy who firebombed a mosque in Missouri or the guy who tried to bomb the MLK parade in Spokane in 2011.
More importantly, the rule of law and due process should apply to all of these people. We don't need kangaroo courts and torture to hold terrorists accountable. Terrorism is ultimately a foreign policy, intelligence, and law enforcement issue, not an issue of "war".
It was a very big mistake for Bush to militarize the issue in the way he did after 9/11, and we'd have been far better off if he'd continued Clinton's policy of pursuing al-Qaeda rather than dropping the ball when he took office. But Bush apparently needed to feel like a warrior, and thus gave al-Qaeda the status of noble warrior rather than scummy criminal.
So, it would be correct to say, "Iran harbors Al-Qaeda terrorists." I remember Bush on TV making monkey faces saying something like, ",,,,,and those countries who harbor these terrorists,,,," Iran doesn't count ? Pakistan doesn't count ? They can 'harbor' whomever they wish to harbor. Obviously.
Your post makes no sense try again please
Okie -
Iranians hid the guy out for years. Pakistan hid bin Laden out for years. Bush says we'll go after any country that harbors terrorists. He lied. That help ya ?
Iran kept him in prison for the last 10 years during which time the US was giving safe harbor to the MEK terrorist group at one of our military bases in Iraq, and refused to agree to a prisoner exchange.
We could have had this guy 10 years ago, but Cheney scuttled the deal.
Two words: Bill Ayers.
Why did they sneak this guy into the United States a week ago without letting anyone know? Obama and Holder stepped on their dicks the last time they tried this and they will do it again this time. New York city complained it would cost them millions for the trial and security last time. Obama clearly would rather offend american citizens than his muslim brothers.
In my #10 above, on November 17, 2010, a jury found Ghaliani was found guilty of one count of conspiracy, but acquitted him of 284 other charges including all murder counts. Guilty on 1 out of 284 does not inspire confidence in Eric Holder and the Justice Department. Many of the conditions that caused the overwhelming accquiltals was the restrictions on the use of witnesses who obtained had obtained information before we took custody. The release of sensitive national security information was another restriction.
And how bail? Should we release him on bail pending trial?
Ever hear of JUSTICE fella???
This guy will be convicted and spend the rest of his life in a Maximum Security, Federal Prison. You've got a problem with that???
Ozzie
see 19.1
To OzzieBoy .. Have a problem with that? Yes, I do!! He is enjoying the protection of the legal system of the society that he tried to destroy. We'll hear from his stinking mouth and yet provide him with 3 squares and a cot with our tax dollars. You DON'T have a problem with that????
Funny how you teabaggers have no faith in the US justice system or the rule of law. LOL.
It's funny how you liberals kow-tow to ANYTHING this administration has to peddle. Benghazi, Sequestration, Fast and Furious, Obamacare, etc. Stay hypocritical my liberal friends!
Skrekk
How many of those teabagger cards do you have up your sleeve?
If you believe that, you would vote for Obama.... twice. Sorry, forgot.
Oh dearie me, The Righties are besides themselves. How dare the Obama administration use good, old fashioned police work to arrest this bum and then try and convict him using OUR LAWS and not resorting to torture and illegal, and IMMORAL methods of incarceration. We're the good guys, remember Righties???
And you'll notice that it did not require our starting any more stupid, unnecessary wars on trumped up charges, spilling precious American blood and spending countless billions of dollars on a fool's errand. I guess the Right will be gnashing their teeth when he gets a life sentence in a Federal Penitentiary. I mean, suppose he burrows out in a jail break and proceeds to kill thousands of Americans??? God but there ain't no pleasing these people.
Ozzie
You have just exposed yourself for the leftist partisan hack that you are! Try just once not to be political when posting.
We're the good guys, huh? Then why didn't we stick a Hellfire missle up his butt like Obama usually does so that he doesn't suffer at the hands of "Water Boarders?"
Nice! Just get ready for the liberal pseudo-ridicule to ensue!
I think you are wasting your breath trying to reason with the tea party followers on here. They are not about to change their mind or be objective about anything. They are typical Republicans, always think they are right and ignore all facts.
All you PARTY DRONES are soooooo boring!
You've traded in your brains for bumper-sticker slogans and partisan insults.
If we are at war with Al-Qaeda, then, anyone who is Al-Qaeda is an 'enemy combatant.' How can we argue and conclude that an American in say Yemen who has joined Al-Qaeda and plotting all sorts of bad things against the USA can be killed by a drone because he is an 'enemy combatant, then, wrestle with it and insist they get a fair trial in New York if they are not a citizen ? It seems we are contradicting ourselves to suit actions rather than any spirit/intent of the law. Just take him to a nearby Al-Qaeda camp with a drone standing by. Release him and then zap him. That way, we'd be within the guidelines of Holder's little brain faart.
Kudos, Perry. You hit the nail squarely on the head. No matter what political persuasion you have, this decision-making should be setting off alarm bells. This sort of decision-making shows at least one of the following:
1) Ineptitude (not recognizing its inconsistent nature)
2) Hidden Agenda (recognizes the inconsistent nature and promotes some ulterior motive at the expense of legal consistency)
3) Arbitrary Rule (I thought we had dispensed with the rule of kings back in 1215 with the Magna Charta).
I know, right? It's almost like Obama thinks he's enforcing a duly-passed federal law or something.
Good Job US MILITARY...oh and not thanks to obama who never served....and is still not serving the USA
ignorance!
SarahT - Agree and well said at 21.3
Agreed,well Obamas servitude is leading to destruction,so I'll pass.
We'll end up setting a legal precedent and everyone in the future convicted by military court will be given a basis for appeal. Wouldn't surprise me if truth be told and we discover this guy has been a CIA asset all these years, and we've known exactly where he's been. Things wouldn't go well for him at GITMO then if his mates knew, eh.
I think it's @!$%#ing disgusting that Osama bin Laden's son-in-law, a KNOWN AL-QAEDA TERRORIST, can only get a max of LIFE, but Jodi Arias, an American girl who just has a truckload of untreated mental problems, can be given a death sentence.
@!$%#ing no justice in this country AT ALL
Wow. I can raise absolutely no sympathy for Jodi, but you are right about which poses the larger threat to our society.
My large regret is that this douchebag will now have months of Al-Jazeera prime time thanks to the venue where he will be tried. A bad accident - rain of plane - on the way to NY would have been preferable - and ironic.