Mohammed is in a civilian courtroom, so I believe he's completely and totally innocent until proven guilty beyond any and all reasonable doubt. This also means he was apprehended lawfully and legally in accordance with New York State law, that he was read his Maranda Rights, that he was never the victim of unauthorized wire tapping, that he wasn't interrigated using any tactics that are against New York State law, and that his civil rights were not violated at any time during his detainment.

Oh, and of course we will need to see any and all still classified documents that led to his arrest and indictment, regardless of how that information being made public could imperil our national security - lest the defendant be acquitted of all charges for lack of evidence.

What will be really fun to see is how many billions he will sue the United States for in civil court should he be acquitted or have the case dismissed.

_________________
Oh lord, it's hard to be humble, when you're perfect in every way. I can't wait to look in the mirror, 'cause I get better looking each day. To know me is to love me, I must be a hell of a man. Oh lord, it's hard to be humble, but I'm doin' the best that I can.

I'm usually a peaceful guy, but seriously, a "rogue rifleman" with impeccable, almost professional aim could take him out and I wouldn't give two shits less. He's gone, the ridiculously-expensive trial would be cut short, and his death wouldn't be at the hands of the Great Western Satan.

_________________
mechaphil

He is not a citizen of the United States therefore he should not be granted ANY of these rights... he should just be put in front of a firing squad and executed.

_________________

LETS GO BUFFALO!

It makes no difference whether this trial is handled as a military tribunal or civilian trial as far as the issue of "national security" goes. For that matter, it also makes no difference whether it is done in NYC or Gitmo. If the trial is perceived as an American trial, which it would be in either a tribunal or civilian court, in either Cuba or New York or Cheyenne, Wyoming, then it will pose the same risks to those who would take such a trial as an injustice. This is a non-issue, manufactured by paranoid media pschyobabble.

I believe it should be a civilian trial, because that is the only way to retain any sort of moral ground. Try these men as you would anyone else, and if your case is strong enough, justice will prevail. As to this point, I feel the course is clear and I agree that tribunals give the appearance of a rushed, secretive trial.

The fact that the trial would be held "blocks" from Ground Zero is quite troublesome to this whole scenario in my view however, as it does suggest that the trial would be far from impartial, and that it would inevitably become a show trial. Yes, this is the location of the crime, and thus it would seem to fall under New York State jurisdiction. But... it just smacks of falseness to me.

In short:
-location has no bearing on "security"
-civilian trial good
-Manhattan trial undermines supposed show of impartiality

It definitely has a bearing on the cost of security and we've spent too much keeping this asshole alive anyway.
I also tend to think a jury of 12 American citizens (and eventually the public record) probably shouldn't be privy to state secrets, CIA methods etc. etc.

Pfft...there's no way any trial is going to look good, fair or moral to people that support him so there's no reason to try to please people you can't.

And can you imagine what physical security would be required...and the ensuing months long circus...
his ACLU lawyer will immediately file for a change of venue, but I would hope any 12 random Americans would hang this bastard.
So you're right, definitely nothing good can come out of a NYC trial.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Yeah... Were fucked.

_________________
"Call a cop he robbed Delmore blind!!!"
Rick Jeanerette after Marty Biron's diving save back in 2000.

"I'm going to go to the spa and have a hot tub and massage and relax," Miller said. "That's it, and it's back to work tomorrow." Ryan Miller after clinching the North East division.

Come on Xcheck, civilian trial in NY is awesome! Can't wait to see Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Louis Farakhan, Cindy Sheehan, Sean Penn, Jerry Springer, Maury Povich, Oprah, David Letterman, Howard Stern, Bill Maher, The Dixie Chicks and many, many more stars on hand to lend their expert opinions on the trial and what George W. Bush and Rush Limbaugh have done to make the Islamic world hate America so much, and how President Obama is representing hope for change!

I can just see the charismatic, Jackie Chiles ACLU lawyer for Mohammed mugging for the courtroom cameras, winking and telling everyone out in television land, "Since waterboarding ain't legit, you must acquit!"

The tabloid shows will televise Muslims at the Islamic Center cringing as they watch the trial live on big screen TV while the defense tells of the racist, bigoted crimes that have been committed by the US military, CIA, and FBI against Muslim detainees. How evidence is made up so they can round up Arabs and torture them.

Oh, and let's not forget the commercial that will come out featuring Paris Hilton and Ru Paul talking about how torture ain't cool and we need to chill with Muslims 'cause they're like totally awesome dudes!

At some point, Howard Stern will appear in court as Fart Man and let one rip before being ushered out of the courtroom to hysterical laughter. Outside there will be candle light vigils for all the Muslims killed by the policies of George W. Bush, and speeches from NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and Jane Fonda about how the persecution of Muslims is not unlike the persecution of American women seeking abortions if Sarah Palin had her way.

Gay activists will march outside demanding that all people, be they gay, straight, transgender or Muslim, deserve to be given equal rights under law. That the days of persecution must end, and that we need to legalize gay marriage all across the country no matter what people like Glenn Beck say.

Yes, this will indeed be one hell of a party. I can hardly wait for the show!

_________________
Oh lord, it's hard to be humble, when you're perfect in every way. I can't wait to look in the mirror, 'cause I get better looking each day. To know me is to love me, I must be a hell of a man. Oh lord, it's hard to be humble, but I'm doin' the best that I can.

...better yet. Get me a visitor's pass.

I'll speak to him quietly for about five minutes about the error of his ways, the harm he's spreading, and the pain and death and destruction he's brought upon so many human lives.

Then I'll crush his trachea with my right hand and wait for legal counsel.

Ok, Ok, let me see if a get this straight. Sending a man that helped to plot and carry out an attack that killed 3000 + people out right and was and still is a part of an organization that has killed a U.N. estimated 24,000 + people globally to a public trial in New York City is not a good idea.

Ok, I'll make this a real easy constitutional and international law question. Since this individual represents no sitting government and was not acting as an agent of a recognized foreign military power, how do you go about charging this man with a crime and in what criminal system does he belong?

Should take alot of you sometime on this one, I spent 8 months at the Army War College in Carlisle, PA. This school trains high ranking officers on strategic leadership, mainly Lt. Col. and Col.
I was apart of the security detail there for 2 stints, each 4 months. My last one was in 07, this was my last assignment before discharge. This very subject was debated quite often. An officer of recent distinction hit on several points with regards to the Geneva Convention, the International War Crimes Court at the Hague and individual nations and their respective responsibilities internationally to hold those none government attached war criminals accountable.

The following had been agreed upon by every individual in this debate. There are 3 succint foundational questions that need be answered.

1. What is the appropriate label for an individual or organization that has no government or operates as a global organization independent of any boundries? To answer this you must break the question down into two components.
1a. Criminal - treating these individuals as criminals executing heinous crimes, if this were the case, who would claim jurisdiction, the nation the crime was committed or the nation the criminal is currently in?
1b. War Criminal/Enemy Combatant - the Supreme Court ruled in 2004 that Enemy Combatants have the right to have access to the American legal system. If they are held by the U.S., but what about the Geneva Convention and the International Court on War Crimes?
2. Under what entities jurisdiction do these criminals fall. See above. There has been created, a scenairio in which the United States has superceded the International law it had signed onto as a member and Honored in most conflicts. Here in creates a moral dilemma, not only in the U.S. but to its allies and all nations that have signed onto these rules.
3. What are the penalties afforded in the sentencing phase of any commission, court, panel or judicial tribunal that would suit the situation? Justice must be served, but the entity prusuing this closing portion of any prosecution must consider safety risks for the population at large, not just the population of the prosecuting nation, but those of their allies as well. Also, they must take into account the allies themselves and the impact it will have on direct relations (including submission into the war on terror) both in a short term tactical view as well as a long term strategic analysis.

I can tell you that there was never agreement in this debate accept on one subject, which in turn affected the answer to the other 2 points.
That was the following.
It is agreed upon by all parties, with no dissenting group or individual entity that the label to be placed on these (terrorists) individuals is that of a criminal.

Very interesting indeed.

_________________
Lord Stanley's Cup is what its all about.
Mr. Pegula, your destiny awaits you sir.

It always turns into a turf war, and a battle of semantics. Vain or weak people lose focus. Lose resolve. Become indecisive or distracted by petty enticements.

Evil is evil.

You put a bad dog down, and leave the "interpretation" to the theoreticians.

That which is anti-Life deserves fulfillment, on a most basic and intimate level. Firsthand.

You hate Life? Meet death.

You're welcome, have a nice day.

this is one of the situations in which i think somethign should happen to him, but it is better i do not know

he should not spend the rest of his life in jail, or leave a free man

what happens after conviction, i do not want to know

EDIT: do what you will, just dont let the public know

_________________
PSA: I am an overly sarcastic person. If you take me at my word, then i will most likely anger and offend you.

Many (including myself) would tend to agree with you. We live in a world however, that still clings to the old friendships and alliances post 1945. It has by no means been perfect but from time to time has worked. The really interesting points made by both sides of the debate were good intentioned, but based on outdated agreements none the less.

My belief is as follows.

Bring them to New York, run the trial then kill them without appeal. People can speak of security issues and how this raises risk, having been overseas and actually meeting these scumbags face to face I have a little news flash for these bleeding heart types who don't have the balls to grab a gun and man a post next to me.

"We are already in a fight to the death people. This trial can be held in Fucking Time Square and the danger will be the same if we held it on Easter Fuckin Island". I will never understand people who seem to think the danger has passed and they are out of harms way, Unfuckin believable that any American even thinks that. Just shake my head and wish they would grow a brain.

_________________
Lord Stanley's Cup is what its all about.
Mr. Pegula, your destiny awaits you sir.

A repressed and embittered covetousness that manifests itself in destructiveness and murder, and cloaks itself in a barbaric and archaic idealism, is a sham excuse for existence.

Caveman be gone.

Good bye, Sheikh Generic Umpteenth-Retread Carbon-Copy Spoiled-Child Baby-Murdering Joy-Killer.

...all these assholes need to just fuck off, and die.

Or, maybe they just need to get themselves a pair of Levis, an iPod, a flat-screen 1080i, The Playboy Channel and get fucking laid.

Poisonous fuckers.

This will go off without a hitch...we've got the Commander in Chief himself tainting the jury pool.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/? ... RmNzYwZTI=

He's supposed to be an uber-smart lawyer from Harvard right?
Am I missing something?

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Who cares about Mohammed? It's George W. Bush who's on trial, remember!

_________________
Oh lord, it's hard to be humble, when you're perfect in every way. I can't wait to look in the mirror, 'cause I get better looking each day. To know me is to love me, I must be a hell of a man. Oh lord, it's hard to be humble, but I'm doin' the best that I can.

hehe

I was just lurking on another site discussing this topic and there are several liberal Obama supporters there worriedly discussing how they believe if this trial ends in anything besides conviction, Obama is a 1 term president...they're scared.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Then we can elect Dennis Kucinich!

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1

Your tax dollars at work.

_________________
Hold my beer and watch this...

Good read.

If we are going to keep our eye on the ball, this is the part that stands out most to me:

"There has been created, a scenairio in which the United States has superceded the International law it had signed onto as a member and Honored in most conflicts. Here in creates a moral dilemma, not only in the U.S. but to its allies and all nations that have signed onto these rules."

If there really is a "coalition of the willing", and we are truly banding together with the free countries of the world to fight terrorism universally, then I hope we are listening to and respecting their opinions in this matter as well. We have failed to do so in the past, and if Obama is being honest with us, he will in the future.

Well ETC, since you brought it up, ya, he should be. His administration mislead not only the American people, but also directly lied to Congress (the people that represent us, the people) and foreign nations (C. Powells presentation to the U.N.) in a concerted effort to set the United States on a course of war with the Nation of Iraq. I have no doubt what so ever his administration lied. In doing so he should have been and still should be arrested, held without bail and prosecuted accordingly.

This nation has killed indirectly and directly, more Iraqi civilians then were lost on 9/11. If this nation is to even attempt to take the moral high ground (which should always be the case, lowering our standards to falsify documentation and manipulate the facts in order to come to a pre-determined outcome that sets this nation on a path to an illegal invasion and occupation of a soverign nation, no matter how much it is hated) it must follow those principals that "once" made this a great nation. That starts with leadership that shows integrity, honor and honesty.

To standby as citizens, having reviewed the facts at hand (and bare in mind, they are not disputed) and not demand justice for the actions of the Bush administration is not merely a disgrace, it is actually a sign of weakness to our enemies. It shows them we can be manipulated and we give no recourse of action to such. That is the real demise of this situation.

Actions speak louder than words. Say what you mean, mean what you say. No one is above the law.

_________________
Lord Stanley's Cup is what its all about.
Mr. Pegula, your destiny awaits you sir.