| Obama Predicts 9/11 Trial Outcome | | Print | |
| Written by Rebecca Terrell | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Thursday, 19 November 2009 18:30 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NBC News Correspondent Chuck Todd interviewed the President in Beijing during Obama's Asian tour. Todd: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — Can you understand why it is offensive to some for this terrorist to get all the legal privileges of an American citizen? Obama: I don't think it will be offensive at all when he is convicted, and when the death penalty is applied to him. Todd (aside): Pressed on whether he was prejudging a verdict, the former constitutional law professor expressed confidence in the government's case. Obama: What I said was that people will not be offended if that's the outcome. I'm not prejudging, and I'm not going to be in that courtroom. That's the job of the prosecutors, the judge and the jury. The president uttered the retort with a bit of impatient defensiveness in his voice. Yet "if" was not the word he used. He said "when" not once, but twice. Todd questioned Obama further regarding Republicans' concerns, to which the president responded, "[What] I think we have to break is this fearful notion that somehow our justice system can't handle these guys." U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who made the decision to try the suspects in civil court, echoed this sentiment in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. Holder endured intensive grilling from Republican members in morning and afternoon sessions. He refuted fears that federal court will provide Mohammed a "platform to spew his hateful ideology," and he claimed the case is not unprecedented because the federal courts have been prosecuting terrorists safely and securely for years. However, Holder balked when Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked, "Can you give me a case in United States history where an enemy combatant caught on a battlefield was tried in civilian court?" After a long pause, Holder stumbled over himself saying, "I don't know. I'd have to look at that. I think that, you know, the determination I've made —" At that point, Senator Graham interrupted him to say, "We're making history, here, Mr. Attorney General. I'll answer it for you. The answer is 'no.'" The committee chamber erupted in applause when Senator Jon Kyl (R – Ariz.) asked incredulously, "How could you be more likely to get a conviction in federal court when Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has already asked to plead guilty before a military commission and be executed?" Holder dodged the question by saying he would not base a determination of prosecution venue on the word of a terrorist. Senator Kyl pressed him further, and Holder said he based his decision on military and civilian court protocols. When Holder was asked about the possibility of acquittal, the attorney general assured the senators of conviction, despite constitutional safeguards against foregone conclusions in civilian trials. Holder said acquittal would not "mean that person would be released into our country."
Set as favorite
Email This
Trackback(0)
Comments (10)
Always American
said:
|
In an 
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed |
... This nutcase said he wants the death penalty & it's apparent obamau wants it to. Therefore, we should NOT give it to either. -It would only imflame them further (dealth penalty). Stick 'em back in G and throw away the key after further toture!!! |
Reader
said:
 |
... Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has been locked up so long all he can think about is his 72 virgins. |
Troy
said:
 |
What He's Still Alive? I was shocked when I found out he was still alive. I mean I kind of knew it but now I think about it. He's admitted his guilt under the Geneva Convention Rules everyone beefs about. Shoot him at dawn. Just like we've always done. Although I'm going to enjoy the show. Obama really stepped in it on this one. Another nail in his political coffin. |
Lee Gonzales
said:
 |
To be always American one must believe in the protection of individual rights and equality under the law for everyone Otherwise you end up like communist Cuba under Castro when "detainee" prisoners were shot at dawn and then all found guilty later in Castro's "legal courts of law." Since when did congress declare war on Iraq and Afghanistan? Technically we are not at war and there are no war combatants and POWs. Those accused of acts of terrorism must face trial in a civilian court. The "blind sheikh" was tried and convicted of seditious conspiracy and is serving time along with his fellow conspirators. I didn't like the verdict. He and the others should have been executed for bombing the WTC in 1993 and causing the deaths of six people and injured over a thousand. The method used by totalatarian regimes is to shoot first and ask questions later. Amendments 5, 6 and 7 does not exempt anyone from these protections. To cease to use them just because Some talking head on TV says they don't deserve a trial is nothing but 21 century lynch talk. The 8th prohibits torture. Getting a confession out of someone by means of torture is one of the methods practiced by Iranian and Iraqi police; it was the method preferred by Hitler's SS and the Soviet Union's KGB. So why would any American cheer alien methods over American due process methods? For someone who calls himself "always american" to suggest to throw away the Bill of Rights and to break God's commandments is the advice of someone who needs to read the 5,000 Year Leap http://www.shopjbs.org/index.php/catalogsearch/result/?q=5,000&x=16&y=6 |
Thomas Paine
said:
 |
Even John Birchers cave to Fascism Look at us, just like the German's at the beginning of Nazi rule, we are willing to dehumanize all arabs, try them in the court of public (propoganda) opinion, and forget about fair trials per the constitution. Why not, the CIA tortured them to confession. The Nazi's would have accepted that. Hell, they look different, stick to themselves, have a weird religion. Who cares about their rights. Wow, sounds awfully familiar to a lot of Jews with numbers on their wrists. But again those Jews are all dead, and people have short memories. Lets just put all the Arabs in concentration camps. |
Always American
said:
|
... Lee Gonzales and Thomas Paine, you are right and I was wrong in allowing my emotions to rule over me rather than reason. It really angers me, everything that is currently going on in our country. And, with this civil case, the possibility that they will be privy to our intelligence, put our CIA on trial and just make a mockery out of our judicial system. Thank you, both of you, for pointing me in the right direction. Moreover, Lee, thank you for the specific education (Law). Maybe it wasn’t so bad what I wrote, in that, it prompted your responses. This is the very reason I like and promote this site, as well, as jbs.org. For as much as I know, it really is very little. And I bet that there are many others out there that need to be “properly” educated about US Law and the use of reason over emotions. Keep up the good work and please pray for our country and me too! |
Always American
said:
|
...To be always American one must believe in the protection of individual rights and equality under the law for everyone Does this mean NON US Citizens, too? If not, then why a civil case, allowing the same rights as a US Citizen? |
Always American
said:
|
...Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful. http://tiny.cc/OPi2J |
StevenC
said:
 |
Still in Denial Reading the comments above, I see there are still some Americans who have failed to realise that 9/11 was an inside job. This is just another act by Obama the Federal Reserve Puppet to popularise himself even more with the dumbed-down American people, while he finishes off the work that Bush never got done. |
