Obama Administration Wants 9/11 Suspects Tried in US!

Consider the security issues related to this. Hasn't the American public suffered enough at the hands of these terrorists?

The mayor who oversaw rescue and recovery efforts in the wake of the attacks on lower Manhattan told "Fox News Sunday" the president is only granting the "wish" of Khalid Sheikh Mohammad at the expense of the American people and that the conspirators should be tried in a military tribunal.

He questioned why the administration would use the tribunals for other suspects but not the Sept. 11 conspirators.

"What the Obama administration is telling us loud and clear is that both in substance and reality, the War on Terror from their point of view is over," Giuliani said. "(Mohammad) should be tried in a military tribunal. He is a war criminal. This is an act of war."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/15/gi...

He’s just a typical cowardly conservative that speaks out both sides of his mouth..
-----
Politico points out that previously Giuliani had supported using civilian courts to try terrorists—but let's face it, he said all that before 9/11. Mayor Bloomberg supports the decision for the trial to come to NYC, "It is fitting that 9/11 suspects face justice near the World Trade Center site where so many New Yorkers were murdered. We have hosted terrorism trials before, including the trial of Omar Abdel-Rahman, the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing... I have great confidence that the NYPD, with federal authorities, will handle security expertly. The NYPD is the best police department in the world and it has experience dealing with high-profile terrorism suspects and any logistical issues that may come up during the trials."

http://gothamist.com/2009/11/15/giuliani_mist...

dolander wrote:

He’s just a typical cowardly conservative that speaks out both sides of his mouth..
-----
Politico points out that previously Giuliani had supported using civilian courts to try terrorists—but let's face it, he said all that before 9/11. Mayor Bloomberg supports the decision for the trial to come to NYC, "It is fitting that 9/11 suspects face justice near the World Trade Center site where so many New Yorkers were murdered. We have hosted terrorism trials before, including the trial of Omar Abdel-Rahman, the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing... I have great confidence that the NYPD, with federal authorities, will handle security expertly. The NYPD is the best police department in the world and it has experience dealing with high-profile terrorism suspects and any logistical issues that may come up during the trials."
http://gothamist.com/2009/11/15/giuliani_mist...

First of all, nutjob. The location of the courtroom has nothing to do with it. N.Y. is not more fitting than any other location.
It's the type of court held that makes the difference.

Second, Bloomberg is thinking of all the increased government money N.Y. will recieve for security. By his very word useage "HOSTED terrorism trails before", he sees this as a major media & entertainment event bring in millions more.

Tony wrote:

<quoted text>
First of all, nutjob. The location of the courtroom has nothing to do with it. N.Y. is not more fitting than any other location.

Whats the difference? And where is Tim McVeigh right now?

They should be tried by a military tribunal.

dolander wrote:

<quoted text>
Whats the difference? And where is Tim McVeigh right now?

One noteable difference is that McVeigh was a non military member and U.S. citizen. He also acted alone for the most part, and was not part of a faction. Neither is okay, but you asked the difference.

Julianna wrote:

<quoted text>
One noteable difference is that McVeigh was a non military member and U.S. citizen. He also acted alone for the most part, and was not part of a faction. Neither is okay, but you asked the difference.

Omar Abdel-Rahman, the mastermind of the 1993 was tried there and he now has a sentence worse then death. So whats the difference because he is not a US citizen?

Julianna wrote:

<quoted text>
One noteable difference is that McVeigh was a non military member and U.S. citizen. He also acted alone for the most part, and was not part of a faction. Neither is okay, but you asked the difference.

dolanders mind is that of a 5 year old. Explanation is useless.

dolander wrote:

<quoted text>
Omar Abdel-Rahman, the mastermind of the 1993 was tried there and he now has a sentence worse then death. So whats the difference because he is not a US citizen?

I can't tell you for certain all the reasons why, but that was prior to 9/11 and before U.S. officials realized the potential threat that exists. The threat was always there, I believe, but we have been living under a false sense of security. Now there is a bit more awareness (or should be).

Julianna wrote:

<quoted text>
I can't tell you for certain all the reasons why, but that was prior to 9/11 and before U.S. officials realized the potential threat that exists. The threat was always there, I believe, but we have been living under a false sense of security. Now there is a bit more awareness (or should be).

That was Bush that had us all living under a false sense of security. Bush completely ignored the terror threat and I believe it was deliberate.. Never the less if we don’t hold these people accountable on our own soil out of fear, it will be another victory for terrorist.. Is that what you want?

dolander wrote:

<quoted text>
That was Bush that had us all living under a false sense of security. Bush completely ignored the terror threat and I believe it was deliberate.. Never the less if we don’t hold these people accountable on our own soil out of fear, it will be another victory for terrorist.. Is that what you want?

Shame on you dolander, now you are using Bush's reasoning and words.

A conviction and death pentalty carried out immediately by the military is not a victory for terrorist.

Tony wrote:

<quoted text>
Shame on you dolander, now you are using Bush's reasoning and words.
A conviction and death pentalty carried out immediately by the military is not a victory for terrorist.

Stop rambling and take another pill...
When was the last time a military court convicted and executed anyone?

dolander wrote:

<quoted text>
That was Bush that had us all living under a false sense of security. Bush completely ignored the terror threat and I believe it was deliberate.. Never the less if we don’t hold these people accountable on our own soil out of fear, it will be another victory for terrorist.. Is that what you want?

I agree with you that the Bush Adm failed to see the extent of some security threats, but it also predated Bush. Clinton did the same. The key in my view is to learn from those mistakes by not repeating them.

Military executions are rare. Civilian federal executions are also rare. McVeigh was one of them. Although terribly misguided, McVeigh quieted the appeals process and faced responsibility once apprehended. That isn't what we typically see. Nonetheless, by not parading them through the streets of the U.S. doesn't mean the U.S. can't and shouldn't deal with them.

dolander wrote:

<quoted text>
Stop rambling and take another pill...
When was the last time a military court convicted and executed anyone?

I apoligize dolander, I made a comment that went over your 5th grade head.
I forget at times that you are such a simpleton.

So what's the argument against the Uniform Military Code of Justice applying? I took another look at this, and it applies to war criminals as well. Have we not declared a "war on terrorism?" Or do we not recognize it for what it is, since the battlefield has changed.

Julianna wrote:

So what's the argument against the Uniform Military Code of Justice applying? I took another look at this, and it applies to war criminals as well. Have we not declared a "war on terrorism?" Or do we not recognize it for what it is, since the battlefield has changed.

The battlefield hasn't changed, but the Commander in Chief has.

That's the problem.

The terrorist will have a better chance in a civilian court than in military court.

Julianna wrote:

So what's the argument against the Uniform Military Code of Justice applying? I took another look at this, and it applies to war criminals as well. Have we not declared a "war on terrorism?" Or do we not recognize it for what it is, since the battlefield has changed.

Terrorism is a tactic. There is no specific enemy when it comes to that..

Even the US sponsored terrorism when its in the favor, like we did with Bin Lauden when Russia was at war with Afghanistan. What we have done is declared war on ourselves, in more ways then one.

I don’t believe that is what our forefathers had in mind when the constitution was written when it comes to the declaration of war...

So now we have to read rights to terrorists captured on the field of battle. Can you imagine if we had to do the same to the Germans or the Japanese during WW2, what a joke. This send a clear message to our enemies that this administration is weak, come and attack us. The time of the trial would be a good time. Maybe they will treaten the judge and family, jurors and family, or maybe just the general population of NY.

These murdering terrorists were not read their rights to date. What do you bleeding heart liberal socialists think will be their first motion. Let me guess for you as you are clueless, I would like to dismiss as I was never read my rights. I hope that one or all of these derelicts gets out and attack again. The blame will lie at the feet of hussein obama.

Tony wrote:

<quoted text>
Shame on you dolander, now you are using Bush's reasoning and words.
A conviction and death pentalty carried out immediately by the military is not a victory for terrorist.

A victory will be a never ending show trial a few blocks from ground zero. These fools may even represent themselves and have daily access to spread their hate on our national and world television. All encouraged by our so called leader obama. They would also have access to all the classified security information if they defended themselves, way to stick up for America you pitiful weak azz of a president.

What could go wrong?

All of these terrorist have already stated several times that they are guilty of the actions in the execution of a holy war. It not like their only defense will be to but the American government and its people on trail. Besides that can you just image the what the law firms representing these guys are going to be paid by the Terrorists and other Muslims organization or our Federal government.

Now on the other hand this could be a right wing conspiracy to take ALL the news of the improving Economy, improving Job numbers and housing numbers out of the news to hurt the Dems in next years mid-terms.