Bloomberg: Crime Stat Manipulations are "Tiny"
Palin: "Absurd" Not To Consider 2012 Run
School Already Canceled Tomorrow for Snowpocalypse!
Wall Street Throwing More Money at Republicans
More Bald Eagles Spotted In Harlem!
While the majority of Americans aren't happy with the plan to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed and four other suspected terrorists in New York City, more New Yorkers support the plan than oppose it, according to two new studies. Based on findings from a nationwide phone survey by Rasmussen Reports, 51 percent of Americans think it's a bad idea to host the trials in the city, while 29 percent of respondents favor the proposal to move the suspects from Guantanamo Bay to Lower Manhattan.
The study also found that only 30 percent of Americans want to see the suspected terrorists tried in civilian courts, while 54 percent of respondents favor military tribunals. According to the Post, those numbers broke down along party lines, with 72 percent of Republican opposing the use of civilian courts.
Meanwhile, a Marist College poll of only New York City residents found that the city is divided on the plan to hold the trials just blocks from the World Trade Center site, though slightly more New Yorkers support the proposal than oppose it. The study determined that 45 percent of locals think it's a good idea, while 41 percent of respondents consider it a bad idea. What do you think?
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
new york is part of america? huh. you learn something new everyday.
Why not? What are we gonna do, hold them in custody indefinitely? Try 'em, find 'em guilty, give 'em the chair. Or needle. Or whatever the hell they use. Hello, people: they're called "terrorists" for a reason. If you're afraid of them, they win.
you mean the same americans who think 'nyc is sum dum leeberal elitest hellhole.' but then want to make our tragedy their own? i didnt tell oklahoma what to do with mcveigh and i didnt pretend to care that a bunch of fundamentalist hillbilles died.
"you mean the same americans who think 'nyc is sum dum leeberal elitest hellhole.' but then want to make our tragedy their own?"
"...Thousands of volunteers from around the country continued to want to help after the official agencies were up and running and the “vacuum of authority” no longer existed. Indeed, so many individuals wanted to be helpful that service organizations and official agencies had trouble sending them home when they were no longer needed (Halford and Nolan 2002). According to one Red Cross professional, “We’ve never had this many volunteers at any disaster… This is the most volunteers we’ve ever had in the history of the Red Cross.” By two and one-half weeks after the disaster, the Red Cross had received approximately 22,000 offers of assistance and had processed 15, 570 volunteers. "
http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/7/0/8/pages107082/p107082-3.php
" i didnt tell oklahoma what to do with mcveigh and i didnt pretend to care that a bunch of fundamentalist hillbilles died."
Classy. Real classy.
"The victims ranged in age from three months to seventy-three, not including the fetuses of three pregnant women.[86][87] Of the dead, 99 worked for the federal government.[88] Nineteen of the victims were children, fifteen of whom were in the America's Kids Day Care Center.[89]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing
I oppose a trial, but would not oppose a military tribunal being held in New York.
don't give a rat's ass.
of course, the mayor wants it here, he wants everything here if it would benefit the richies.
if I knew then what I knew now I would have walked those 4 blocks downtown.
Where is the poll option for "Don't give a fuck"
US Out of New York!!
Why should these people have any say in how we run our city-state?
The 'Americans' who think the trial shouldnt be held in New York are just parroting what Fox News and Rush Limbaugh tell them to think. They have no capacity to reason it out for themselves nor do they even want to try.
Party lines, indeed.
Your god-like ability to see into the hearts and minds of millions of people you've never even met is impressive. Is it only with those who don't march in lock-step with your own "party lines" that you have this power?
I think pinball's argument is that the right wing can't give a good, clear reason why the trials should not be held in NY.
To be honest, I've actually rethought my stance and believe they should be tried in Kansas, where there's still a death penalty.
they should be tried in Kansas, where there's still a death penalty.
It's a Federal case. State death penalty laws don't apply. The Federal government does have the death penalty. And unless something changed I believe it's still on the table for these guys.
Here's just one good, clear reason (among others) not to have the trial in NYC: deny the terrorists the media spotlight that they want and that this city is famous for. Don't have to be a "right winger" to figure that one out.
Good thing the Allies didn't fight WW2 this way. Could have stormed the beaches at Normandy with lawyers waving subpoenas instead of armed soldiers; that would have taught those nasty krauts a lesson. Having said that, the thought of thousands of ambulance chasers getting mowed down like blades of grass is not without its appeal.
The Allies did fight WWII this way. It was called the Nuremburg Trials.
Maybe you've heard of them. You know the full, legal and open account of genocide that provides the complete testimony of what actually occurred so that conspiracy theories and misinformation don't lead to it happening again.
You beat me to it. As I read that comment, I thought "um, Nuremberg?" and am happy to see that someone else remembers basic facts and likes to bring them up when relevant.
how dare you imply that facts are relevant?! as if!
Since you brought it up, most of what went on in Nuremburg were military tribunals. Also note they were held in Germany, not the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. And the Allies jurisdiction and legal basis for the tribunals was pretty much made up because we won the war.
The Nuremberg trials happened AFTER the nazis surrendered and the war was OVER. Last time I checked, al-qaeda was still in business.
Perhaps you are unaware that DURING the war, nazi saboteurs were in fact caught on American soil, placed before a military tribunal and executed. Get your history straight.
How did you manage to check on al-Qaeda?
Media spotlight? What in the hell are you talking about? You think this is People's Court that they'll air the trial live on TV? And the judge will be a pushover as to let the defendant rant and rave and call his terrorist buddies to arms?
"Media spotlight? What in the hell are you talking about? You think this is People's Court that they'll air the trial live on TV?And the judge will be a pushover as to let the defendant rant and rave and call his terrorist buddies to arms?"
Yes. And ll of the local & national state owned media will be gushing over themselves to publicize KSM's rants against America; have you been asleep as Obama runs around the world apologizing for our existence?
WHY DO YOU THINK HOLDER AND OBAMA WANT THE CRIMINAL TRIAL INSTEAD OF MILITARY TRIBUNALS?
So they can say its not a war on terrorism, it's a "criminal" thing and we need to let the jihadis state their case AGAIN....
why, then, are they sending some to tribunals and not to criminal courts? please explain your logic. ksm stated a preference for representing himself in a tribunal, but feel free to take his side.
I'm undecided as to whether they deserve a civilian trial or whether a military tribunal would be a better option, but I am concerned about the logistics of having the trial held in downtown Manhattan. It will be a nightmare to get around down there - there's certain to be street closures and press from around the world will set up their news vans. Who knows what kind of angry protesters these guys will attract? I'm mainly concerned about the safety of people who live and work in the area, more than anything else.
I like that one side of the argument comes down to "laws, pshaw, why not ignore laws? Why should we care if there are laws!"
Morons.
New York City is not really part of America. Americans are still shaking in their boots about 9/11. Evidently we're tough enough here to get on with business. As for this trial, I think it's going to be circus because I think KSM is not a mastermind but a nut job; but, so what? We've had a few circuses in this town before. Baseball caps, pennants, buttons and bumper stickers will be on sale shortly.
I just wish Mr. Big Man Giuliani would shut up and dry his pants. He's a disgrace to the city.
I sure hope I'm not called for jury duty when they start selecting a jury. How many weeks will it take to find a jury member in New York County that wasn't affected by 9/11? Most of the people I know either lost some one they knew in the tragedy or was deeply shaken by the events of that day.
That's the only reason I can think of to not have the trial here. I just don't see how we can even pretend that we're giving these guys a "fair and impartial" trial when the jurors selected were probably effected by the events.
Does Khalid shop at American Apparel?
"New York City is not really part of America. Americans are still shaking in their boots about 9/11. Evidently we're tough enough here to get on with business."
Uh, right. That must explain all those people running out of buildings in a panic when the plane sometimes known as Air Force One buzzed the Statue of Liberty.
New York City is not really part of America.
Except when Wall Street needs a bailout from the Federal Government.
Most people, the overwhelming majority, ignored the airplanes. But there are always a few people who enjoy a nice panic, the media got something to b.s. about for a day, and the authorities got a chance to both screw up and puff themselves up at one and the same time. It was a wonderful opportunity for all.
We NY'rs cannot afford this trial send them to
Ft Hood TX surely they have a secure jail there?
try them in a military court, wrap them in bacon and put a bullet in their heads.
That's a waste of delicious bacon. :(
They'd probably prefer a military trial, so give them a criminal trial instead. I'm not worried about traffic jams or courtroom rants or terrorist attacks -- I want to know how the hell you can try a criminal case against people who were almost certainly tortured, waterboarded, etc. Once they have Constitutional protections all those things come into play in a major way and could even lead to acquittal. Then what? Do you let them just walk out into Foley Square and get on the subway?
I want to know how the hell you can try a criminal case against people who were almost certainly tortured, waterboarded, etc.
That's why they're getting a civilian trial. It let's the defense cross examine every military and intelligence witness the government has to put on the stand to make its case. It's a backdoor way of investigating the previous administration without a formal government investigation.
PLEASE let them walk out into Foley Square. I doubt they'd get much further than the subway entrance.
We lost our chance for post-9/11 Nuremberg trials/military tribunals years ago. The original Nuremberg trials were held in 1945-1946, just after WW2 ended. And there was no question the Nazis on trial were military and national leaders.
The Bush administration wasted years trying to do something like this, but failed so badly, it became impossible to go on. Defense lawyers, prosecutors and judges refused to participate because the process is clearly unjust/illegal/immoral.
As for trials in NYC: Any sane defense lawyer would and should demand a change of venue. I hear Alaska is horrible this time of year.
He'll make a fine kamikaze cabbie when acquitted. Unless he becomes a toast of socialites on either Upper Side. He fought their fight against evil Bush-Cheney junta.
This poll kinda agrees with the post-9/11 reality that many anti-Iraq war New Yorkers participated in a massive anti-war protest in the very streets that are most likely to be a terrorist target while at the same time the not-a-target heartland cheered our cowboy president and our new, fun war.
I don't think New Yorkers are pacifists; I just think that most of us have met a Muslim and think a little beyond pure hatred and fear. And yeah, I'm biased against my fellow Americans - the angry foolish ones, anyway.
If we give them a military tribunal, doesn't that simply dignify their cause? I know I'd read it that way. Soldiers of Jihad, baby! If you try them as criminals, though-- well then, they are just a bunch of criminals, ain't they?
They do not care. They don't make such distinctions.
If it's happening where an American flag hanging, it's all the same to them.
The issue I have with it: They're going to be on trial as civilians. They're war criminals and should be tried by the military.
Can you explain to me how they are war criminals? I'm asking this very earnestly because I don't know the true definition of 'war criminal.' Do we have to be in a declared state of war with a country, or is an act of terrorism like this automatically considered an act of war?
For my part, I'd like to just shoot 'em all and have done with it, except that it gives them martyred hero status.
Some fat pig in Texas driving around in a minivan with an american flag bumper sticker doesn't want terror trials held in NYC? So really, nobody that matters is against them.
Can't we get a new photo of that Khalid Sheik Mohammed guy, or do we have to continue flaunting how we're too uncivilized to treat our prisoners well?
That photo was taken moments after he was handcuffed in Pakistan, not after we waterboarded him.
OK, then how about a photo where the collar isn't open so wide? He must be the hairiest guy on earth.
Forget waterboarding. Waxing would've been a better method of getting info. "40 year old virgin" multiplied.
Regardless of whether it's a military tribunal or civilian court, let's resolve that when they are judged guilty, they are executed publicly - roll those gurneys right into ground zero!
This is a perfect example of how the most bloodthirsty fantasies on both sides are pretty much the same thing. A public execution would make a most excellent martyrdom.
i respect your perspective H.B and i don't mean to come off as bloodthursty; all of what i am saying is based on an assumption that it is a fait accompli that there is going to be the death penalty here regardless of how they proceed.
So if that is the case, i submit that the whole 'martyrdom' appeal is a moot point: countless studies have shown that the death penalty doesn't deter murder or violent crime, which is why (believe it or not) i'm against it.
But these same studies continuously show that the only benefit for death as punishment is to give the surviving families some opportunity for retribution and closure. I am sure that many surviving family members would want a prime seat wherever KSM and his miscreants are terminated.
But in a larger sense, because of the nature of the attacks, we are all a 'family member' of the victims, and I for one would think that there would be a catharsis and closure amongst many if we rolled these animals out to ground zero, don't give them any last words, end their worthless lives and bury them with snakes or whatever else is anethema to them.
And i don't think that would help al queda's recruiting. The last thing i care about is pissing these guys off anyway...Ask anyone who has ever seen even a "sanitized" death sentence carried out. It isn't a pretty sight.
You're blind if you think any kind of martyrdom wouldn't help recruitment - and the more public the spectacle the more effective it would be for the Islamists. That's why KSM wants it and I don't think we should give it to him. Life imprisonment with no platform for spewing his hate would be a much more offensive punishment. Oh, and I'm pro-death penalty in certain (rare) circumstances, believe it or not.
As for revenge and closure: I think the victims community is divided on that one; those whom I know are more interested in coming to terms through their own actions and not obsessed with what happens to these fanatics.
100,000 Americans have signed the Letter To President Obama sent by 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America and theBravest.com:
NO TRIAL IN NYC.
http://www.keepamericasafe.com/petition_signup/
You mean .033% of the population? Wow.
"You mean .033% of the population? Wow."
Quite larger than the population sample in the marist poll
602 polled /8.36 million NYC population = 0.000072
You can go back to sucking a hookah with your jihadi friends and their useful idiot accomplices.
Sen. Lindsay Graham (who voted to confirm Holder) explains today exactly (a) why Holder is in over his head and (b) why these trials are a huge mistake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG7lm8Sfbo4
and suddenly anyone should listen to lindsey graham because (really, of all the fucking blowhards in senate, this one's a particularly poor choice if you want to cite him as some form of voice of reason and/or expertise)?
now, i'm going to pull a little trick out of ye olde gop tea bag and tell you that ksm wanted to go to a tribunal, so if you want him to go to a tribunal, then you're on the side of the terrorists. i've wanted to do that all day. fucking asshat hypocrites.
"and suddenly anyone should listen to lindsey graham because (really, of all the fucking blowhards in senate, this one's a particularly poor choice if you want to cite him as some form of voice of reason and/or expertise)?"
Hey, he's one of your reach around guys that you dems love just like mccain (so you can set them up as "moderate repubs" and then beat them) so STFU.
"...ksm wanted to go to a tribunal, so if you want him to go to a tribunal, then you're on the side of the terrorists. i've wanted to do that all day. fucking asshat hypocrites."
Foul-mouthed leftard - who cares what KSM wants, its what's good for America, and Holder is giving the terrorists their "day in court" where they can spout all of their Obama-agrees–with AmeriKKKA s*cks crap.
Then you and the rest of your hate-america crowd can chime in during the trial, "see, we should have mirandized, him, we shouldn't have waterboarded him, Bushco's illegal war, joos, crusades, misunderstod islam, WAH WAH WAH WAH... set him free, !!!"
whoops, the plan is already announced
Obama: Alleged 9/11 leader will be executed
In NBC interview, he then backs off by saying he doesn't mean to prejudge
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34015727/ns/us_news-security/
Does he have a plan for when he loses reelection in 2012 because of this and a dozen other debacles?
I don't understand the logic of having a tribunal vs. a trial. These people were not part of any military force, nor were they acts of war. These were crimes committed on american soil... seems the ONLY logical option is a trial in a US court. Even if they were captured abroad... it's just been a delayed extradition. Bring 'em to NYC and show them that nobody fears them, but they obviously fear death. Otherwise they would've committed suicide rather than allow themselves to become and remain captured.
It doesn't really matter if the trial is held here or not, because it'll most likely be pure theater. I suppose we should hope that the details of his patsyism will come out in the wash but I won't hold my breath.
Assemblyman Dov Hikind is considering buying property in an Arab neighborhood of Jerusalem.
A STRICTLY POLITICAL MOVE, BUT A VERY RISKY ONE.
Events wherein people using powerful weapons, funded with hundreds of millions of dollars, launch attacks against a country, its people, its embassies and other outposts, are not just “criminal acts,” they are Wars.
http://pacificgatepost.com/2009/11/show-trial-goes-to-new-york.html
pimping your blog (everywhere)?