• White House Considers Moving 9/11 Trial Out of New York City
    80 replies, posted
[QUOTE] Bowing to intense and deepening bipartisan opposition to conducting the criminal trials for the 9/11 hijackers in the heart of New York City, the Obama White House has begun discussing alternative locations with the Justice Department, senior administration officials told Fox News. The White House denied a New York Daily News report that it ordered the Department of Justice to find a new location for the trials, which are sure to attract massive publicity and require intense security preparations wherever they are held. However, senior administration officials confirm alternative trial locations are being sought because Congress is almost sure to deny President Obama the funds necessary to conduct the trials, as originally planned, in the federal courthouse mere blocks away from the Twin Towers, the epicenter of the 9/11 attacks that took the lives of nearly 3,000 civilians. "The discussions are under way in case the option of holding the trials in New York City is foreclosed upon at either the state or the federal level," an Obama administration official said. Up to now, the Obama administration has stood by Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to move the suspects, including self-professed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, from the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to New York to be tried in federal court rather than before a military commission, as many Republicans have demanded.The White House is not backing down from its stance that a civilian trial is appropriate and worthy venue for seeking to bring the alleged conspirators to justice. "President Obama is still committed to trying Mohammed and four other terrorist detainees in federal court," spokesman Bill Burton told the Daily News on Thursday. "He agrees with the attorney general's opinion that ... (the detainees) can be litigated successfully and securely in the United States of America, just like others have." The news that officials are considering a new venue comes as New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who initially was open to the idea of holding the trials in the city, says he'd be "very happy" if the White House reconsidered. Security has been an issue, as well as cost, estimated at $200 million a year. The discussions on alternative trial locations suggest the New York City trial plan is all but dead. Congressional and Democratic sources tell Fox News that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has told lawmakers the administration will stand down if the House and Senate, as appears likely, deny funds for 9/11 trials in the Big Apple. Rep. Peter King of New York, ranking Republican on the Homeland Security Committee, has introduced legislation to block funds for a 9/11 trial in New York City. House Minority Leader John Boehner said Wednesday the Obama administration doesn't have the votes to proceed. "There is not going to be a trial in New York, I guarantee it. There is no appetite for the trials in Congress," Boehner said. More than half a dozen senators have forged a bipartisan coalition against funding 9/11 trials there. No timetable has been set for resolving the impasse. Military charges against Mohammed and his co-defendants have been dropped. Criminal charges are pending resolution of a final trial site.[/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/28/white-house-considers-moving-trial-new-york-city/[/url]
bring them to New York, watch New Yorkers rip them limb from limb.
[QUOTE=UnidentifiedFlyingTard;19918533]bring them to New York, watch New Yorkers rip them limb from limb.[/QUOTE] Surprisingly, New Yorkers want them [i]out[/i] of NYC and put on a federal trial. They don't want the terrorists being judged in civilian courts.
It's a stupid idea to bring them to New York. It's only going to cause trouble.
[QUOTE=Musicfreak59;19918550]Surprisingly, New Yorkers want them [i]out[/i] of NYC and put on a federal trial. They don't want the terrorists being judged in civilian courts.[/QUOTE] Good thing the average New Yorker doesn't hold a position of power in government then. They're civilians that attacked a civilian target, so they get a civilian trial. Anyone who rates disagree is as bad as the terrorists who behead people without trial
That's not the problem. The problem is that; A. New Yorkers get worked up and cause civil disorder during the trial B. Someone decides to stage an attack, be it a bombing, a shooting, you name it. There is nothing to stop another Mumbai.
Remember that Manhattan is one of the busiest places in the world. I really don't think it's a good idea to bring them here seeing as it'll cause major traffic jams and because I'm not sure whether the security force, as they said in the source, will be able to keep the peace. [b]Edit:[/b] Holy shit both my points got ninja-fied
Sooner or later Obama will have to dig in and refuse to cave on something if he wants to win his reelection.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;19919043]Sooner or later Obama will have to dig in and refuse to cave on something if he wants to win his reelection.[/QUOTE] No, you don't cave in [i]after[/i] you get reelected. Then it doesn't matter what you do because you don't need to worry about another term.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;19919090]No, you don't cave in [i]after[/i] you get reelected. Then it doesn't matter what you do because you don't need to worry about another term.[/QUOTE] The people that supported him are seeing him cave on issues left and right, that doesn't inspire the confidence to vote for him again. We wanted things done, and he keeps giving in to the minority at our expense.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;19919120]The people that supported him are seeing him cave on issues left and right, that doesn't inspire the confidence to vote for him again. We wanted things done, and he keeps giving in to the minority at our expense.[/QUOTE] *majority If it were the minority, he wouldn't care.
Actually, they planned on moving them to Governors Island, which is a little island between Brooklyn and Manhattan. I live in New York, and I think it's a bad idea. It's only a good publicity stunt, that we finally "caught and bring justice to them terrorists". There's no real difference if we tried them somewhere else, but I dunno, I guess it's like a "haha karma, bitch" type of situation.
The incident happened in New York, so the trial should be in New York. (Well, we shouldn't have taken them prisoner in the first place, we should have just killed them)
[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;19919304]The incident happened in New York, so the trial should be in New York. (Well, we shouldn't have taken them prisoner in the first place, we should have just killed them)[/QUOTE] Amazing. You should be President or something.
Why is it such a big deal? It's not like they have any chance of being innocent. Also, just hypothetically, they are found innocent. New Yorkers will rip them apart in the streets.
Hey wait, if we bring him to trial here, wouldn't he have the same rights as any other person? Where he can just get a lawyer and not say a word.
[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;19918780] B. Someone decides to stage an attack, be it a bombing, a shooting, you name it. There is nothing to stop another Mumbai.[/QUOTE] Right, because an attack the scale of the mumbai attack would be totally easy to bring to new york.
[QUOTE=darkzero226;19919940]Hey wait, if we bring him to trial here, wouldn't he have the same rights as any other person? Where he can just get a lawyer and not say a word.[/QUOTE] So he should be tried as a piece of dirt? Then why not just kill him on the spot? Is he any less of a human being as you or I?
[U][B]SCORPIUS! [/B][/U][I][B][U]Stop posting foxnews articles as your source!!![/U][/B][/I] Nobody is remotely considering this. I could go through that entire article and pick out all the false assumptions that make it is based on, but I don't have the time. Here's just one: Congress is [B]NOT [/B]going to deny the funds to conduct these proceedings. I live in New York and I can say for certain that the people here want KSM to be convicted in our city. $200 million is a heinous, unsubstantiated, borderline fallacious over estimation of the cost of the trial, based on no facts whatsoever. I'm sick of fox news and their fucking, irresponsible, fear-based, agenda and I'd prefer if we could keep them out of the news from now on.
I don't understand why people are trying to move them in the first place. It takes this long to take them to any court to punish them for their crimes, and if the government is forced to move them, this entire will be delayed. They already have the plan in place to prosecute them, don't try to change that so justice can be served as swiftly and quickly as possible.
they're not US citizens and shouldn't be tried as such. they should be tried in military court
[QUOTE=Jewsus;19920283][U][B]SCORPIUS! [/B][/U][I][B][U]Stop posting foxnews articles as your source!!![/U][/B][/I] [/QUOTE] [i][b][u]ONLY IF YOU START SPELLING MY NAME RIGHT! SCORPIOUS! WITH A FUCKING O![/i][/b][/u] :downs:
Hang every god damm terrorist, There worst than zombimes!
[QUOTE=Javascript;19920682]they're not US citizens and shouldn't be tried as such. they should be tried in military court[/QUOTE] They're not soldiers. They're not prisoners of war. Think before you post. [editline]04:13PM[/editline] [QUOTE=darkzero226;19919940]Hey wait, if we bring him to trial here, wouldn't he have the same rights as any other person? Where he can just get a lawyer and not say a word.[/QUOTE] Why should they not have the same rights as any other person? At what magnitude of crime should we deny people rights? 100 deaths? 1000? Or should we just let YOU decide since you're obviously such a fucking political genius?
they're terrorits they dun deserve our american freedum
[QUOTE=KmScMT;19921106]they're terrorits they dun deserve our american freedum[/QUOTE] You forgot to throw in a couple :foxnews: and :patriot: emotes.
[QUOTE=UnidentifiedFlyingTard;19918533]bring them to New York, watch New Yorkers rip them limb from limb.[/QUOTE] Blood for the [B]BLOOD GOD. :black101: [/B]
[QUOTE=Jund;19919485]Amazing. You should be President or something.[/QUOTE] I had to turn down a few people's request a few months ago. I'd like to make myself clear; I won't be running in 2012. Sorry Thisispain.
[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;19923244]I had to turn down a few people's request a few months ago. I'd like to make myself clear; I won't be running in 2012. Sorry Thisispain.[/QUOTE] You'll be voting for Palin instead. :smug:
[QUOTE=Zeke129;19920820]They're not soldiers. They're not prisoners of war. Think before you post. [editline]04:13PM[/editline] Why should they not have the same rights as any other person? At what magnitude of crime should we deny people rights? 100 deaths? 1000? Or should we just let YOU decide since you're obviously such a fucking political genius?[/QUOTE] Shit, I think your right. Chain of Wiki quotes: [U][B]POW[/B]:[/U] "A prisoner of war (POW, PoW, PW, P/W, WP, or PsW) or enemy prisoner of war (EPW) is a [I][B]combatant [/B][/I]who is held in continuing custody by an enemy power during or immediately after an armed conflict." [U][B]Combatant[/B]:[/U] A [B]combatant[/B] is someone who takes a direct part in the hostilities of an armed conflict. If a combatant follows the law of war, then they are considered a privileged combatant, and upon capture they qualify as a prisoner of war under the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII). An [I][B]unprivileged combatant[/B][/I] is someone, such as a mercenary, who take a direct part in the hostilities but who upon capture [I][B]does not qualify for prisoner of war status.[/B][/I] [B][U]unprivileged combatant:[/U] [/B]a civilian who directly engages in armed conflict in violation of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and [B][I]may be detained or prosecuted under the domestic law of the detaining state for such action.[/I][/B] Still, This just doesn't feel right. But theres nothing I can do about it. I just hope the trial is fast and results in death for them, but I have a feeling this case going to last years. Actually... according to the Laws of War Spies and terrorists may be subject to civilian law or [B][I]military tribunal [/I][/B]for their acts and in practice have been subjected to torture and/or execution. I feel as if I just wasted my time.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.