Terrorist Criminal Trials and the Coming Jihad

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Philobeado, Nov 30, 2009.

  1. Philobeado
    Offline

    Philobeado Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    566
    Thanks Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Gulf of Mexico Coast, Texas
    Ratings:
    +173
    Look what happened the last time al-Qaeda terrorists and their attorneys got a hold of the discovery process.

    After the bombing of the American embassy in Nairobi, the police found amid the belongings of one of the perpetrators a list of the unindicted co-conspirators of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing in New York. The list was submitted to the lawyers for the defendant, Sheik Abdel Rahman, and signed by Mary Jo White, the United States Attorney. Under the rules of discovery in a criminal trial, the defendant had every right to the list. If you read through the names of the unindicted co-conspirators, one will jump off the page and grab your attention. It is Number 95: Osama bin Laden.


    If ever you needed a reason why terrorists must be dealt with as foreign combatants and not as criminals, it would have stared you in the face throughout the discovery process of Sheik Rahman's trial. But there's more. Rahman's activist attorney, Lynne Stewart, used her position to pass information from the cleric to his terrorist followers in Egypt. She was later disbarred and sentenced to twenty-eight months in prison.


    Stewart is not an anomaly. Radical lawyers bent on using the legal system to further a political agenda will be falling all over themselves to represent the five alleged terrorists who will now stand trial in New York City. These lawyers will put American foreign policy on trial for the events of September 11, 2001. In putting September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his co-conspirators into the criminal justice system, Attorney General Eric Holder and President Barack Obama have given the jihadists a once-in-a-lifetime stage for their propaganda.


    What then possessed the Obama administration to ignore the obvious and resolve to try these defendants in civil and not military proceedings? It most certainly is not to showcase the American justice system to the world. In a consummate act of legal stupidity, both the president and the attorney general have announced to the world that not only are the defendants guilty, but they will also be sentenced to death. If ever a national jury pool was tainted, this one is. In the Islamic world, no one remotely sympathetic to the defendants could ignore the hypocrisy of this conduct.


    Obama is willing to compromise intelligence and provide the jihadists with a propaganda platform because he needs to placate the extremist elements of his political base. By taking these terrorists out of the military's hands and putting them into the criminal justice system, Obama is redefining terrorism as a criminal justice issue and not as irregular warfare. In this, Obama is beginning a process that will reshape the meaning of terrorism to conform with the sympathetic and minimalist notions of leftist ideology.


    Terrorist trials in the media capital of the world will be a magnet for the inspired publicity of jihadism. All terrorism finds its inspiration in violence as theater. The theater in the courtroom will be overshadowed by the inevitable carnage in the streets.


    Terrorists have always wanted a lot of people watching, a lot of people asking, "Why?" From Abane Ramdane, who moved the Algerian insurrection against the French out of the anonymous Sahara and into the media-saturated streets of Algiers, to George Habash of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, who blew up airplanes, terrorist leaders have thrived on the oxygen of publicity.


    It is inconceivable that the jihadists will not find New York during the terrorist criminal trials the perfect place for statements to be written in blood and punctuated by explosions.


    Innocent blood will flow in the streets of New York because Obama chose to make a political statement rather than confront the reality of what terrorism is and how it works.


    Abraham H. Miller is an emeritus professor of political science and former chairman of the Intelligence Studies Section of the International Studies Association
    American Thinker: Terrorist Criminal Trials and the Coming Jihad
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. SFC Ollie
    Offline

    SFC Ollie Still Marching

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    28,742
    Thanks Received:
    4,418
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Extreme East Ohio
    Ratings:
    +4,458
    yes, there is all that, but do not forget that this is the lefts shot at putting Bush on trial at the same time. It's a stupid , ignorant, political game.
     
  3. Claudette
    Offline

    Claudette Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    19,754
    Thanks Received:
    3,044
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +7,784
    Gotta agree Ollie. This is more about politics than anything else. Holder, before he was AG, worked for a company that spent thousands of man hours defending terrorists. Kinda makes you wonder don't it???
     
  4. Mike458877
    Offline

    Mike458877 Conservative

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Messages:
    462
    Thanks Received:
    116
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Midwest
    Ratings:
    +116
    Politics at the expense of more American blood!

    Obama Hope & Change!

    Mike
     
  5. Charles Stucker
    Offline

    Charles Stucker Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2009
    Messages:
    2,071
    Thanks Received:
    225
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +225
    Perhaps the New York liberals will change their thinking if this does happen.

    At least I don't live in NYC
     
  6. RhodesNews
    Offline

    RhodesNews Rhodes News

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Ratings:
    +0
    Here's what I don't get: Most people do not realized that we try American citizens everyday in military tribunals. They've been going on for years and the ACLU has never once raised an objection. Who are these Americans? And if the ACLU believes these tribunals are sound and just, then why aren't military tribunals sound, just and fair for terrorists? There is a really good video on Youtube. Search code: SIRxilvPcK8.
     
  7. potter 58
    Offline

    potter 58 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    996
    Thanks Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +57
    and heres what I don't get, had Booooooooooooooooooooooooooosh not tortured the cocksuckers , we wouln't be having rthis conversation
     
  8. JakeStarkey
    Offline

    JakeStarkey Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    137,548
    Thanks Received:
    12,358
    Trophy Points:
    2,165
    Ratings:
    +32,697
    Supreme Court disagrees with you folks, and it is certainly not a liberal, radical extremist group.
     
  9. Mike458877
    Offline

    Mike458877 Conservative

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Messages:
    462
    Thanks Received:
    116
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Midwest
    Ratings:
    +116
    It's really a shame that Obama and his Klan doesn't have more respect for the wishes of the American citizen and most of all for the families of those killed and of those injured on 9/11.

    If he had no other options it would be different, but the fact is, those who he is hired to serve, have no meaning to him and he doesn't respect them!

    Mike
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. WillowTree
    Online

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,193
    Thanks Received:
    10,175
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,770
    There is no "kinda" about it. They left favors the terrorists and the anarchists.
     

Share This Page