According to an article reported by
The Washington Post: āIn the nearly two decades since 19 al Qaeda terrorists crashed hijacked planes into the World Trade Center buildings, the side of the Pentagon, and a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, killing nearly 3,000 people,
the five men believed to be responsible have yet to face a trial.ā Now thatās what I call an exceptional example of dropping the ball, more like dropping a cannon ball during full-on Viking rogue warfare. My God. This refers of course to the planners of 9/11 and not the dead tools who flew the planes.
āKhalid Sheikh Mohammed, dubbed
āKSM" and
described as āthe principal architect of the 9/11 attacksā in the 9/11 Commission Report, was a close ally of al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden and will be on trial alongside Walid bin Attash, Ramzi bin al Shibh, Ammar al Baluchi, and Mustafa al Hawsawi.ā
A federal appeals court rejected a constitutional challenge brought by lawyers for a Yemeni businessman held at Guantanamo Bay, with the judges ruling that the Constitutionās due process clause is not applicable to foreigners held at the U.S. naval base. Judge Neomi Rao, appointed by President...
www.washingtonexaminer.com
So, are these planners of death and destruction ever going to be tried, and if so when? I canāt find anything about it and I havenāt confirmed they are within that 40 group of detainees they still hold at Gitmo Bay but assume thatās the case.
Another aspect of all of this that is mind-boggling is why in the hell didnāt they try these men? All 40, not just the 5? Does it all fall back onto the fact thereās no agreement whether they have due process rights or not? Thatās totally unacceptable.
The fact that itās still debatable whether or not these foreign men have US constitutional rights certainly makes me go āHuh?!ā It was just being debated on this thread. Honestly, I donāt know which way to believe but I lean towards trying them. Judges and lawyers at odds regarding the precise level of presidential and congressional war powers, and there still isnāt concise agreement among so called āconstitutional expertsā. Lawyers argue one way, while appellate judges have ruled another either supporting or opposing due process due to foreign status. Call me ignorant, but this is something that should have been legally determined way before 9/11 - good grief!
We are either a nation of laws or we are not; there really isnāt a gray area with this type of catastrophic crime. Yes, I understand the interpretive factor that we all can read the same law and come out with different opinions. This issue, however, is so important that I donāt understand why we have not reached a consensus by now. I guess thatās why we have lawyers and suchā¦.to argue their interpretive cases.
Those 5 men who are accused of perpetrating 9/11 should have been tried 18 or so years ago. How have they justified the hold up? Obviously, Iāve missed something. Who exactly is refusing the due process? Judges, congressional reps, and presidents only have so much power after all. Who is controlling the puppet strings here?
www.americanthinker.com
