[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Rare Van Halen Leicestershire, Donnington Park August 18, 1984 Valerie Bertinelli Cameo

If you need a Good Opening for black, use this.

"Arrogant Hunter Biden has never been held accountable — until now"

How Republicans in Key Senate Races Are Flip-Flopping on Abortion

Idaho bar sparks fury for declaring June 'Heterosexual Awesomeness Month' and giving free beers and 15% discounts to straight men

Son of Buc-ee’s co-owner indicted for filming guests in the shower and having sex. He says the law makes it OK.

South Africa warns US could be liable for ICC prosecution for supporting Israel

Today I turned 50!

San Diego Police officer resigns after getting locked in the backseat with female detainee

Gazan Refugee Warns the World about Hamas

Iranian stabbed for sharing his faith, miraculously made it across the border without a passport!

Protest and Clashes outside Trump's Bronx Rally in Crotona Park

Netanyahu Issues Warning To US Leaders Over ICC Arrest Warrants: 'You're Next'

Will it ever end?

Did Pope Francis Just Call Jesus a Liar?

Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth) Updated 4K version

There can never be peace on Earth for as long as Islamic Sharia exists

The Victims of Benny Hinn: 30 Years of Spiritual Deception.

Trump Is Planning to Send Kill Teams to Mexico to Take Out Cartel Leaders

The Great Falling Away in the Church is Here | Tim Dilena

How Ridiculous? Blade-Less Swiss Army Knife Debuts As Weapon Laws Tighten

Jewish students beaten with sticks at University of Amsterdam

Terrorists shut down Park Avenue.

Police begin arresting democrats outside Met Gala.

The minute the total solar eclipse appeared over US

Three Types Of People To Mark And Avoid In The Church Today

Are The 4 Horsemen Of The Apocalypse About To Appear?

France sends combat troops to Ukraine battlefront

Facts you may not have heard about Muslims in England.

George Washington University raises the Hamas flag. American Flag has been removed.

Alabama students chant Take A Shower to the Hamas terrorists on campus.

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

Deadly Saltwater and Deadly Fresh Water to Increase

Deadly Cancers to soon Become Thing of the Past?

Plague of deadly New Diseases Continues

[FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Obama Wars
See other Obama Wars Articles

Title: GOP lawmaker introduces bill to ban terror trials from civilian courts and NYC
Source: The Hill
URL Source: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief ... s-from-civilian-courts-and-nyc
Published: Jan 28, 2010
Author: Jordan Fabian
Post Date: 2010-01-28 15:01:20 by Badeye
Keywords: None
Views: 5690
Comments: 38

GOP lawmaker introduces bill to ban terror trials from civilian courts and NYC By Jordan Fabian - 01/28/10 02:03 PM ET The ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee on Thursday introduced legislation that would prevent the 9/11 terror trials from taking place in New York City.

Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.), who represents New York City suburbs on Long Island, told the Associated Press that his bill would cut off Justice Department funding for moving Guantanamo Bay detainees to civilian courts.

The Obama administration announced last year that it would hold a trial for so-called 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and four others in civilian courts in Manhattan.

King and other Republicans have long opposed the trial, saying that it could pose a security threat to New York City and that the suspects do not deserve the legal protections of civilian courts.

While most Democrats believe that the suspected terrorists should be tried in civilian courts, some top Democrats have recently voiced opposition to their New York City location.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) said Thursday they should be moved as did New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D).

"I am open for the trials to be moved to another appropriate place," Gillibrand said.

Sens. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Jim Webb (D-Va.) also signed a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder asking him to move the trials.

The Obama administration has stood behind the trials and their location in lower Manhattan.

It's not clear how much Democratic support King's bill could garner, since it is meant to prevent all civilian terror trials.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: All (#0)

Perfect opportunity for bi partisanship that makes the nation safer, eliminates a propaganda win for al Qaeda, and saves the tax payers 2 BILLION DOLLARS per year related to the upcoming trial in NYC.

Wanna bet Democrats don't jump at this opportunity? Nor the White House?

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-28   15:02:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: go65, Fred Mertz, Biff Tannen, mininggold, A K A Stone, Bickus Dickus (#0) (Edited)

*15% of his constituents are unemployed...good job, Pete...(eye roll)

*hypoerbole for the intellectually challenged...

war  posted on  2010-01-28   15:03:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Badeye (#1)

Cowering in fear sends the right message to Al Qaeda?

go65  posted on  2010-01-28   15:03:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: go65 (#3)

Cowering in fear? By trying enemy combatants in a military tribunal?

How is that 'cowering in fear'? Its common sense, much better and cheaper security, and highly cost effective in comparision to Obama and Holder's ridiculous 'terrorist rights' insanity.

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-28   15:05:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: war (#2)

Too easy...I'll let it go...(chuckle)

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-28   15:06:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: go65 (#3)

Cowering in fear sends the right message to Al Qaeda?

Not one of the arguments against holding these trails extends to any reason beyond the visceral...

war  posted on  2010-01-28   15:22:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Badeye (#4)

Cowering in fear? By trying enemy combatants in a military tribunal?

How is that 'cowering in fear'? Its common sense, much better and cheaper security, and highly cost effective in comparision to Obama and Holder's ridiculous 'terrorist rights' insanity.

The problem with military tribunals is crafting a system that's fair. However, if you've already decided that folks are guilty and are just looking for a show-trial, then military tribunals could be useful. However, due to supreme court rulings there isn't much of a difference anymore in rules between a military tribunal and a federal courts.

Meanwhile we've tried Ramsey Yusuf, Richard Reid, Jose Padilla, Sheik Abdul-Rahman, and Tim McVeigh in civilian courts without much of a problem.

This strikes me as another case of faux outrage. Nobody complained when Bush tried Reid and Padilla in civilian courts.

go65  posted on  2010-01-28   15:37:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: go65 (#7)

Or Zacharias Moussaoui who was part of KSM's conspiracy...

war  posted on  2010-01-28   15:42:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: go65 (#7)

The problem with military tribunals is crafting a system that's fair.

Really? Please explain in specifics what you think is 'unfair' about a military tribunal.

I'm going to love reading your explanation, I just know it!

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-28   15:48:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: All (#9)

Nobody complained when Bush tried Reid and Padilla in civilian courts.

Padilla was a US Citizen, wasn't he? And wasn't Reid also a Brit Citizen? We do have a series of treaties regarding Brits and trials here...Padilla goes without saying due to his status (if I'm right about the US Citizen).

The guy in question for the NYC trial has NO such treaties, nor is he an American citizen. He's an enemy combatant.

But hey, you can argue with Feinstein about it as well as with me, right?

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-28   15:51:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: Badeye (#9)

Really? Please explain in specifics what you think is 'unfair' about a military tribunal.

Tell me the rules first.

go65  posted on  2010-01-28   16:57:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Badeye (#10)

Padilla was a US Citizen, wasn't he? And wasn't Reid also a Brit Citizen? We do have a series of treaties regarding Brits and trials here...Padilla goes without saying due to his status (if I'm right about the US Citizen).

I'm not sure what treaty you are referring to.

go65  posted on  2010-01-28   16:58:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: go65 (#12)

I'm not sure what treaty you are referring to.

There were at least 9 Brits held in Gitmo for years.

"Nine British citizens of Muslim background are in Guantánamo; they have proven to be a political liability for Prime Minister Tony Blair, as calls have been made in Parliament for their repatriation."

war  posted on  2010-01-28   19:34:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: go65 (#12)

Guantánamo Bay prisoner's letter claims he was witness to murders

Tania Branigan

A British man held at Guantánamo Bay has alleged that he saw US soldiers kill two men in Afghanistan.

Moazzam Begg, 36, who has been detained for 2 years without charge or trial, complains in the first letter from a serving inmate to describe severe mistreatment of having suffered "vindictive torture" and death threats, and implies that he has made a false confession.

His lawyers said yesterday that they believed he had been held in solitary confinement at the US military base in Cuba because he had seen the killing. He has had no contact with fellow prisoners since his arrival almost 600 days ago.

Although former detainees have alleged that they suffered extensive abuse and torture at Bagram in Afghanistan and Guantánamo, mail from the camp is heavily censored.

It is unclear why the Pentagon has cleared a document which makes such strong allegations of abuse.

Mr Begg's letter, which is labelled as a supplement to an earlier statement, was written in July and forwarded to his legal team earlier this week. He wrote it after learning that he would be given access to a lawyer.

The American lawyer who subsequently visited him could be jailed if she disclosed their discussions.

In his letter Mr Begg, who comes from Birmingham, said that he was a law-abiding Briton who had never met Osama bin Laden or joined al-Qaida or other paramilitary organisations.

He was arrested by Pakistani agents at his home in Islamabad and handed over to the Americans, who held him at Bagram in Afghanistan for a year and transferred him to Guantánamo Bay in February last year.

Mr Begg wrote: "During several interviews, particularly - though unexclusively - in Afghanistan, I was subjected to pernicious threats of torture, actual vindictive torture and death threats - amongst other coercively employed interrogation techniques."

He described signing a statement in early February 2003 "under threats of long-term imprisonment, summary trials and execution", and added: "Interviews were conducted in an environment of generated fear, resonant with terrifying screams of fellow detainees facing similar methods ...

"This culminated ... with the deaths of two fellow detainees at the hands of US military personnel, to which I myself was partially witness."

Two deaths at Bagram airbase have been classified as homicides and the autopsies indicated "blunt-force injuries", but it is thought that Mr Begg is referring to separate incidents.

The Pentagon said torture was prohibited at Guantá namo Bay and that all "credible allegations" of abuse were investigated, but would not elaborate on whether it considered Mr Begg's claims to be "credible".

war  posted on  2010-01-28   19:38:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: war (#14)

I think badeye was just making things up.

go65  posted on  2010-01-28   20:08:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: go65 (#15)

That's a Stop The Fucking Presses!!! moment...

/sarcasm

war  posted on  2010-01-28   20:13:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: go65 (#11)

You suggest KSM won't get a fair trial up above.

Now you ask me for the 'rules' for a military tribunal?

(laughing)

This is what happens when you blindly follow talking points, GO65.

As Senator Feinstein, or Mayor Bloomberg.

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-29   9:05:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: war (#16)

Fuck off, Fraud.

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-29   9:05:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Badeye (#17)

ou suggest KSM won't get a fair trial up above.

Now you ask me for the 'rules' for a military tribunal?

We need to know the rules for a military tribunal before determining whether or not it's "fair".

See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/29/AR2006062900928.html

go65  posted on  2010-01-29   11:12:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: go65 (#19)

'we' kemosabe? Nope. You, obviously. Again, you say it won't be a fair trail by military tribunal, but you admit you don't have a CLUE as to whats involved.

Its exceedingly fair. Those of us that have knowledge on the topic know this. Those that don't, are leftwingers using talking points, as you did up above.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...(chuckle)

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-29   11:59:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Badeye (#20)

'we' kemosabe? Nope. You, obviously. Again, you say it won't be a fair trail by military tribunal, but you admit you don't have a CLUE as to whats involved.

I said the problem with a tribunal is making it fair.

So what rules do you propose that would make it fair?

go65  posted on  2010-01-29   14:00:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Badeye (#20)

Its exceedingly fair. Those of us that have knowledge on the topic know this. Those that don't, are leftwingers using talking points, as you did up above.

Would knowledge of non-existent treaties be part of what you are talking about?

go65  posted on  2010-01-29   14:01:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: go65 (#21)

So what rules do you propose that would make it fair?

Maybe it's the witholding of exculpatory evidence tbat makes it fair?

war  posted on  2010-01-29   14:23:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: go65 (#22)

Would knowledge of non-existent treaties be part of what you are talking about?

[snicker]

war  posted on  2010-01-29   14:23:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: war (#23)

Maybe it's the witholding of exculpatory evidence tbat makes it fair?

That's the point - the USSC struck down the first Bush plan. The reality is that any viable military tribunal won't look much different from a civilian case, so why not just use the civilian system?

go65  posted on  2010-01-29   15:13:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: go65 (#21)

Military tribunals are exceedingly 'fair'. The suggestion that 'rules' needed to be made or added to what exists is absurd...if you are familiar with the topic.

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-29   19:57:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: go65 (#22)

We have treaties regarding how we will prosecute Brit citizens...going back a couple of centuries actually.

Honestly, between this absurd thread, and the disgusting comment about the space shuttle disasters,....your better off talking to Fraud, GO65.

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-29   19:59:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Badeye (#27)

We have treaties regarding how we will prosecute Brit citizens...going back a couple of centuries actually.

Could you cite me just one of these treaties that you are talking about?

go65  posted on  2010-01-29   21:48:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: Badeye (#26)

Military tribunals are exceedingly 'fair'. The suggestion that 'rules' needed to be made or added to what exists is absurd...if you are familiar with the topic.

Well again, the USSC tossed out Bush's tribunal proposal as being unfair. Did you miss that?

go65  posted on  2010-01-29   21:49:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: go65 (#29)

If you don't understand the difference between the circumstances specific to the case you are trying to cite, and this conversation...well, its okay, you've already admitted you don't know what your talking about in relation to military tribunals.

So you oppose Feinstein and Jimmy Webb? Interesting. Smart money says this gets put back into a military tribunal, and that its held at Gitmo.

btw, Gitmo isn't going to be closed. (laughing)

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-30   8:22:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: go65 (#29)

C'mon there's double top secret proof for those of them who knows....

war  posted on  2010-01-30   9:19:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Badeye (#30)

btw, Gitmo isn't going to be closed. (laughing)

Why shouldn't it be closed? I mean why do we have to keep prisoners on a foreign countries soil? Here is the answer. Because they want to do things that would be unlawful in this country. They want to be to coverup stuff.

A K A Stone  posted on  2010-01-30   9:22:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: A K A Stone (#32)

If reporters, the Red Cross, lawyers for the prisoners were not allowed access on a routine basis, I'd agree with you AKA. Since thats not the case, I don't.

If you see comments designed to distract from the article, you are informed the poster is out of ammo....

Badeye  posted on  2010-01-30   9:36:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: Badeye (#30)

If you don't understand the difference between the circumstances specific to the case you are trying to cite, and this conversation...well, its okay, you've already admitted you don't know what your talking about in relation to military tribunals.

)

Again, the USSC threw out Bush's proposal for military tribunals.

Again, what treaty do you keep referring to.

So you oppose Feinstein and Jimmy Webb? Interesting. Smart money says this gets put back into a military tribunal, and that its held at Gitmo.

non-sequitur

btw, Gitmo isn't going to be closed. (laughing

Non-sequitur.

After all these years Badeye, some things haven't changed. You STILL throw stuff out without any basis in fact and still try and change the subject when cornered.

Being a Republican means you get to choose your own reality.

go65  posted on  2010-01-30   10:35:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: A K A Stone (#32)

Why shouldn't it be closed? I mean why do we have to keep prisoners on a foreign countries soil? Here is the answer. Because they want to do things that would be unlawful in this country. They want to be to coverup stuff.

What?? You mean you don't TRUST the government to always be right?

Being a Republican means you get to choose your own reality.

go65  posted on  2010-01-30   10:36:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: go65 (#35)

What?? You mean you don't TRUST the government to always be right?

More like I never trust the government to do the right thing.

A K A Stone  posted on  2010-01-30   12:31:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: A K A Stone (#36)

More like I never trust the government to do the right thing.

I've always been fascinated that so many of those who call themselves "conservative" and who most complain about the government when it comes to social programs often have unlimited faith in the government when it comes to arresting, imprisoning, torturing people or carrying out military actions.

Being a Republican means you get to choose your own reality.

go65  posted on  2010-01-30   12:37:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: go65 (#37)

unlimited faith in the government when it comes to arresting, imprisoning, torturing people or carrying out military actions.

Lets see. I think the government regularly violates peoples rights when arresting people. Such as the fourth. I am against torture. I think that we haven't had a legitimate war since world war 2. The congress doesn't declare them anymore.

A K A Stone  posted on  2010-01-30   15:44:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com