January 31, 2010

Gibbsy: "Oh, Yeah, We're For Sure Gonna Kill KSM"
— Gabriel Malor

On the one hand: well, yeah.

On the other hand: trial? What trial? Since the Democrats have made such a ruckus about giving terrorists criminal trials, it behooves them to not undermine the process at every turn, doesn't it?

Obama already fouled that up when he decided that some terrorists would get criminal trials and some would get military tribunals. Why aren't military tribunals good enough for all if they are good enough for some? He pulverised the legitimacy of the military commissions system created by Congress. And now Gibbsy is casting doubt on the legitimacy of the criminal justice system.

Accused Sept. 11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is likely to be executed after being tried and convicted, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Sunday.

What's that I hear? Is that a million voices from the Islamic world screaming "showtrial!"?

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 07:20 AM | Comments (183)
Post contains 158 words, total size 1 kb.

1 First!  that is all...

Posted by: Tami at January 31, 2010 07:21 AM (VuLos)

2 "it behooves them to not undermine the process at every turn, doesn't it?"

no because when they can't get a fair civilian trial then they're left with the military.  on to gitmo.

Posted by: newrouter at January 31, 2010 07:23 AM (bEZJ+)

3 How does this not turn into a recruitment tool for AQ, and the rest of the terrorist groups in the world?

Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Expensive Bacons, Meteors, and Scorn For This Administration at January 31, 2010 07:26 AM (erIg9)

4 We have a bunch of immiture egotistical idiots running the WH !

Posted by: sonnyspats at January 31, 2010 07:28 AM (68tQb)

5 The math is such that, assuming a world a world pop 0f 6.8 billion, Muslim pop 1.6 billion, if .6 billion Muslims followed their rules and killed 10 infidels, there would still be a billion left. Screaming and making the infidels pause for any reason plays well for them.

Posted by: TD puppethead at January 31, 2010 07:28 AM (t/GDA)

6

God, how much more stupid can they get?

Or is that just asking for it?

Posted by: HH at January 31, 2010 07:29 AM (GkYyh)

7 How about this for a boob threat:

http://tinyurl.com/ybkw3sz

Posted by: lan sing at January 31, 2010 07:29 AM (cEOZd)

8 Yeah a civilian trial that they already have compromised with their assertions of guilt. Please someone tell me how they can do this with a straight face. Insanity is the norm for this administration, you don't have to be crazy to be in it, but it sure helps.

Posted by: jainphx at January 31, 2010 07:29 AM (1xnCv)

9 Actually, this is quite disturbing.

The government can certainly say we are going to execute illegal combatants, and such is in fact the norm historically.

The government can instead make the bizarre argument that they are going to give this people civilian trials.

But the way Obama is handling this - sure we'll give 'em a fair trial right before we execute them is a gross abuse of our civilian trial system. Imagine, for example, if Bush had said something similar about the unibomber?

Posted by: 18-1 at January 31, 2010 07:29 AM (bgcml)

10 It's simple:  Obama and everyone around him are liberals.  They believe all trials are corrupt and "fixed" -- judges are part of the System, a brother can't get a fair trial, free Mumia, yadda yadda.  They actually believe this.

So naturally they assume the trial's going to bring in a conviction, because KSM is a brown Muslim person going on trial in bigoted white Christian cracker Amerikka.

Posted by: Trimegistus at January 31, 2010 07:34 AM (OW3Eh)

11 Since we're going to give them a fair trial - then "take them out back and shoot them", why do we need a trial in the first place? Just wondering, that's all.

Posted by: alwyr at January 31, 2010 07:34 AM (w2++y)

12 What's that I hear? Is that a million voices from the Islamic world screaming "_________!"? Just fill in the blank.

Posted by: kansas at January 31, 2010 07:34 AM (Wwi5M)

13 Isn't this the exact reason the Geneva Convention expressly prohibits civilian trials...

SMART of  Barry and Holder to have exposed themselves to being called/charged-as war-criminals by the rest of the world....

Posted by: phreshone at January 31, 2010 07:35 AM (1AnxB)

14 It makes a mockery of our legal system.

Posted by: lan sing at January 31, 2010 07:35 AM (cEOZd)

15 I think Gibbsy mis-spoke.

He meant to say Ace of Spades, and not KSM. And yeah, it'll be a show trial...

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at January 31, 2010 07:36 AM (1hM1d)

16 I believe Gibbsy's job within The One's administration is to promote a sense of cognitive dissonance among the American people.  He has proven himself eminently qualified for the task.

Posted by: Bertha Lewis at January 31, 2010 07:36 AM (vTmeT)

17 10 It's simple:  Obama and everyone around him are liberals.  They believe all trials are corrupt and "fixed" -- judges are part of the System, a brother can't get a fair trial, free Mumia, yadda yadda.  They actually believe this.

So naturally they assume the trial's going to bring in a conviction, because KSM is a brown Muslim person going on trial in bigoted white Christian cracker Amerikka.

You know, that makes perfect sense in emotion based, logic free libralstan.


Posted by: shibumi at January 31, 2010 07:38 AM (OKZrE)

18
They believe all trials are corrupt and "fixed" -- judges are part of the System, a brother can't get a fair trial, free Mumia, yadda yadda.

Indeed.



Posted by: Dang Straights at January 31, 2010 07:38 AM (pau71)

19

I really do blame Bush for this. As soon as the SCOTUS put their long and stupid nose into this he should have organized a firing squad and executed every one of them at GITMO and then shut down the camp.

After that, no more prisoners from the battlefield.

Posted by: Vic at January 31, 2010 07:39 AM (QrA9E)

20 Last year I expected Gibbs would be thrown under the bus within a year. He seemed SO bad at the job and is a pasty white boy, but I guess he is good at pushing the administrations lie of the day with a straight face, so for them he is overall an asset.

Posted by: paleRider at January 31, 2010 07:39 AM (tm2sM)

21 I'm glad John King did such a bang up job of asking Gibbsy a follow-up question along the lines of, "What's the point of pushing to hold a civilian trial if you're already condemning the accused to death?"

Posted by: WTFCI at January 31, 2010 07:39 AM (EbpbH)

22 OBlunder has $200 mil in the yrly budget for the trial(s).  Does anyone know what the defenses' "take" is?

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at January 31, 2010 07:40 AM (ucq49)

23 Follows in the footsteps of Nixon declaring Manson guilty.

Posted by: Neo at January 31, 2010 07:41 AM (tE8FB)

24 That is not the first time they have said that. Some jack ass (D) Senator said that also. I think the D from RI. I think these jack asses have said enough to almost shit can a fair civilian trial. Put him back in a Military court where he was about to plead guilty and be done with it and then hang him. Or hang him first and then try him. Either works for me.

Posted by: nevergiveup at January 31, 2010 07:42 AM (ekqTc)

25

Accused Sept. 11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is likely to be executed after being tried and convicted, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Sunday.

If it was a fair trial, the verdict could be in doubt. And if convicted, then the sentence could be in doubt.

To just up and admit that the whole thing is a sham is a disgrace on the WH.

Posted by: HH at January 31, 2010 07:43 AM (GkYyh)

26 Remember when the MSM bashed John Ashcroft incessantly?  Now we have either the worst or second worst AG, in history. Was Janet Reno worse?  This guy seems to redefine stupid.

Posted by: kansas at January 31, 2010 07:44 AM (Wwi5M)

27 He admitted it. He is an unlawful combatant. Send him back to Gitmo and execute him.

Posted by: kansas at January 31, 2010 07:45 AM (Wwi5M)

28
That cocksucker Holder hasn't done a Branch Davidian, YET.  So Reno is still 'worse', but not by much.

Posted by: Dang Straights at January 31, 2010 07:47 AM (pau71)

29 Mel Brooks for JUDGE!!!   (think blazing saddles)

Posted by: hutch1200 at January 31, 2010 07:49 AM (ULjg5)

30

Now we are off the the races--

Defense is going to argue that the result of the trial was pre-determined. 

Defense is going to argue pre-trial publicity.  

Defense is going to argue _______ (just fill in the blank).

I am so glad we have a constitutional lawyer in the whitehouse...  http://tinyurl.com/yf2qgsp

Posted by: Matt at January 31, 2010 07:50 AM (QBsVk)

31

25 -- Exactly; hey, thanks a lot Gibbsy for giving KSM's defense attornies a bone there.  Stupid bastard.

All belong in a military tribunal; all belong at Gitmo -- end of story -- but that's preaching to the choir isn't it?

Posted by: unknown jane at January 31, 2010 07:51 AM (5/yRG)

32 I think we should either have a policy of not killing these idiots who think they're getting sent to virgins, or killing them by cutting them and tossing them in a pit of boars. I'd vote for the boars and letting Al Jazeer televise it myself, but I'm a beoytch after being crossed. The show trial has always been a dumb idea, this is not the first time they have said they wouldn't release KSM even if he is acquitted -but its never been about trying him -the trial was always going to be about indirectly attacking Bush/Cheney.

Posted by: paleRider at January 31, 2010 07:54 AM (tm2sM)

33 I am not comfortable with the outcome being assured before the trial begins. Once the presumption of innocence is gone for one, it is gone for all. KSM has already admitted guilt, so this trial is a showcase for other things yet unseen. Discovery will be interesting, and not good for the USA.

Posted by: rawmuse at January 31, 2010 07:56 AM (6Kciv)

34

All belong in a military tribunal; all belong at Gitmo -- end of story -- but that's preaching to the choir isn't it?

Yeah, it is. How can the White House screw this up so badly?

Hell, forget I even asked.

Posted by: HH at January 31, 2010 07:56 AM (GkYyh)

35 Incompetence in a person in that position, while understandable, is certainly grounds for immediate dismissal.

Gibbs is just following the lead of his boss who has said the very same thing.

Posted by: Tami at January 31, 2010 07:58 AM (VuLos)

36 Shouldn't Gibbs be publicly shunned by now?  Guy is a mealy-mouthed piece of detritus.

Posted by: Wyatt Earp at January 31, 2010 07:59 AM (CCcDq)

37 won't that be used as a recruiting tool by AQ ?

Posted by: Jeff at January 31, 2010 07:59 AM (gvwSW)

38 Wow, and I thought my show trials were bad!

Posted by: Josef Stalin at January 31, 2010 08:00 AM (CCcDq)

39 Wow, and I thought my show trials were bad! Posted by: Josef Stalin at January 31, 2010 01:00 PM (CCcDq) Hey Obama is one of your boys now

Posted by: nevergiveup at January 31, 2010 08:02 AM (ekqTc)

40 26 Remember when the MSM bashed John Ashcroft incessantly?  Now we have either the worst or second worst AG, in history. Was Janet Reno worse?  This guy seems to redefine stupid.

Posted by: kansas at January 31, 2010 12:44 PM (Wwi5M)


Has Holder set fire to a bunch of civilians yet?

Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Expensive Bacons, Meteors, and Scorn For This Administration at January 31, 2010 08:02 AM (erIg9)

41 As Brian Dennehy said in Silverado, "We're gonna give you a fair trial, followed by a first class hanging."

Posted by: huerfano at January 31, 2010 08:03 AM (sf1Eo)

42 What's that I hear? Is that a million voices from the Islamic world screaming "showtrial!"?

Consequences, Scmonsequnces, as long as he's dead.

Posted by: Daffy Duck at January 31, 2010 08:04 AM (yguwr)

43

Has Holder set fire to a bunch of civilians yet?

It's only been a year.  Give him time.

Posted by: huerfano at January 31, 2010 08:04 AM (sf1Eo)

44 He should be shown the door. Today. Incompetence in a person in that position, while understandable, is certainly grounds for immediate dismissal. You're assuming that he made that statement without the prior approval of JugEars and Holder. I suspect that this was just their way of killing the whole issue and returning to the incarcerate-at-Gitmo-before-military-tribunal status quo.

Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 31, 2010 08:04 AM (9Lm5R)

45 I wonder what Julius Rosenberg has to say about this?

Posted by: nevergiveup at January 31, 2010 08:06 AM (ekqTc)

46

Does Eric Holder have a twin that was separated at birth?

http://tinypic.com/r/xmogu1/6

 

Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at January 31, 2010 08:07 AM (Vu6sl)

47 In Soviet Russia Amerika, the trial shows you.

Posted by: Yakov Smirnoff at January 31, 2010 08:08 AM (/x2Ts)

48 This is a Democrat's brain being tough on terrorism.  Any questions?

Posted by: rockhead at January 31, 2010 08:09 AM (RykTt)

49 0 said they would be tried, convicted and executed too. why bother with a trial? a waste of time and money. time to string them up.

Posted by: nyc redneck at January 31, 2010 08:09 AM (EtrGh)

50 I wonder what Julius Rosenberg has to say about this?

Posted by: nevergiveup at January 31, 2010 01:06 PM (ekqTc)

The same thing I say every day. "Lotion or no lotion for your ass rubdown Satan?"

Satan is obsessed with his gluts. "Powerful but supple" is his mantra.


Posted by: Julius Rosenburg at January 31, 2010 08:09 AM (yguwr)

51 "On the other hand: trial? What trial? Since the Democrats have made such a ruckus about giving terrorists criminal trials, it behooves them to not undermine the process at every turn, doesn't it?" Have you met Scooter Libby's jury?

Posted by: Richard Mcenroe at January 31, 2010 08:13 AM (oxMVR)

52 Show trials for enemies of the State-check.
Dismantle the legal process to obtain a pre-determined outcome-check
Convince the populace that it is the only way to obtain "justice"-working on that

Say, who is it that homeland security under Napolitano considers to be the true threat to the USA, Islamic terrorists or Veterans coming home from fighting those same terrorists, tax protesters or union thugs, christians (right-wing-extremists) or members of a death cult intent on subjugating western civilization?

Obama's election started a run on guns and ammo in the USA, and I do not believe in coincidence.

Posted by: Mord at January 31, 2010 08:13 AM (tTj19)

53

In defense of Robert Gibbs,

.

.

.

.

.

what an idiot

 

 

 

 

 

 

what an idiot

Posted by: HH at January 31, 2010 08:13 AM (GkYyh)

54 Oh in their twisted minds Gibbs only said "Likely to be" and that "Likely" covered everthing. Heh, at the rate they are going he IS only 'likely' to be tried at all. They'll end up kicking the can down the road and nothing other than lots of $$$ going to the lawyers defending KSM and the others will happen until the next administration.

Posted by: paleRider at January 31, 2010 08:16 AM (tm2sM)

55 Nothing pisses people off more than totalitarian injustice

Posted by: Beto at January 31, 2010 08:17 AM (+CLh/)

56 What if they gave a show trial, and nobody watched?

Posted by: bergerbilder at January 31, 2010 08:17 AM (S1Ttj)

57 57 What if they gave a show trial, and nobody watched?

Posted by: bergerbilder at January 31, 2010 01:17 PM (S1Ttj)

If you really want to find out - let Keith Olbermann report it.

Posted by: Juicer at January 31, 2010 08:19 AM (/x2Ts)

58 KSM has switched his plea to not guilty - it is possible a jury could return a not guilty verdict - especially if it includes a few "hate America" crowd who will agree with KSM that it was done in self defense, and all those people deserved to be killed.   

Posted by: lan sing at January 31, 2010 08:20 AM (cEOZd)

59
48
LOL

Posted by: Beto at January 31, 2010 08:20 AM (+CLh/)

60 The Misunderestimitation of Peril

Posted by: Beto at January 31, 2010 08:22 AM (+CLh/)

61 And another way this could go:  Since it was an act of war, can a civilian court legally try KSM?  His attorneys can claim this and the trial would be a "mistrial."
Then does he get off because he can't be tried twice for murder? 

Posted by: lan sing at January 31, 2010 08:24 AM (cEOZd)

62 Jeebus. Way to go. No taint left on this enterprise. He should not even mention the Government's sentencing recommendation.

Posted by: eman at January 31, 2010 08:25 AM (4tixt)

63 Hey......leave taint out of this. Taint is holy and sacred and has nothing to do with this trial.

Posted by: pendejo grande at January 31, 2010 08:28 AM (ipxsa)

64

As many said when this trial was first announced...this will not end well.

 

Posted by: Meremortal at January 31, 2010 08:29 AM (7FgWm)

65 Just one more example of the pitfalls of being Not Bush™

Posted by: franksalterego at January 31, 2010 08:32 AM (+6fgE)

66 If Scott McClellan was a big middle finger from Bush to the White House press corps -"Don't like me, huh? Fine. You can deal w/ this idiot every day"- what's Obama's excuse for Gibbsy?

Posted by: seamus at January 31, 2010 08:32 AM (5HhWZ)

67

Maybe barry should throw KSM out of AF1 on his next fly-over MidTown Manhattan.

And IF booosh did a photot-op over Manhattan, we'd still be hearing about it. And we'd taken the keys away from him. As we should w/barry. To Everything.

Posted by: hutch1200 at January 31, 2010 08:33 AM (ULjg5)

68 Good Lord, even the damn Soviets played along with the whole presumption of innocence thing.  But these friggin' Maoist clowns can't even manage to do that.

Posted by: bigpinkfluffybunny at January 31, 2010 08:33 AM (KWhJd)

69 You know what truly pisses me off about this?  AQ et al can correctly claim that this is a show trial.  Way to go Obama admin!  Way to go!

Posted by: alexthechick at January 31, 2010 08:38 AM (TtXKB)

70 I say, give him a fair trial and a fair hangin'.

Posted by: Judge Roy Bean at January 31, 2010 08:40 AM (dMx+D)

71 Obama Administration: "Velcome to your trial. You are guilty. How do you plead?"

Posted by: eman at January 31, 2010 08:40 AM (4tixt)

72


46 Has Holder set fire to a bunch of civilians yet?

Yeah, but they were Christians. So it was OK. I guess you are right though. It's Reno.

Posted by: kansas at January 31, 2010 08:43 AM (Wwi5M)

73 The Obama Administration:  "The Gang That Can't Shoot Straight".

Only administration where, if you get 3 of it's leading members on 3 separate TV shows, you'll get 3 different "points of view" ON THE SAME TOPIC!

Posted by: GarandFan at January 31, 2010 08:43 AM (ZQBnQ)

74

Gibbs is re-iterating Obama's previous assertion made days after the announcement of the Trials.  Obama, having been beat to the punch by AG Holde who made the exact same assertion the day previous, is now doubling down on lunacy through Gibbsy.

They have certainly guaranteed a formal objection from the defense.

Also, I have yet to hear a legal analyst or commenter question the Right to a speedy trial being raised in such proceedings. How long have these guys been in custody?

 

Posted by: garrett at January 31, 2010 08:45 AM (yQLG4)

75

I've got some family members who are attorneys (all liberal of course) and last year they were shocked, SHOCKED I tell ya, to find out that I was completely unimpressed with BO's speechifying at and shortly after his inauguration.

Can't wait to find out how my liberal lawyer family members actually defend these statements and argue with the fact that they're tainting the jury pool.  (heh, heh) But I know that they will.

Posted by: NC Ref at January 31, 2010 08:45 AM (jcRLx)

76
AQ et al can correctly claim that this is a show trial

It makes perfect sense if the goal of this marxist piece of shit is to do as much damage as possible to the U.S.

Posted by: Dang Straights at January 31, 2010 08:46 AM (pau71)

77 Obama could improve his standing by ordering all captured terrorists returned to their home country via a cruise ship.  This cruise ship would tragically sink in a storm in the Atlantic.


Posted by: kansas at January 31, 2010 08:46 AM (Wwi5M)

78

",,,Right to a speedy trial..."

And if he's convicted, in a death penalty state, how many appeals, and how many years, will justice wait?

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at January 31, 2010 08:48 AM (ucq49)

79 71 You know what truly pisses me off about this?  AQ et al can correctly claim that this is a show trial.

Embrace it. Yeah. It's a show trial, and then we're going to execute the fucker. Deal with AQ.

PS

Ask Danny Pearl about fair trials.

Posted by: kansas at January 31, 2010 08:48 AM (Wwi5M)

80 Who's the "cowboy" now, Gibbsy?

Posted by: FreakyBoy at January 31, 2010 08:50 AM (Q41Zh)

81 Coincidentally to the poster mentioning Daniel Pearl, a man who was beheaded by KSM.

Posted by: rawmuse at January 31, 2010 08:51 AM (6Kciv)

82

(Question - "Will it be a FairTrial?" )

" Fo' Sho "

Posted by: President Light Brown, but with 'Dialect' at January 31, 2010 08:52 AM (yQLG4)

83 Oh I also feel sorry as hell for the judge who gets stuck with this.  No matter what the rulings are, that judge is screwed.  This is the ultimate bad facts make bad law situation.

Posted by: alexthechick at January 31, 2010 08:52 AM (TtXKB)

84 "We are the ones we've been waiting for!"

You'd think that would have been a dead giveaway.

Posted by: IslandLibertarian at January 31, 2010 08:53 AM (wSHMa)

Posted by: rino2con at January 31, 2010 08:55 AM (qLV03)

86

"Oh I also feel sorry as hell for the judge who gets stuck with this"

Barry's already considered this and decided I'd be perfect for the job.

Posted by: Judge Ito at January 31, 2010 08:56 AM (ucq49)

87 Where's the ACLU!!!

Posted by: rino2con at January 31, 2010 08:58 AM (qLV03)

88 Barry's already considered this and decided I'd be perfect for the job.

Holy crap wonton soup hurts when you snort it out your nose. 

Posted by: alexthechick at January 31, 2010 08:58 AM (TtXKB)

89 You guys don't understand. The trial of KSM doesn't matter. It's the prescident of the civilian law above the military law. The consitiution is restrictive new prescident must be established to make our law an evolving mechanism which will respond to the progressive agenda. They could give a shit about the terrorists as long as de-constitutionalizing our justice system continues.

Posted by: dagny at January 31, 2010 09:00 AM (726kZ)

90 [It would be fun to hear what Alito mutters to himself about the professionally challenged when he is NOT on camera.]

Well, I am sure the administration will work out a compromise for the use of that $200 million.  They can have the trail at Gitmo:

Of course we will need a hotel to house the press.

The ship builders union can build the transport ships
Longshoreman can load and unload the ships
Construction unions can build the hotel
Communications unions can wire it
SEIU can staff the hotel
Police unions can provide security

Profit!

Posted by: AE at January 31, 2010 09:00 AM (kSfPT)

91 Does it seem that nowadays we don't capture such folks anymore? They get killed or they end up in the kind custody of others?

Posted by: eman at January 31, 2010 09:01 AM (4tixt)

92 I can't believe you people, don't you understand this is going to show the world the brilliance of Eric Holder and the Obama administration. You have no idea how smart they fucking are.

This trial will show how awesome the AG can trial. He is one trialing motherfucker.

His first choice of venue was Islamabad to show the Islamic world how awesome his trialing is. They turned it down do to the fact that it would end all wars for all time and they don't want that. So NYC was the next choice and the wimps there don't want to pay for it, Ha! the American people are dying to pay more taxes to show the world how awesome Holder's Trializing Gesticulations can be.

They will have to move it to Space so everyone can fit in.

Posted by: JavaJoe at January 31, 2010 09:01 AM (e9JZd)

93 I'm not so concerned about a show trial as a mistrial -- a show trial I could deal with (so long as a guilty verdict was found -- I have always entertained hanging in front of the nearest radical mosque, but cutting him up and throwing his pieces to the boars is a nice touch...of course my anti-death penalty friend's idea of throwing them into a dark hole never to see the light of day and eating only just enough bread crusts and water to keep them existing is ok too, for those who are against the death penalty -- and that might be a better option here; takes away the martyr-y goodness of an execution, involves slowly rotting away, forgotten, in a pit).

Posted by: unknown jane at January 31, 2010 09:01 AM (5/yRG)

94 Sorry prescedent--I shouldn't spell from the gut

Posted by: dagny at January 31, 2010 09:02 AM (726kZ)

95 The commenter up there (forgot which #, sorry) who said that this is just a convoluted way to get back to the Bush status quo has nailed it, I think.  This has become SOP for the O'Dumbass administration:

1) suggest some retarded far-left idea on the hope that somehow it flies.
2) if it doesn't, wait for the blowback
3) bow to the pressure while
4) blaming "Republican obstructionism" at every opportunity.

This allows them to a) never admit they're wrong, and b) score what they see as a political victory, since "blaming Republican obstructionism" in the service of never being wrong is pretty much the only goal this administration has.

Posted by: bullfrog at January 31, 2010 09:02 AM (g+3Ca)

96 10 It's simple:  Obama and everyone around him are liberals.  They believe all trials are corrupt and "fixed" -- judges are part of the System, a brother can't get a fair trial, free Mumia, yadda yadda.  They actually believe this.

So naturally they assume the trial's going to bring in a conviction, because KSM is a brown Muslim person going on trial in bigoted white Christian cracker Amerikka.

Posted by: Trimegistus at January 31, 2010 12:34 PM (OW3Eh)

 

That's actually not a bad stab at this.  It's pretty sympathetic to the Administration, too.  I would say this is as good an analysis as any, given the facts as we know them.

My own take is that they fully intend to screw the pooch on this one, kick KSM, and hand him back to Islam on a silver platter.  This way, we can show that we're really, really sorry for being who we are, for protecting ourselves... and KSM can write books, and go on the college lecture circuit, and win the Nobel Peace Prize for Peace and Stuff...

Posted by: Truman North at January 31, 2010 09:03 AM (FjC5u)

97 Once the presumption of innocence is gone for one, it is gone for all...

Posted by: rawmuse at January 31, 2010 12:56 PM (6Kciv)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

That's a hell of a lot said in one sentence of just a few words.  Very frightening and very true.

Posted by: Countrysquire at January 31, 2010 09:06 AM (X0WG3)

98 And of course, this is not about the trial proper, this is about bashing the Constitution, again, to smithereens.  Miserable pukes.  I really detest these fraks. Despise them, loathe them.

Posted by: unknown jane at January 31, 2010 09:06 AM (5/yRG)

99 I don't support governments that conduct show trials. I just don't. Deal breaker. Game changer. Time to reach for the big fucking RESET button, patriots.

Posted by: rawmuse at January 31, 2010 09:07 AM (6Kciv)

100

Interesting thing. I've seen the results of an actual tribunal by the U.S. Military Justice system during WWII. A number of graves in a small spot in an out of the way area in the Post at Ft. Leavenworth.  It was a bunch of hardcore Nazi prisoners who were creating problems, and the U.S. decided to make an example of them. Trial, sentence, death.

Nothing announced. No publicity. It worked. No problems at Leavenworth afterwords

Methinks the WH needs to take a look at the past...

Posted by: HH at January 31, 2010 09:08 AM (GkYyh)

101 So some get honorable and honest Military trials, while others get Public Relations show trials with assured outcomes....at the whim of el Presidente. Remind me again; how is this supposed to make us look better to the world?

Posted by: 29Victor at January 31, 2010 09:09 AM (HaMuw)

102

Nothing announced. No publicity. It worked. No problems at Leavenworth afterwords

Methinks the WH needs to take a look at the past...


The question that concerns me about that is, who does the President see as the enemy?

Posted by: JavaJoe at January 31, 2010 09:09 AM (e9JZd)

103

From today's NYT:

President Obama was right to move Mr. Mohammed and four other high-profile terrorism suspects out of the jurisdiction of military tribunals. President George W. Bush’s decision to hold prisoners outside the law and then attempt to try them in rigged military courts was legally wrong, and hugely damaging to American values and this country’s global image.

Gibbsy:

Accused Sept. 11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is likely to be executed after being tried and convicted, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Sunday.

Ya gotta love da left... although they're coming from all angles these days... yet, apperantly not comparing notes.

Posted by: Tom vG at January 31, 2010 09:09 AM (TRJxR)

104 Set up for a mistrial. Attaboy Holdereno.

Posted by: 48%er at January 31, 2010 09:10 AM (QOE7k)

105

Rove, you magnificent bastard!

People, people who Socialize people, are the pluckiest radicals in the world

Posted by: Rewrite! at January 31, 2010 09:12 AM (d7Px0)

106 Is there a video of this? Are we sure he didn't say MSM insead of KSM? There have been a few dissenting voices out there lately that haven't come from Fox News.

Posted by: Bill R. at January 31, 2010 09:12 AM (EhlQq)

107 Cobb: "We're gonna give you a fair trial, followed by a first class hanging. " --Silverado Someone needs to get ahold of a this clip from the movie. I can't seem to find it anywhere.

Posted by: 29Victor at January 31, 2010 09:16 AM (HaMuw)

108

We clingers just cain't get it through our thick skulls that the fucking Geneva Convention says whateverthefuck Obama wants it to say!!

Posted by: sherlock at January 31, 2010 09:17 AM (ktKOD)

109 No no no, you've got it all wrong.  This is just Obumbles' way of declaring he's not one of those wussy namby-pamby wimpy liberals.  Why he's so tough, he can threaten terrorists with death!  But a showtrial?  Naww, President Toonces isn't suggesting that at all.

Posted by: chemjeff at January 31, 2010 09:18 AM (Gk/wA)

110

101 -- Well, showtrials aren't anything really new; even with a military tribunal, these weren't anything but show trials -- the outcomes should have been pretty much a done deal from the start (should have been; I put nothing past this administration).  The problem is Gibbsy and friends hauling off and making it so blatant -- keep your goddamn mouth shut and don't force people to recognize the obvious if you want to keep up the appearance of something else.

 

I'm wondering how this might allow an appeal to the UN/World Court?  I'm wondering if the rotten rat bastards are trying to help make a case for that?  They've been after getting our sovereignty for a while now, and that was one of the cherished goals of this administration from the get go wasn't it?

Posted by: unknown jane at January 31, 2010 09:19 AM (5/yRG)

111 @104 "Methinks the WH needs to take a look at the past..." Statists can't look at the past, at least not honestly, or they would see the failings of the policies they espouse. They have to reject the past and keep doing what they convince themselves will work.

Posted by: 29Victor at January 31, 2010 09:19 AM (HaMuw)

112

Lawyers, the same folks that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid protected in Obamacare, will make huge fortunes from these trials.

Q: why can no one get a straight answer on who directed LE to read the Miranda Rights to the PantyBomber??

Posted by: Rewrite! at January 31, 2010 09:21 AM (d7Px0)

113

And just to add to all of this, weren't the guys who captured KSM to be brought on charges because he had a black eye?

WTF???

Posted by: HH at January 31, 2010 09:22 AM (GkYyh)

114 OTOH, this could actually have an up side.  These vermin (Islamofascists, not the Obamaites) have never understood our fetish for fair trials.  They view it as a sign of weakness.  If they actually come to believe that we are done with that, and are moving to summary executions, they might start to reevaluate just how soft a target we are, and hence, whether or not it's a good idea to go after us.  Yeah, I'm sure that's what Barry was thinking. 

Posted by: pep at January 31, 2010 09:22 AM (0K3p3)

115

We clingers just cain't get it through our thick skulls that the fucking Geneva Convention says whateverthefuck Obama wants it to say!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~

And the Constitution, Bill of Rights...

Posted by: Rewrite! at January 31, 2010 09:23 AM (d7Px0)

116

Here the Gibbs Video on CNN

 

Posted by: newser at January 31, 2010 09:23 AM (D2axM)

117 and KSM can write books, and go on the college lecture circuit, and win the Nobel Peace Prize for Peace and Stuff...

Or more likely, return immediately to plotting the next 9/11.

Posted by: Soap MacTavish at January 31, 2010 09:24 AM (554T5)

Posted by: toby928 at January 31, 2010 09:25 AM (PD1tk)

119 Those German prisoners who were executed at Leavenwrth were tried and convicted of murdering a fellow prisoner who was a collaberator for the U.S.

Posted by: Vic at January 31, 2010 09:25 AM (QrA9E)

120

Since the Democrats have made such a ruckus about giving terrorists criminal trials, it behooves them to not undermine the process at every turn, doesn't it?

Nicely put.  Not only for the impression of America among other countries they're so worried about but also for the legitimacy of our legal system.

Another thing I rarely see is the insult that is routinely delt to the military vis-a-vis military justice.  There seems to be an underlying assumption or prejudice that military courts are substandard, unfair, and devoid of due process.  Wrong.  And if it's good enough for our soldiers, it's good enough for terrorists.

Tangentially related--or maybe for future use--Bush signed an exective order on Nov. 13, 2001, allowing military tribunals against foriegners suspected of connections to terrorist acts or planned acts against the U.S.  That pretty much obviates some of the concern about jurisdiction I heard raised on the crotchbomber.

Posted by: rdbrewer at January 31, 2010 09:27 AM (5MGPV)

Posted by: ol_dirty_/b+tard at January 31, 2010 09:27 AM (NDj/7)

122

If they do insist on trying this POS in a civilian court, I'm glad I will never be on the jury. I'd absolutely have to free him...there is no way in hell he gets a fair trial with the fucking POTUS and AGOTUS already talking about how he's dead meat.

He Who Must Not Be Re-Elected and his little AG Wormtail are doing a great job of making this look like the ultimate kangaoo court.

Way to showcase the American Justice System, assholes.

Posted by: Redneck, tea-baggin' bitch at January 31, 2010 09:27 AM (GXLjK)

123 This is what happens when the Left and it's useful idiots are more at war with the USA than with Islamic Terrorists.

Posted by: eman at January 31, 2010 09:29 AM (4tixt)

124 I still think this is prescedent to get rid of military trials and put all authority with Obama/Holder.

Posted by: dagny at January 31, 2010 09:31 AM (726kZ)

125 Haven't had time to read all the comments above, but Jeebus!, did Gibbsy really say that??  If so, it would prove that the guy is totally incompetent.

Did he not grow up in the U.S. and read about at least a dozen cases where a "prejudicial statement" by a prosecutor resulted in a reversal on appeal?  Or watch any of, like, 50 hour-long TV courtroom drama shows making exactly the same point?  It's been amply ajudicated that if any figure of high authority makes a statement predicting a conviction, the accused's "right to a fair trial" has been destroyed.

Assuming KSM's convicted, this will provide grounds for appeals lasting at least 20 years.

Thanks a lot, you incompetent moron.

Posted by: sf at January 31, 2010 09:33 AM (xz5dP)

126


So this is what becoming irrelevant and washed up looks like.

Posted by: Blazer at January 31, 2010 09:34 AM (t72+4)

127 anyone involved in these civilian trials is going to have a target on their back. terrorists would love to go after jurors, witnesses, judges, prosecutors, and everyone in their families. it is conceivable these KSM jihadis could even get off because people are afraid to convict them. these warring bastards need to be tried in military tribunals.

Posted by: nyc redneck at January 31, 2010 09:35 AM (EtrGh)

128 I bet KSM's liberal civil attorney is high fivein' his co-counsel about now. Oh......., and telling his law clerk to do research on prejucidial pretrial statements.

Posted by: rino2con at January 31, 2010 09:38 AM (qLV03)

129

"I'm wondering how this might allow an appeal to the UN/World Court? "

Given how the Obami have given Interpol, supra-constitutational access and rights, I'm sure there'd be no problem accessing any info they might need.

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at January 31, 2010 09:43 AM (ucq49)

130 I say we let him go.

Posted by: Pee Wee Herman at January 31, 2010 09:44 AM (Tr9MG)

131 Yeah.  Show trials.  Not a big fan here.

Posted by: Nikolai Bukharin at January 31, 2010 09:48 AM (Gk/wA)

132 Warm up the bus, Gibbsy.

Posted by: President Toonces at January 31, 2010 09:48 AM (554T5)

133

 I say we let him go.

Where?

In Queens?  Brooklyn?  Hmmmmm?

Posted by: Tom vG at January 31, 2010 09:49 AM (TRJxR)

134 I say we let him go.

Where?

In Queens?  Brooklyn?  Hmmmmm?

 

SF?  Berkeley?

Posted by: Dreamin' out loud at January 31, 2010 09:51 AM (ucq49)

135 124, Posted by: Redneck, tea-baggin' bitch at January 31, 2010 02:27 PM

Huh.
Ya know, that made me think. I'm on a jury. I have a civic duty to take the evidence presented at trial and make a determination. The defense clearly makes a case that this is not a fair trial and the prosecution does not present damning evidence (what can/can't they present, anyway? Confessions under torture? I'm guessing not.). Fuck me, I think there's at least a chance I'd have to acquit.

What a fucking clusterfuck.

Someone please tell me my scenario is totally off-base or that there is plenty of other evidence not tainted by that which would be unacceptable in civilian courts.

Posted by: jcjimi at January 31, 2010 09:51 AM (XSikc)

136 The NYT? They're like totally still printing that right?

Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Expensive Bacons, Meteors, and Scorn For This Administration at January 31, 2010 09:52 AM (erIg9)

137 Once the the process of the trial and delivery of a verdict and sentence is complete, I'll explain it to the American people and they'll see that I'm a total fucking genius who thinks 20 steps ahead.
 

Posted by: Baracus Obamus, First Prefect at January 31, 2010 09:53 AM (sYxEE)

138 I'd say Gibbs just gave DOJ an excuse to go to a Military Trial. What a fucking idiot.  For all I apologize for this asshole, he really isn't a true Southerner.

Posted by: Kemp at January 31, 2010 09:54 AM (2+9Yx)

139 This is yet another gesture on my part intended as reparations for American imperialism.

Posted by: President Toonces at January 31, 2010 09:56 AM (554T5)

140 Posted by: Baracus Obamus, First Prefect at January 31, 2010 02:53 PM

Friends, Romans, Chinamen, lend us some money!

Posted by: Joe Bidenus, Second Fiddle at January 31, 2010 09:58 AM (sYxEE)

141

Well at least give the guy credit for not jumping to this conclusion without taking time to observe the facts as known by the entire world to the exclusion of ObamaHolder.

Is it just me or is this admin serioulsy 180 degrees out of phase with reality?

Obama unjustly crucifies the MA police within hours, then takes days to warn us not to jump to conclusions about the isolated-case bloomerbomber. And then the Fort Hood man-caused massacre?!?

If there ever was a just reason for a mistrial, this be the big one!

Please someone tell me that I WILL wake up and find this all to be a nightmare!

Posted by: rookwood at January 31, 2010 09:58 AM (cOXVZ)

142 The smartest man ever to walk the earth with all his best and brightest from the educated classes armed with degrees didn't really think this one through, did they..

Posted by: kbdabear at January 31, 2010 10:00 AM (sYxEE)

143 So- at the KSM trial  Bush and Co. are put on trial, intelligence methods are exposed, and the intelligence effort is gutted.  Then KSM walks due to prejudicial statements made by Obamao and Co.  Perhaps Obama isn't as incompetent as he appears.

Posted by: publicserf at January 31, 2010 10:00 AM (RaO3p)

144

"Confessions under torture? "

Nope.  All that won't be used.  I know, they'll be a lot of a challenges, regarding which proposed testimony and evidence falls where, but fear not.  Barry & Eric have used their super intellilects, to noodle this one thru.

Posted by: Dreamin' out loud at January 31, 2010 10:00 AM (ucq49)

145 but fear not.  Barry & Eric have used their super intellilects, to noodle this one thru. Posted by: Dreamin' out loud at January 31, 2010 03:00 PM

I feel better already

Posted by: jcjimi at January 31, 2010 10:02 AM (XSikc)

146 I need that static cling stuff, for the friggin' sock!

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at January 31, 2010 10:03 AM (ucq49)

147

From today's NYT:

President Obama was right to move Mr. Mohammed and four other high-profile terrorism suspects out of the jurisdiction of military tribunals. President George W. Bush’s decision to hold prisoners outside the law and then attempt to try them in rigged military courts was legally wrong, and hugely damaging to American values and this country’s global image.



You know what? If Obama and Holder are dead set on a civilian trial for KSM, keep it in NYC. Don't move it, because all of a sudden those Obama worshippers in Manhattan will decide once again that as long as it's not their asses in danger, it's a wonderful idea.

I say hold the trial in around Times Square, right near the Pinch Majal.

Posted by: kbdabear at January 31, 2010 10:05 AM (sYxEE)

148

"I say hold the trial in around Times Square, right near the Pinch Majal."

I kinda favor DC, as close to 1600 as possible.

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at January 31, 2010 10:06 AM (ucq49)

149

I kinda favor DC, as close to 1600 as possible.

No, the White House will someday be free of the current disgrace-in-chief, and it deserves our admiration and protection.  The "Pinch Mahal" (excellent!) will never be free of disgrace, and it deserve our contempt.  Too bad the 9-11 terrorists didn't buy into the horseshit about the press being our guardians and act accordingly, but even low-lifes like them aren't that fucking stupid.

Posted by: sherlock at January 31, 2010 10:17 AM (ktKOD)

150  94 This trial will show how awesome the AG can trial. He is one (trialing) trifiling motherfucker
FIFY I don't know how to do a strike through.

Posted by: Major "King" Kong at January 31, 2010 10:18 AM (E7i+5)

151 Now on the other hand this can be a way to introduce how evil Bush and Cheney are about torturing.

"See!  If it wasn't for the war mongering devils that tortured these men they would have been convicted of heinous crimes but they blew it and now we must prosecute them instead!" 

Posted by: JavaJoe at January 31, 2010 10:28 AM (e9JZd)

152

Posted by: Major "King" Kong at January 31, 2010 03:18 PM (E7i+5)

Aw man, aren't you supposed to be bombing the Russkies?

 

Posted by: HH at January 31, 2010 10:28 AM (GkYyh)

153 precedent. it is precedent.

Posted by: spell check at January 31, 2010 10:30 AM (L+dBi)

154 In re Holder vs Reno. Holder was her assistant and the power behind the thrown. Reno was a figure head.

Posted by: jainphx at January 31, 2010 10:41 AM (1xnCv)

155

"precedent. it is precedent."

Actually its pre-pubescient, but missing a following word.

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at January 31, 2010 10:44 AM (ucq49)

156 Fuck, I could beat a parking tickey from Holder!

Posted by: hutch1200 at January 31, 2010 10:46 AM (ULjg5)

157

"What's that I hear? Is that a million voices from the Islamic world screaming "showtrial!"?"

Only from the Islamic world?  Not hardly.

Posted by: Starboardhelm at January 31, 2010 10:51 AM (SgSfB)

158 What's that I hear? Is that a million voices from the Islamic world screaming "showtrial!"?

GOOD!

When our enemies are howling in anger and pain, then we are doing the right thing.


Posted by: Lee at January 31, 2010 11:11 AM (8cnnJ)

159

"What's that I hear? Is that a million voices from the Islamic world screaming "showtrial!"?"

 

You can also hear it from a little Canadian Joo too....

Posted by: experience smeperience at January 31, 2010 11:11 AM (8mpdw)

160

"What's that I hear? Is that a million voices from the Islamic world screaming "showtrial!"?"

Many, many more than that.  What about us?

Posted by: Islamists at the 9th level at January 31, 2010 11:32 AM (ucq49)

161 Jcjimi, I would certainly say anything I could to stay off that jury.  Simply saying, "I have drawn a conclusion"  would get you dismissed.  Jihadists are not subtle enough to bribe a juror, it's cheaper to kill all twelve.  This civilian trial will last at least six months.

Posted by: Holger at January 31, 2010 11:34 AM (8NGHm)

162 What ever happened to the terriorist who shot two military people who were in their uniforms standing in front of a recruiting office. IIRC, it was in Arkansas or Missouri.

Posted by: mystry at January 31, 2010 11:43 AM (kmgIE)

163 They are not casting doubt on the legitimacy of the American legal system. They are casting a light on the left's views the court is another political tool that ought have politically determined outcomes.

If any of those "right wing extremists" Napolitano warned us about - you know, conservatives - end up in the system, the left will have even less concern over pre-selecting the outcome.

Posted by: ef at January 31, 2010 11:44 AM (DD+LA)

164 Holder is demonstrating the power of Al Q by backing off NYC. Let's have it here so the NYT can take some reponsibility for the ensuing PR and financial disaster when the city comes to a halt every day and the guy is given life by the local liberal dicks, and then freed on appeal which is what many of them hope will happen so Bush can be blamed for inadmissible evidence caused by torture. Obama is acting like the bombastic fascist judge who tried the Hitler conspirators, most of whom were executed and their often gruesome deaths filmed for Hitler, by showing a crude form of patriotic anger, mouthed by his loyal jackal Gibbs. But in reality he would not mind acquittal by appeal. This way he can keep the guy in jail as a security risk and have the glory of punishment for himself, while his slaves at the NYT bury the fact of KSM capture and much more valuable interrogations by the Bush et al. Twenty years from now he will be released as rehabed and O will have clean hands.

Posted by: mytralman at January 31, 2010 11:47 AM (bXaxZ)

165

it was in Arkansas or Missouri.

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at January 31, 2010 11:52 AM (ucq49)

166 Do what FDR did, firing squad at dawn.

Posted by: bill-tb at January 31, 2010 11:55 AM (y+QfZ)

167 Why not just kill him now and have the trial later?  Then we don't have to pay to feed him for a year or so.  I'm just trying to save the taxpayers a few bucks here...

Posted by: Purple Avenger at January 31, 2010 12:18 PM (JnT9r)

168 You would be forgiven for thinking that behind that spacious forehead there was a proportionately large brain. But nope. It's hollow. Gibbs uses it to focus the sound of bullshit.

Posted by: amos at January 31, 2010 12:21 PM (gDWoG)

169 Suppose we start a rumor that he converted to Christianity and has fallen under the influence of teabaggers?

Holder will have him strapped in and eating voltage within 48 hours.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at January 31, 2010 12:25 PM (JnT9r)

170

Eissler ran showtrials in Nazi Germany. He faced the grim reaper and didn't win like Keister Olbermann did.

Whatever happened to the judges who ran the show trials in Stalinist Russia?

 This is not Nuremberg. Terrorists have no rights under the Geneva Convention and the American Constitution. They have the right to sit in a chair facing 3 American senior officers. Get on with it.

 Holder and the Precedent want to undermine your Constitution and embarass the Bush administration. Its backfiring already.

 The new detention facility in Illinois will be a recruiting tool for the Islamofascists. Showtrials= same result.

 Paraphrasing Shakespeare- 700 solicitors under the sea.

Posted by: chicocano at January 31, 2010 12:25 PM (2n5cq)

171 wtf is the deal with this Administration.  They send 2 Navy Seals to Iraq for trial.  They tried to send Gitmo terrorists for trial to N.Y.  Stuck on stupid is too good a description.  3 more years of this shit.  The 52 percenters who voted for Teh Won will regret their decision (if they don't already).

Posted by: sirsurfalot at January 31, 2010 01:30 PM (UPNlB)

172 It's kinda cute to see this administration talk tough. It's like the skinny kid on the playground spouting off smack right after he got his ass kicked. "Oh YEAH?! Well my big brother's SIX FEET TALL and he knows karate and I'm going bring him here and he's gonna beat up you and we'll see about things then, huh!"

Posted by: ExurbanKevin at January 31, 2010 01:35 PM (toqoX)

173 1.) Didn't Obama just say "Let’s put aside the schoolyard taunts about who is tough."?

2.) I thought military tribunals were supposed to be the "kangaroo courts", the  "hangin' courts" dispensing "drumhead justice". Turns out it's the federal courts, according to Gibbsey! A guaranteed verdict and sentence is the very definition of a kangaroo court.

3.) Obama says giving terrorists gilt-edged Korans, volleyball lessons, lamb kabob and full dental at Gitmo is a "recruiting tool." But this isn't?

Seriously: how is this not a "recruiting tool"?

5.) These people believe terrorists have the same rights as you. Which is another way of saying you have the same rights as terrorists. Why then can't the administration guarantee the result of ALL federal trials? This policy both elevates undeserving terrorists while simultaneously dragging our rights down to their level undeservedly.

6.) Of course, Gibbsey can't truly promise a result. In previous federal trials, jurors have held out against the death penalty. Terrorists in these trials have also tried to escape, maimed guards, used defense lawyers as co-conspirators, gained valuable classified secrets and plotted further attacks--including 9/11.

Obama is hoping that defense attorneys will put Bush on trial. Why should New Yorkers suffer this circus just to indulge Obama’s political vendetta?

Now that his lax policies nearly let an airliner disintegrate over Detroit, Obama realizes that he may be impeached if there is a successful attack on New York City during Khalid Sheikh Muhammed’s years-long trial. Hell, KSM’s trial may outlast his presidency.

So now he’s decided to move the trial.

In other words, the decision to hold the trials in New York federal court was pure politics. And the decision to remove the trials from New York federal court is also pure politics. Neither decision was about what is best for New York or the country. Both decisions were about one thing:

What's best for Obama.


Posted by: Noel at January 31, 2010 01:57 PM (Hh13R)

174

I'd like to see what Gibby actually said. He certainly could have said the administration plans to seek the death penalty IF he is convicted.

It's unfortunate that Obama put himself in the position he did. By essentially accusing Bush of being a war criminal for not holding civilian trails, he put himself in the unenviable position of guaranteeing a conviction to Americans while at the same time promising an uncertain outcome to foreigners.

Posted by: Ken at January 31, 2010 01:58 PM (H0wvU)

175

Since their IS kinda a war going on, don't ya think that the enemy will try to avenge their losses?

As long as KSM is alive they can entertain springing him...hostage trade for instance.

Posted by: torabora at January 31, 2010 03:48 PM (urwqd)

176

Trial? TRIAL? Don't ask me about trials! We're just looking to make it past our first administration!

Trial?

Posted by: Show Trial Jim Mora at January 31, 2010 05:14 PM (+/6so)

Posted by: linda at March 07, 2010 07:59 PM (n6xnC)

178 Thanks for the info, nice post!

Penny stock investment  Burn fat gain muscle

Posted by: kasey t at October 05, 2010 07:19 PM (Gk1Ss)

179 there are 84-game list till now. You can nearly find all the games here.
 All of them are fantastic, and when you have more currency in game that we deliver to you,
 you can enjoy the game much more.

Posted by: mabinogi gold at November 17, 2010 01:54 AM (6VzfZ)

180 gabion is enjoy excellent corrosion resistance.-ning

Posted by: gabion at April 05, 2011 10:57 PM (aFRfL)

Posted by: Ferly Juliansyah at April 13, 2011 12:55 AM (2SzfI)

182 Nowadays it becomes really simple <a href="http://www.researchpaperspot.com/" style="text-decoration: none; color: #000000;">research paper</a> to share the latest happenings and historical events through social networking.

Posted by: research paper at May 15, 2011 10:02 PM (4trNK)

Posted by: منتدى at June 17, 2011 03:38 AM (U4RPl)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
157kb generated in CPU 0.18, elapsed 1.2879 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.1606 seconds, 419 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.