Part 1| CNN's 'Heated' Debate About 9/11 New York Terrorist Trial

[natqoh]

...you know, I think this was a public test to see if they could pass the NDAA, the man would be charged 3000 1st degree murders, and our own ex governor has the audacity to say the courts would treat this man as a petty thief, if he has so little faith in courts, what about our own imprisoned?

[mickymacky02]

HERES THE REAL QUESTION: WTF is being discussed at bohemian grove???

[gombis666]

Give KSM his 72 virgins and sling him up.

[Nickfab88]

those animals are not u.s. citzens they are terrrorists they should not be on trial in new york

[AndrewDeLong]

@Nickfab88

Keep in mind that the exact goal of these guys is to create civil unrest and a breakdown of decent society. By denying them a civilian trail, we succumb to just that goal.

What better way to shove it in their faces that they CAN'T do that, than by being civil and fair in their trail.

[fromWestie]

These terrorists weren't given their rights (they weren't read their Miranda rights, right to a lawyer). So, will these guys go free now, or by convicting them will it set a precedent in U.S. civil courts that these rights don't necessarily have to be given. This whole fiasco is just a way for them to get us to focus on this, while they try to sneak socialized medicine through the backdoor. Obama has tainted jury selection by making comments that they should be executed. Oh, & he's a socialist.

[whitefeet21]

fromWestie, socialized medicine? are you serious? The same politicians, who say that Americans do not need it, get it. How is it good for them and bad for us? We tried the first terrorist, why not these guys?

[bushtyranny]

Maybe in this Terrorist Trial the FBI can "Hide" 10,000 pages of evidence like they did until ten days before Timothy McVeigh was executed. Then have a Judge dismiss it because it didn't matter.... Whats that old phrase? With Liberty and Justice for ALL? You mean all but McVeigh and other unwanteds? Terrorists, DUIs, Littering. Hey, we all know he/they are guilty, but to hide evidence? Of course that was under the BUSH Regime. And just HOW do you have a Trial for 19 DEAD HiJackers?

[tresdizz]

republicans are scared of what will be exposed to the public their "dark secrets" of torture, while at the same time fear mongering to show that they are still relevent on what they think is their strong card which is terrorism. alot of americans are very naive and republicans know this so they use it to their best advantage.

[daddybearification]

Heated with hot air maybe 249 views-37 comments...hmmm...

[daddybearification]

Keep the courts open in NYC after the trial and go get the rest of the conspirators ON WALL STREET!

[daddybearification]

Canada is flip flopping about afghan prisoners recieving H1N1 shots, Mainstream media sez they won't give it to them, Geneva convention sez they got to, All because some people are "Not On The PRIORITY LIST"- hmmm....

[daddybearification]

It seems we can't catch all the masterminds, fight fire with fire, I say put a master mind in the oval office and work our way down from there.Hmm.

[nycpup]

I'm really amazed at some of you people who think that the American Constitution and our Justice system are weak. Plus you all seem terribly afraid of just about everything. It's all just so sad at how much you don't like this country and it's system of laws.

[2010GOP]

nycpup:

Look at what happened with the OJ Simpson trial. With this case, the largest terror attack in American History:

-Many families of 9/11 victims oppose

-Americans paying for Terrorists defense

-The millions spent for security

-The risks for terror plots

-Just one juror could change the outcome

Plain & Simple: Take all of the above & ask what the "benefit" is. Why not Military Tribunal?

[nycpup]

-Many families of 9/11 victims approve

-We are a nation of laws, when we abide by those laws we say to the world that we truly are better than those who attacked us.

-Again we are a nation of laws, so what needs to be done needs to be done.

-I live in NYC, and I'm not afraid.

-Do you really think that any New Yorker will find them innocent, come on.

[nycpup]

Also, I watched those towers fall with my own eyes, not on the teevee. I want them brought to justice - not just rotting away in some prison cell without a proper trial.

[2010GOP]

nycpup:

There are many people who watched the towers fall, not just you. In fact, many who watched the towers fall, watched knowing their family members were inside

Do you actually believe no one wants them brought to justice? They want them in a Military Tribunal --- something Liberal-minded people have been stalling for years

You say "proper" trial. A "proper" trial is a Military Tribunal

[nycpup]

Do you really think I didn't know people in the towers, that's quite crass of you.

The U.S. Justice system has a long history with terrorism trials, Military courts do not.

[2010GOP]

nycpup:

WTH are you talking about?

These were foreign terrorists who planned the worst attack in American History, subsequently captured in a foreign country ---- now we're giving them the same rights as Americans, paid for by the American taxpayer

[nycpup]

Also, did you live here when they fell? If not, then you really don't have a clue as to what the city went through at the time.

[2010GOP]

nycpu

-Many families of 9/11 victims oppose; the families that are okay w/this are not "opposed" to Military Tribunal

-These terror were terror acts / acts of war. They should not be afforded the same rights as Americans

-Americans will pay for their defense

-Doesn't matter what we "say to the world".  How many years have displayed democracy? Face reality

-One unstable juror could change the outcome

-You've yet to describe the "benefit" of civilian court vs Military Tribunal

[nycpup]

In the last 8 years, we abandoned the rule of law. Now we are trying to go back to what we stand for. That is the benefit of the Federal Courts, we will show to the world that we are not a nation of hypocrites.

NY has successfully prosecuted terrorists before. You still seem to be thinking that our Justice system is weak and seem to be afraid that it will fail.

Again, you think out Justice system is weak and have no faith in it - that's really sad.

[2010GOP]

nycpup:

We have not "abandoned the rule of law" ---- lay-off the left wing blogs & research what has occurred in the last 8 years

We can "show the world" by frying their asses via a Military Tribunal, all the while, eliminating risks & costs

Our Justice System is not perfect. Again, take the OJ Simpson trial.

Taking all of these risks on a trial for the worst attack in American History --- and Americans funding it

Reality & common-sense escapes you -- that's really sad

[nycpup]

I can't believe you are actually comparing the OJ trial to these trials - that is SO moronic, it is beyond belief. That was state courts, this will be FEDERAL courts, quite different.

"Frying their assess", hmmm, sounds like a Totalitarian/Fascist state way to go about things.

Again, you seem to not agree with the laws of our country.

Yes, we are giving them a trial paid for by the taxpayers. Sometimes acting like adults and adhering to our principles costs a bit of cash.

[2010GOP]

nycpup:

It matters not that it's "Federal" Courts -- it is still a civilian court, with civilian jurors.

"Frying their asses" -- yea, got a problem with that? What's the difference in Eric Holder pushing for the death penalty?

Go pick up a history book -- you are obviously clueless. There's a reason why the vast majority of people are shocked at this decision, including experts.

Add one more thing to the list of "risks": The world will be privy to US tactics, etc. -- how smart

[nycpup]

You obviously have a very narrow view of the world, of how your justice system works (there are times when, yes, things can be hidden from the public while still available inside the court room - shocking I know!) , and our constitution.

Um, I believe the vast majority of people who have a clue and understand the rule of law agree with this.

I think you need to step out into the world and stop watching foxnews.

Have a great weekend! :)

[2010GOP]

nycpup: LOL --- you are ignorant

Oh yes, no one from the "public" will hear the sensitive info in court. How stupid.

And no, you're WRONG. The vast majority agree with me, including experts

Yes, I do watch FOX, among other networks, in addition to researching through various other sources

Your comment about FOX simply proves how brainwashed you are -- you must rely only on MSNBC & HuffPo

Keep living in your world of lollipops, skittles & unicorns. Maybe one day you'll grow up

[nycpup]

You really just make me laugh. I haven't laughed this hard in a long time. Thanks!

And that fact that I was right that you watch fox (which was just a guess) just proves my point.

foxnews: we alter reality. you are sold a preconceived narrative.

Again, have a lovely weekend, I've got work to do. :)

[2010GOP]

nycpup:

If you haven't laughed that hard in awhile --- you clearly have a sad & pathetic life

Perhaps you need to learn how to read & comprehend. I said I watch FOX, among other networks & research thru various sources

Newsflash: Pew Research, Center for Media and Public Affairs, Media Research Center / Business and Media Institute, among others conclude: Fox is the least biased & most balanced

Have a good weekend kiddo; maybe it'll rain skittles while you're riding unicorn

[nycpup]

Stop it, you're killing me! :)

Well, even with watching fox just a little bit, you've obviously become brainwashed, so good for you. :)

From Pew: Fox News Viewed as Most Ideological Network

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

CMPA, MRC & BMI are biased to the conservative side.

Try again.

[2010GOP]

nycpup: LMAO -- you really should learn to comprehend

Learn the difference between "polls" & "studies". The studies by those groups are NOT "Conservative" -- nice try

Thankfully, some have awakened to the bias w/the other networks. That's why FOX has made history recently w/increased viewership at an astronomical rate ---- more viewers than MSNBC & CNN......COMBINED

You just keep living in your fairy tale land & tune into MSNBC November 2010 ;)

[nycpup]

Um, the GOP brand is dead on arrival. the only reason they won the governorships in VA and NJ were because both of the Dem candidates were just plain awful and ran awful campaigns.

fox has more viewers than msnbc and cnn combined because they only draw ultra-right wing conservatives. but still, they may have higher ratings, but they still have only a teeny tiny fraction of the total viewership of the entire country. most people don't watch 24 hour news channels.

[nycpup]

and studies by conservative groups aren't skewed conservative? what, are you kidding me? you really are brainwashed aren't you. i guess then you would say that studies by liberal groups aren't skewed liberal?

I wouldn't, because of course they are.

and yes it was a poll. polls are scientifically done. so the american population thinks that fox is ideologically to the right. so that must be the case, but then again, you don't think the american judicial system works....

[2010GOP]

nycpup: Um......you're an idiot. The GOP brand is dead? LOL

Oh yes, no significance VA elected Obama 1 yr ago -- and then voted "overwhelmingly" for Republican

No significance "Liberal" NJ voted Republican

Gallup 11/11/2009: "Americans now prefer Republicans"

No significance Democrats in Congress are losing to Republicans, including Reid & Dodd who have been shoo-ins for 30+ years

Even CNN & MSNBC are forced to report:

"Democrats will lose big in 2010"

[2010GOP]

"Scientific Polling"? Here you go:

•FOX: 39% Republican, 33% Democratic, 22% Independent

•CNN: 18% Republican, 51% Democratic, 23% Independent

•MSNBC: 18% Republican, 45% Democratic, 27% Independent

MSNBC & CNN viewers are MOVING to FOX. Repubs didn't suddenly decide to flip on the TV. LOL

"Studies", analyzing real data:  MSNBC & CNN, huge imbalance of "postive" Obama & "negative" McCain reporting to confuse tiny brains like yours. FOX even

[nycpup]

um, NY 23? been in republican hands for 150 years and now democratic.

yeah, good luck with that. the dems will pick up seats in 2010.

you hate america, the american judicial system, and the constitution. you've already said that.

you make me laugh. you are such a moron, i didn't realize that anyone could be as clueless as you.

thanks, it's been fun. you're an idiot and please don't reply cause i'm just bored with you. you are completely brainwashed and it's a waste of my time.

[2010GOP]

nycup: LOL. Yea, I'm brainwashed. I provide sources, you provided nothing

NY23? The race is only 3,000 votes apart now -- race called too early. Over 10,000 more ballots to be counted.

If Owens retains, it doesn't change he LIED to his constituents. Said he was against the health care bill, then votes for it. Seat will be up again 2010. Scozzofava & Hoffman totaled more that Owens

Yep. Gallup, MSNBC, CNN, Rasmussen, Quinnipiac, etc etc --- all way off on Repubs 2010 -- LOL

[nycpup]

you say they NY23 was called to early, but a year out from the 2010 elections and you are ready to call it.

dumbass....

You bore me. LOL

[sweetheart2109]

this is nothing like the OJ Simpson trial. So do us all a favor and stop comparing it.

[2010GOP]

sweetheart: LOL..what ignorance

Nothing like a basic point flying over your head

It is nothing short of amazing that people cannot understand why people are outraged

-10's of Millions spent for security

-Many New Yorkers fearful

-Sensitive info will potentially be divulged

-Many families of 9/11 victims don't want

-Terror risks heightened

-One unstable whack-job juror could change outcome

FOR WHAT BENEFIT? Answer: NONE

[sweetheart2109]

what are you talking about? In case you have not heard are families who have welcome the trial. The only reason why it in New York is because that where the crime happen. In when a trial happens they have it where the crime took place. Do you realzed while the trial is going on they going to have cops and FBI agents and miltary soldiers protecting the new yorkers. The five people that they have going to be maxium facticly prison in an area of where they are not allowed to talk to anyone.

[2010GOP]

sweetheart: YOU are IGNORANT

A) Approx 1/2 the families do not want the trial in NY ----- the other 1/2 do not care where it is. Thus, your argument is flawed

B) LOL. Brainwashed much? These are terrorists captured on 'Foreign Soil' --- they should be tried in a Military Tribunal

C) Yes dummy -- I realize there will be security. Guess what? That costs MONEY -- something we don't have a lot of

D) ALL the risks/costs/etc I've listed --- not even ONE benefit to counter

[AndrewDeLong]

@2010GOP

Well consider this. The terrorist's goal is to create a civil unrest and breakdown of civility in society, to get us to ignore our own tenants and bases of belief, to make way for chaos. By denying them a fair and speedy trial in the area the crime was committed (6th amendment I think), we succumb to just that.

The benefit, in my view, is that we get to keep our humanity.

[2010GOP]

Andrew: Your thinking is completely backwards

a) Terrorists would reach their goal w/the chaos in NY: media circus, demonstrators, increased security, interruption in daily lives, etc

b) A trial in NY would take much longer than a Military Tribunal... lol. Estimate in NY of 5 yrs. And think of the cost

c) Terrorists get rights under the 6th amendment? lol. We don't afford those rights to POWs under the Geneva Convention. Should we give Constitutional "rights" on the battlefield too?

[AndrewDeLong]

@2010GOP

Problem with the POW statement. The "War on Terrorism"...I don't think it was ever officially declared by congress. Therefore, according to our own constitution, it is NOT an official war, ergo they are not POW's. By that logic alone, they are put under the 6th amendment.

[2010GOP]

AndrewDe:

a) The Iraq war was authorized by Congress... just like the majority of wars have been. "Congressional Approval" is only a formality anyway. If we were under attack, should a President have to go thru Congress before defending? You should pick up a history book

b) You obviously have no idea how ridiculous you sound. Give terrorists more rights than POWs? By your logic, we should hand out Constitutional rights on the battlefield. AMAZING idiocy

[AndrewDeLong]

@2010GOP

Umm, the Iraq war IS NOT the "War on Terror," that is centered in the Afghan/Tribal region. And we never Declared war on that area, not once. No, by the way, the Congressional Approval is not a mere formality.

Stemming from WW1, the Declaration of war on Germany: Congressional Approval, to WW2, the War on Germany and Japan: Congressional Approval. Any LEGITIMATE war had Congressional Approval, and the rules that followed. No approval, then war trials ARE NOT instituted. Simple.

[AndrewDeLong]

@2010GOP

Oh, and I know my history quite fine thanks. Maybe it is YOU who should do the research before spouting off like that.

The idiocy is yours good sir. Yours alone.

[2010GOP]

AndrewDe:

125 Military engagements: NONE were authorized by Congress

Vietnam, Barbary, Lebanon, Korean war, Operation Desert Storm, etc.: NONE were Formal Declarations of War

It seems you don't understand the difference. Like I said, pick up a history book...

[AndrewDeLong]

@2010GOP

Military engagements and a WAR are not the same thing.

How many people under those ENGAGEMENTS were tried as war criminals? Not a one. Because the articles of war did not, and could not apply. The Constitution is pretty clear cut on this one. If the war is not officially declared, then the rules that follow (ie: military trials) cannot be enacted.

Like I said, I know my history quite well.

Pick up the constitution some time. It's a nice read.

[2010GOP]

AndrewDe:

Was the Vietnam War not a "WAR"? Was the Korean War not a "WAR"? They began the exact same way....

What were Disarmed Enemy Forces (DEFs) ?

[AndrewDeLong]

@2010GOP

What were they? Not put under U.S Military Trial, that's what they were.

Look, I'm not going to argue about this. The Constitution is clear cut on this one. No declaration of war = no military trials. The only other option is a civilian trial.

The 6th Amendment applies, regardless of anything you can drum up.

[2010GOP]

AndrewDe:

Yea.... keep reaching

"The Constitution does not provide alien enemy combatants detained at Guantanamo Bay with the constitutional right to file a petition for habeas corpus in our civilian courts, and thus Congress may regulate those combatants' access to the courts".

[AndrewDeLong]

@2010GOP

Two things.

First the typo. I said "every" when I meant to say "ever"

Second, mind telling me who coined that quote?

[2010GOP]

AndrewDe:

I have your previous message in my email. There were no typos. Hopefully you erased it because you're realizing how wrong you are.

[bushtyranny]

sweatheart, yeah, I bet the terrorists will get a fair trial with a Jewish Judge, some Jewish public defenders, a mostly Jewish jury (this is NY BTW), it can be covered by the Jewish Media as a competing story to the Jewish run Health care nightmare. OJs trial. Jewish Judge, let Jewish Goldmans have prime seats in court not related to them for sympathy votes from jury, and judge dismissed key evidence of tape sold to jewish run TMZ. It was a complete Jewish setup.

[TheDukeSnider]

Well, Obama has finally shown his communist colors has he not? He is going to shred our intelligence ability and give out secrets and try the Bush Administration in a civil court where these clowns don't belong.

Way to go YOU LIBERAL PRICK...you just killed the Democrat Party as you have no idea how PO the people are getting now...

[Roonskii]

Apperently you are very , very misinformed, very uneducated, or a combination of the two.

[TheDukeSnider]

Apparently you have your head up your rump ROONskii: These SOB's don't belong in a Civilian court with the same rights as a US Citizen.

This is nothing but a dog and pony show for the liberals so they cry torture and everything else. I heard one Lib commentator say the guy was water-boarded 170 times... not possible as that would drive someone insane.

He was water boarded one time shown the equipment the next day and the ring leader sang like a baby.

It will shred our intelligence ability

[iamavet]

Geneva calls them unlawful combatants who have targeted civilians. Targeting civilians is a war crime and thus should be given military courts not civilian courts.

Joe Sestak is an idiot and should go back and read the Geneva Convention.

[Roonskii]

If you will remember, the bush administration said that Geneva Convention did not apply.

[iamavet]

Bush was referring to Geneva when applying the POW rule. These combatants are not POW's. They fall under unlawful combatants and are not allowed POW treatment.

When they targeted civilians, they committed war crimes and thus can be executed. And since they have admitted it and brag about it, I am for just taking them out and shooting them.

Obama and Holder are creating 4 years of a media circus that will end with more people dead. NY will be a 'free fire zone'.

[SubmarinerAndroid]

Pataki is a failed has-been with zero understanding of American law, busy kissing teabagger butt in hopes of a political comeback.

It shouldn't matter whether someone is accused of mass murder or petty thievery, everyone should get a fair trial. Period.

[FixedNewsChannel]

Hey NewsPolitics, FIGHT THE POWER!

[ech0]

ROW ROW