New York 9/11 trial ignites row

[sashoo]

I just heard on the news that the cost of trying these five terrorists in NYC will be between $70 and 100 million.
The feds are not obligated to pay the bill.
So, considering NYC and NYS are close to being bankrupt, I wonder where the money will come from?

If the choice was either try them in a civil court or set them free, I (and I doubt anyone else) wouldn't object to footing the bill.
But, it's not necessary.

I have to wonder exactly why this decision was made.
The administration is planning to try other enemy combatants in military court.....what makes these five different?

9/11

[Anj29]

I can't help but think that if this were a different administration, senior Republicans would be fully in favour of trying the suspects in New York, where their crimes took place.

Axelrod: Giuliani flip-flopped on 9/11 trials

White House senior adviser David Axelrod is dismissing former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani's criticism of the administration's decision to try five Sept. 11 suspects in federal court in Manhattan.

In an interview Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union," Axelrod suggested Giuiliani had flip flopped from just a few years ago when he praised the prosecution of another alleged 9/11 conspirator, Zacarias Moussaoui, in a federal court in Alexandria, Va.

"Mayor Giuliani testified in that case, and he heralded the outcome," Axelrod noted. "He may have changed his view, but we haven’t changed ours."

Giuliani has denounced the plan to try the five suspects as an example of an unwise return to a law enforcement mentality in fighting Al Qaeda.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicol ... ml?showall

[shyne]

May, 2009:
President Obama today revived the use of military trials for detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba. The decision to modify, but maintain the military commissions stands in stark contrast to the president's prior statements about the process.

But in a statement today, the president said he had supported the tribunals in some cases and he sought to "restore the commissions as a legitimate forum for prosecution while bringing them in line with the rule of law."

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military ... 05-15.html

The question still is.....if military courts have been revived and standards changed, why are these five brought to a civil court rather than tried in a military court? At enormous expense to the taxpayers? With different standards of rules of evidence?

Sashoo...you answered "9/11"
I don't know what you mean.

[moldman7n]

The question still is.....if military courts have been revived and standards changed, why are these five brought to a civil court rather than tried in a military court? At enormous expense to the taxpayers? With different standards of rules of evidence?

This ragtag group of commies, crooks, and clowns could not care less about taxpayer dollars.

[shyne]

You talkin' about politicians??????

[rubbadubbawubba]

[sashoo]

May, 2009:
President Obama today revived the use of military trials for detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba. The decision to modify, but maintain the military commissions stands in stark contrast to the president's prior statements about the process.

But in a statement today, the president said he had supported the tribunals in some cases and he sought to "restore the commissions as a legitimate forum for prosecution while bringing them in line with the rule of law."

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military ... 05-15.html

The question still is.....if military courts have been revived and standards changed, why are these five brought to a civil court rather than tried in a military court? At enormous expense to the taxpayers? With different standards of rules of evidence?

Sashoo...you answered "9/11"
I don't know what you mean.

My understanding is that these men being tried in New York were responsible for a crime that happened on American soil: the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington.

I could be mistaken in that.

The whole notion of war crimes and detention of people for actions committed during a war is an intriguing one.

Really, who is in Gitmo, and for what?

The 9/11 terrorists make sense. They committed a clear crime against a sovereign nation and her people.

But did US soldiers do the same thing when they invaded Iraq?

Iraq was not at war with the US when the invasion started, was it?

Does this mean that those US soldiers are war criminals? Who would try them, and would those trials have the same legitimacy as the trials being held in New York?

[egeek10]

yes we were at war with iraq - they fired on our aircraft three times a day for ten years - those are acts of war - they were also trying to, would have used and did use wmds - the 500 pounds of yellowcake wasnt betty crocker

lets try the animals in afghanistan since thats where they planned it than we can hang them without liberals crying or leave them in filthy afghan jails forever plus we can waterboard them all daily

the trial is just one more thing the muslim america hater present odumbo will use to destroy our country

[sashoo]

yes we were at war with iraq - they fired on our aircraft three times a day for ten years - those are acts of war - they were also trying to, would have used and did use wmds - the 500 pounds of yellowcake wasnt betty crocker

lets try the animals in afghanistan since thats where they planned it than we can hang them without liberals crying or leave them in filthy afghan jails forever plus we can waterboard them all daily

the trial is just one more thing the muslim america hater present odumbo will use to destroy our country

What yellowcake was that?

[egeek10]

'bacon' why do i have to do your homework for you ? lol

i used to charge for that


not pounds, metric tons


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sour ... oq=&aqi=g1