N.Y. Terror Trials

**elganned** · November-23-09, 04:17 PM

dfunkTcity, why don't you go try to find some terrorists under your bed. I'm sure there are some, if you look real hard...

And the Declaration didn't say anything about "citizens", or "legal residents"; it said "all men". If you need the definition of "all", I'm sure Cc can help you out: he's very fond of posting dictionary definitions.

Oh, and I don't think you have to worry about terrorists targeting Detroit; there isn't anything left in the city worth bombing. You can thank Coleman, Dennis, and Kwame for that.

**ejames01** · November-23-09, 04:24 PM

U.S., NYC split on civilian terror trial

Published: Nov. 17, 2009 at 8:04 PM

NEW YORK, Nov. 17 [[UPI) -- Public opinion in New York is split almost evenly on whether the avowed mastermind of the 2001 terrorist attacks should be tried in the city, a poll said.

While 45 percent of those surveyed said trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-defendants in the city where almost 3,000 people died on Sept. 11, 2001, is a good idea, 41 percent disagreed, the Marist Institute of Public Opinion found.

A Washington Post-ABC News poll found the United States is also divided. Almost half, 47 percent, said the suspects should be tried in a civilian court and 48 percent said by a military tribunal. There was a partisan split, with 61 percent of Democrats saying they preferred a civilian court, while 58 percent of Republicans and 53 percent of independents said they preferred a tribunal.

Forty percent of those responding to the Marist poll said holding the trial in the city would increase the chance of another terrorist attack there.

Marist questioned 602 New York City residents by telephone on Nov. 16. The poll has a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

For the Washington Post-ABC poll, 1,001 people were surveyed between Nov. 12 and Nov. 15. The poll has a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

Â© 2009 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2009/...5121258506298/

dfunkycity · November-23-09, 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by elganned

dfunkTcity, why don't you go try to find some terrorists under your bed. I'm sure there are some, if you look real hard...

And the Declaration didn't say anything about "citizens", or "legal residents"; it said "all men". If you need the definition of "all", I'm sure Cc can help you out: he's very fond of posting dictionary definitions.

Oh, and I don't think you have to worry about terrorists targeting Detroit; there isn't anything left in the city worth bombing. You can thank Coleman, Dennis, and Kwame for that.

Maybe we could ask that wonderful statesmen,that amazingly gifted, talented orator of peace and prosperity beholden to the world[[as long as he, Hill, Ol Al,and the rest of the syndicate can make a buck off of it) that most wonderfully intelligent constitutional advocate that is shredding our most cherished documents and using them to wipe his incompetent ass with?

I guess u fail to remember, the GM building was one of their targets.
But I don't have to worry about getting blown up in the ren cen as long as I am in NYC Im safe .

**rb336** · November-23-09, 04:32 PM

you sad, kool-aid brainwashed kid.

GM building was one of their targets

I do not recall hearing that. is that the current Cadillac Place/ex GM HQ, the RenCen or the GM building in NYC?

dfunkycity · November-23-09, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by rb336

you sad, kool-aid brainwashed kid.

I do not recall hearing that. is that the current Cadillac Place/ex GM HQ, the RenCen or the GM building in NYC?

The ren cen was on their original target list back in 01

ccbatson · November-23-09, 05:04 PM

Am I to understand that liberals don't care so long as they are not personally targets? Sort of like German citizens willing to surrender Jewish refuges during the Holocaust.

dfunkycity · November-23-09, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Am I to understand that liberals don't care so long as they are not personally targets? Sort of like German citizens willing to surrender Jewish refuges during the Holocaust.

Please see the hilarious video Jimaz posted regarding Hitler.

While u are at it, do a search on youtube with hitler and Obamacare together and u will find an array of parodies with different topics utilizing the same video.

Just genius

ccbatson · November-23-09, 05:26 PM

Misses the point...that being that liberals are willing to turn a blind eye to atrocities so long as they are NIMBY.

dfunkycity · November-23-09, 08:41 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

This is a lose lose for the administration...Holder says that "failure is not an option" so much for a fair trial.

If I were in Politics Id have Mr Holder removed as AG, tried for treason and fraud and while cooling his heels in the fed thinking what he possibly could have done wrong by listening to the liberal left and granting their wish of circumventing our laws and giving enemy combatants citizens rights, he should be disbarred to top it off.

**ejames01** · November-23-09, 10:52 PM

We should have shot them all years ago.

Originally Posted by dfunkycity

If I were in Politics Id have Mr Holder removed as AG, tried for treason and fraud and while cooling his heels in the fed thinking what he possibly could have done wrong by listening to the liberal left and granting their wish of circumventing our laws and giving enemy combatants citizens rights, he should be disbarred to top it off.

**elganned** · November-24-09, 01:06 AM

Originally Posted by ejames01

We should have shot them all years ago.

Who? Holder, the detainees, or dfunkTcity?

**elganned** · November-24-09, 01:09 AM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Misses the point...that being that liberals are willing to turn a blind eye to atrocities so long as they are NIMBY.

No, Cc, that's a conservative trick: send the troops halfway across the world to be decoys to give the terrorists someone to blow up so they won't blow up anyone here.

Kinda hard on the troops, but oh, well. Sucks to be them.

**elganned** · November-24-09, 01:11 AM

Originally Posted by dfunkycity

If I were in Politics Id have Mr Holder removed as AG, tried for treason and fraud and while cooling his heels in the fed thinking what he possibly could have done wrong by listening to the liberal left and granting their wish of circumventing our laws and giving enemy combatants citizens rights, he should be disbarred to top it off.

I can only thank whatever God there may be that you are not in politics; the terrorists would have already won.

Found any under your bed, yet? Keep looking, I know they're under there.

Be sure to report back when you find one.

dfunkycity · November-24-09, 01:15 AM

Originally Posted by elganned

I can only thank whatever God there may be that you are not in politics; the terrorists would have already won.

Found any under your bed, yet? Keep looking, I know they're under there.

Be sure to report back when you find one.

put down Alinsky,it no longer works

**elganned** · November-24-09, 01:30 AM

Alinsky? Please; he's so 20th century.
Which of course doesn't make you any less a paranoid, or any less fuzzy-thinking. Or, for that matter, any less hypocritical.

**d.mcc** · November-24-09, 01:49 AM

its amazing, how conservatives claim to love america so much... yet hate the majority of people that live here.

It's human rights that allots a HUMAN a fair trial...not just our constitution...

**ejames01** · November-24-09, 06:34 AM

The terrists.

Originally Posted by elganned

Who? Holder, the detainees, or dfunkTcity?

ccbatson · November-24-09, 08:34 PM

A fair trial where? The answer to that question tells you what jurisdiction [[ie which rules apply). Why is a military tribunal not a venue in which to get a fair trial? FDR thought it was.

**d.mcc** · November-24-09, 10:31 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

A fair trial where? The answer to that question tells you what jurisdiction [[ie which rules apply). Why is a military tribunal not a venue in which to get a fair trial? FDR thought it was.

which Tribunals would those be?

ccbatson · November-26-09, 12:35 AM

You are such a glutton for punishment.

http://www.amazon.com/Nazi-Saboteurs...tag=dogpile-20

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20011207.html

I almost feel sorry for you...but you are asking for it.

**ejames01** · November-26-09, 08:12 AM

Strange links. The book you reference argues against military tribunals and the other article is an opinion piece written by a watergate felon.

Originally Posted by ccbatson

You are such a glutton for punishment.

http://www.amazon.com/Nazi-Saboteurs...tag=dogpile-20

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20011207.html

I almost feel sorry for you...but you are asking for it.

**elganned** · November-26-09, 07:57 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

A fair trial where? The answer to that question tells you what jurisdiction [[ie which rules apply). Why is a military tribunal not a venue in which to get a fair trial? FDR thought it was.

Newsflash: This just in: FDR is no longer president.

You gotta keep up with the times, Cc. [[Psst: Joe McCarthy isn't a Senator anymore, either. Pass it on.)

ccbatson · November-26-09, 11:37 PM

Out of context libs...D.mcc asked "what tribunals" suggesting that I was making it up. So, as per his challenge, I provided a few links describing the historic precedents on the subject proving him wrong...again...as usual.