Althouse: "Khalid Shaikh Mohammed to Be Tried by Military Commission at Guantánamo, in Reversal."

April 4, 2011

"Khalid Shaikh Mohammed to Be Tried by Military Commission at Guantánamo, in Reversal."

That's the right way to do it, Obama comes around to admitting, by coincidence, on the day he launches his reelection effort.

ADDED: What would it take for Obama to say Bush was right... or anything close to that... just a decent amount of respect for his predecessor?

AND: Here's the link to the NYT article, indicating that the decision represents no real judgment by Obama or Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., but simply yielding to Congress's "steep new restrictions on transferring any detainees from Guantánamo Bay onto United States soil, making such a trial impossible."

UPDATE: Holder speaks (live).

ADDED: Holder is adamant that his original decision was correct. Congress made it impossible for him to follow his original policy. The last question challenged him about how long it will take: perhaps another 10 years? He answers quickly and testily and — to my eye — stomps out of the room.

102 comments:

Phil 314 said...: Oh no!! an NYT link. How many do I have left this month? I will be left in the dark!!

As for the Gitmo decision, I've got one word:

Strategery; 4/4/11, 11:06 AM
Joe said...: (The Crypto Jew)

What, UNPOSSIBLE, that was a policy of the Evilllllll Booooosh, I’m sure there was a fierce moral urgency involved somewhere about this……; 4/4/11, 11:07 AM
Moose said...: He keeps this up, I wouldn't be surprised if he released his Kenyan birth certificate...; 4/4/11, 11:07 AM
SteveR said...: I have to believe his already decent chance of being re-elected goes up substantially if he gets rid of Holder soon. That guy can't explain the sunrise in a way that inspires confidence.; 4/4/11, 11:10 AM
Chennaul said...: Slapped in the face by-

Reality.; 4/4/11, 11:15 AM
Chennaul said...: What's left for Glenn Greenwald and Sullivan to do?

If they cry in the forest would anyone hear?; 4/4/11, 11:16 AM
Ann Althouse said...: "Oh no!! an NYT link. How many do I have left this month? I will be left in the dark!!"

Link to the front page doesn't count. That's why I didn't include a warning.; 4/4/11, 11:16 AM
Sprezzatura said...: Now the country's focus must turn to our second biggest legal question.

What about the Black Panthers?; 4/4/11, 11:17 AM
Pastafarian said...: Yeah, by coincidence.

A little triangulation, just on trivial matters like this, and he'll have the knuckle-headed, perpetually undecided middle utterly convinced that he's a moderate.

Then he's in for 4 more years, with no re-election to worry about, and then the kid-gloves come off. And I don't think they're spending us into oblivion because they think they can spend their way out of a recession. No one can be stupid enough to think that a $1.4 trillion deficit is a positive; and that the coming spiral of an unsustainable interest on the debt can be averted by a sudden, dramatic upward movement of the economy doubling revenues.

They're doing this stuff on purpose. I hate to look like a conspiracy-monger or a nut, but I think Obama's goal is to cripple the United States. When he's no longer constrained, as he has up til now -- be afraid.; 4/4/11, 11:17 AM
Unknown said...: Little Zero decided he'd like to win NYC in '12.; 4/4/11, 11:18 AM
Tank said...: Obama will NEVER say Bush was right.

Period.; 4/4/11, 11:21 AM
Sprezzatura said...: BHO: bush was rigth.; 4/4/11, 11:23 AM
Carol_Herman said...: On this "re-launch" the numbers to watch are the approval ratings. Do they bounce? Ah, anywhere in the vicinity of a dead cat?

I think Donald Trump, now that he has a Monday morning hour at Fox, should be making hay ... and, it doesn't cost him anything to appear.

WIN-WIN

Can the "rubber stamping" republicans still be at work? Sure. As long as there's a living Bush, there's a way. And, the Romney's arena't far behind! Heck, picking up governorships seems to be something you can do with money, if you're a Romney. Or a Kakafella. When Meg Whitman failed, did she fail because she's a woman?

A very large number of people voting, tends to cancel out "feelings." But that's just my opinion.; 4/4/11, 11:23 AM
Sprezzatura said...: or right; 4/4/11, 11:23 AM
Chennaul said...: ADDED:

Obama is never going to do that.

***************

Attorney General Eric Holder originally proposed trying Mohammed and four alleged accomplices at federal court in lower Manhattan. That prompted a chorus of disapproval from numerous officials, including then Governor-elect Andrew Cuomo, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Long Island Congressman Peter King.
More details about the location and timing of Mohammed’s trial are expected to be revealed at a news conference by Holder Monday afternoon.
(newyork.cbs.com)

btw- I believe Cuomo is lining up to run for the Presidency in 2016.; 4/4/11, 11:25 AM
Beorn said...: I won't hold my breath for his apologies to Bush for completely demagoguing this issue in 2007-8.

I've noticed he is all too ready to apologize for the actions of others, and all too reticent to admit his own shortcomings.; 4/4/11, 11:27 AM
jerryofva said...: Are you kidding? Every time Obama confirms the wisdom of a Bush policy he bashes him.; 4/4/11, 11:28 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: That link sent me to the NYT home page - not directly to club gitmo.. do not pass go, do not collect $200 dollars.; 4/4/11, 11:32 AM
The Drill SGT said...: madawaskan said...
What's left for Glenn Greenwald and Sullivan to do?

I'm hoping for some slit wrists or a least a trank overdose by somebody in the leftist legal terrorist apologenezia; 4/4/11, 11:33 AM
JAL said...: What would it take for Obama to say Bush was right... or anything close to that... just a decent amount of respect for his predecessor?

April Fools' Day was Friday.; 4/4/11, 11:35 AM
Anonymous said...: btw- I believe Cuomo is lining up to run for the Presidency in 2016.
Cuomo!....OH NOES!!!11!!11!; 4/4/11, 11:35 AM
JAL said...: Now. What about that mosque thingey at Ground Zero?

Will BHO have Soros buy them off?

wv tootsma
?; 4/4/11, 11:36 AM
Chennaul said...: Drill

Ya. They've kind of "maxied" themselves out...

What's left for them to do?; 4/4/11, 11:36 AM
Kensington said...: The Professor asked:"What would it take for Obama to say Bush was right... or anything close to that..."

What would it take? More character and class than the man possesses, which is why it will never happen. Instead, if ever pushed, he'll find some way to use one of his infamous "as I've always said" obfuscations. Or he'll hide behind one of his false "choice" analogies.; 4/4/11, 11:37 AM
Chennaul said...: NotYourTypicalNewYorker

Oh yeeeessss.

That's been in the "works" for awhile now IMHO.; 4/4/11, 11:38 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: What would it take for Obama to say Bush was right... or anything close to that... just a decent amount of respect for his predecessor?

A conscience?; 4/4/11, 11:38 AM
Chennaul said...: As long as Andy keeps his hair....; 4/4/11, 11:38 AM
Brian Brown said...: Oh you poor, poor rubes!!!; 4/4/11, 11:40 AM
Mike said...: You know I've simply reached a point of Obama fatigue. I don't even listen to him anymore. I may read one of his speeches from time to time for a few chuckles. He's what an old time Brit would have called a shameless bounder.

I can only hope that he will make sufficient unforced errors that the voting public will finally see through this narcissistic vapid twit. He can then go out and join Jimmuh Carter in the club of former POTUS who say and do stupid things.; 4/4/11, 11:50 AM
YoungHegelian said...: What choice did the administration have but to try him with a military tribunal, in spite of Holder's attempts to the contrary?

Remember, the Justice Dept has already appeared before Congress and said that even if KSH and others were found innocent or the cases were dismissed they would be held indefinitely at Gitmo anyway.

What a PR disaster that would be! KSH found innocent, but still held at Gitmo!

The national and international legal firestorm that would follow that action would burn the Obama administration to the ground. Way too risky.; 4/4/11, 11:50 AM
Kirby Olson said...: If he can gain something by it, he'll say it. Otherwise, he won't. That's the grid he lays on the world of discourse. There's nothing for him beyond personal gain (not necessarily in terms of dollars).

My guess about the birth certificate is that there's a different father listed than the one he thinks is his, or that he wants us to think is his.; 4/4/11, 11:50 AM
YoungHegelian said...: Ooops,

Should be KSM not KSH.

My bad.; 4/4/11, 11:52 AM
coketown said...: 2008 strategy: Run as not-Bush
2012 strategy: Run as Bush Incarnate?; 4/4/11, 11:56 AM
Padre said...: It’s called kinetic prosecution. "What would it take for Obama to say Bush was right... or anything close to that..." Dec. 21 2012, but only after he consults his Mayan political advisors.; 4/4/11, 11:56 AM
Anonymous said...: The New York Times seems to blame the reversal not on Bush being right but on Congress being unreasonably restrictive with the transfers.; 4/4/11, 11:59 AM
Anonymous said...: Oh yeeeessss.

I'm not disagreeing, he's in the Dem pipeline for sure. That was my emotion gushing out.

Here in New York Andy-Boy is cutting budgets 5-7% across the boards with much more to follow and not one word has been uttered from the Dem labor circles.

Yet. So far he's getting a pass.

So far.

WV: refloppe, counting his father, this is true.; 4/4/11, 12:02 PM
Stan said...: Bush is evil. The GOP is evil. Therefore, Bush was never right. Obama will not say he was right, because Bush being right is a moral impossibility.; 4/4/11, 12:05 PM
former law student said...: That's the right way to do it, Obama comes around to admitting,

I read that article three times but could find nothing to support this assertion.

What would it take for Obama to say Bush was right

I would say that a necessary precondition would be for Bush to have been right.

"George, thank you for well and truly screwing the pooch, making it impossible to try KSM in a civilian court with any hope of securing a conviction."; 4/4/11, 12:10 PM
Original Mike said...: "What would it take for Obama to say Bush was right... or anything close to that... just a decent amount of respect for his predecessor?"

Never happen. Obama is too much of a prick.; 4/4/11, 12:13 PM
RebeccaH said...: As far as I'm concerned, every Obama flipflop is just confirmation that he should NOT be reelected. A moron who flops in the right direction is still a moron.; 4/4/11, 12:15 PM
Chip Ahoy said...: What would it take to acknowledge?

Is this a trick question? Because if it is, I'm going to be really mad.

The answer appears to be self-evident. It will take the realization with some sense of dread that his own term eventually is followed by another, possibly with policies that contrast to his own, and the new mouthpiece could be could be as overtly contemptuous as himself. It will take the same self-regard and self-protection that is already widely noticed and a trace of class yet to be seen.; 4/4/11, 12:18 PM
Original Mike said...: "A conscience?"

Good answer.; 4/4/11, 12:18 PM
Big Mike said...: What would it take for Obama to say Bush was right?

You're joking, right?; 4/4/11, 12:19 PM
Fred4Pres said...: He has learned to stop digging.; 4/4/11, 12:22 PM
Paul said...: "decent amount of respect for his predecessor?"

Obama? Give respect to any Republican? Ann you are asking to much from the Messiah.

To think the Great Satan was right (and we know he was) just is to much for the Anointed One to bear!

And this happens on the same day Jimmy Carter visits his buddy Fidel Castro just when he arrested 227 political citizens (if you can call them that in a communist country) that month.

Gotta love those far left liberals!; 4/4/11, 12:23 PM
Anonymous said...: "I read that article three times..."

Way to scintillate FLS.

Now I see.heh; 4/4/11, 12:24 PM
The Drill SGT said...: FLS said..."George, thank you for well and truly screwing the pooch, making it impossible to try KSM in a civilian court with any hope of securing a conviction."

Obviously Holder and Obama, two experts in criminal and Constitutional law disagreed, as does the NYT.

All three, months ago, said that KSM could get a fair trial in a Federal Court. Today, they blame Congress for the paranoia, not anything Bush did.; 4/4/11, 12:35 PM
Sigivald said...: Ah, remember when it was a Dark Stain On America's Moral Standing for someone captured fighting Americans out of uniform to be imprisoned and tried before a military tribunal?

Yeah, me either.

That said, I thought that was the correct policy then, and I'm happy the President finally figured that out - it's only been two years!; 4/4/11, 12:40 PM
mrkwong said...: Those who ever thought that KSM would sit in a civilian dock without a mass revolt in the country really need detox.

The biggest problem with everything Bush did - and everything Obama's now doing - is the time factor.

The inability to do anything promptly seems to be emblematic of the overlawyering of war.

We could, and should, have had a military court system established within 120 days of the first combatant captures in Afghanistan. We could, and should, have had trials under that system commencing no later than 180 days from capture. And we could, and should, have had sentences pronounced and served thereafter.

Of course, ten years of internment is nothing compared to ten years of an eighteen-month war.; 4/4/11, 12:46 PM
zbogwan99 said...: Poor Pres. Obama is such a weak hypocrite at the least. Now that he's announcing his reelection he flip flops on his Gitmo hammered in stone policy?

I can't see the One having the courage to look at himself in a mirror and not being totally ashamed of himself?; 4/4/11, 12:47 PM
virgil xenophon said...: WRONG, Sigivald, Obama et al haven't "finally figured it out" at all, they've just been pushed into a corner. They're about as repentant about their original decisions as Sylvester is when he is forced to spit Tweety-bird out, or when hailed as "hero" for "saving" (accidentally) Tweety's life. Ever see that squinty-eyed, furrowed brow, hunched-down pained look Sylvester displays when forced onto the podium to accept the "honors?" THAT look TOTALLY, I am sure, reflects the attitude of Obama, Holder, et al for being forced into this public flip-flop..; 4/4/11, 12:59 PM
Anonymous said...: What an amazing couple of weeks it's been for Obama.

Just over 2 years into his Presidency he catches up to Palin on energy policy (Drill, Brazil, Drill).

Now he finally catches up to George W Bush in foreign policy excellence.

Just an incredible capacity to learn that young man has...; 4/4/11, 1:02 PM
Chennaul said...: NotYourTypicalNewYorker

No I knew you weren't disagreeing I just wanted to pile on the fact-that the decision by Holder and Obama might have to do with the money bag of the Democrat party-

Manhattan, getting all NIMBY.

(Not in my backyard-for the younger Liberals here...)

What will be interesting to watch is if Trump goes silent....; 4/4/11, 1:03 PM
virgil xenophon said...: Correct, mrkwong. Remember when the attempted assassin of FDR shot and killed Chicago's Mayor Cernak? He was tried and executed within 90 days IIRC.; 4/4/11, 1:09 PM
Chennaul said...: All politics is local

And if it's Manhattan where all the Democrat hedge fund managers live ...well....

The largest Democrat campaign donors- probably all have at least a "pied a terre" in Manhattan.; 4/4/11, 1:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Holder on TV right now with a paper bag over his head explaining, explaining, explaining.

The unknown Atty. General.; 4/4/11, 1:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Holder: "It is still our intention to close Guantanamo."

ya and I still intend to surpass the wealth of Soros.; 4/4/11, 1:19 PM
vnjagvet said...: AG Holder's statement today sounds particularly petulant. He is not a happy camper that his decision to prosecute in US federal court has been overridden. He aims most of his anger at Congress's restrictions on having a trial in the US.

Wow.; 4/4/11, 1:20 PM
AllenS said...: obama doesn't have a clue about anything. He never has and he never will.; 4/4/11, 1:23 PM
Rialby said...: FLS - "George, thank you for well and truly screwing the pooch, making it impossible to try KSM in a civilian court with any hope of securing a conviction."

Uhhh, see you stumbled onto a correct answer there FORMERls. When you try someone in an American court of law, you're always just hoping that you get a conviction. There's always a chance that some lawyer can convince a bunch of morons that their defendant is not guilty - see Orenthal Simpson v. POCA. It was never a good reason to leave this up to a civilian court for this and many other reasons.; 4/4/11, 1:26 PM
Chennaul said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/4/11, 1:31 PM
Phil 314 said...: Janet Reno, John Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzalez and now Eric Holder.

Boy becoming the Attorney General has not been kind to one's reputation.; 4/4/11, 1:39 PM
JAL said...: Of course they want it both ways! What else would one expect from this bizarre administration.

They won't try him in NY because of Congress (!!!) but it was the right decision to decide to do that to start with(!!!!) But boy are we glad we are off *that* hook. (!!!!!)

(Phew!); 4/4/11, 1:40 PM
JAL said...: Holder: "It is still our intention to close Guantanamo."

His mama never told him about good intentions and roads, I guess.

But I'm all good with not closing that place down until KSM & Co. they all die of old age. If not of something else.; 4/4/11, 1:45 PM
Chennaul said...: Cripes I deleted my last comment because I am getting my terrorists mixed up.

But the arguments of the Liberals who wanted the terrorists committing acts of war treated as US citizens I think started with the-

USS Cole.

That was an act of war, and should have been treated as an attack on the US.

Instead Clinton did the "lawyerly" equivocation and treated the US sailors as something less than average US citizens. In fact it took an attack on US territory and citizens that was unequivocal for the terrorists to get our attention.

Glenn Greenwald and Andrew Sullivan wanted more rights for the terrorists than any other previous terrorist actor-and they want them treated as American citizens. (-all the greater irony when considering that the US sailors killed in the US Cole attack were treated as something less than.)

That Glenn Greenwald and Andrew Sullivan are driven mad by their own machinations is a particularly fine justice.; 4/4/11, 1:49 PM
Anonymous said...: This is not what Obama explicitly promised to do during his presidential campaign.

Therefore, we must have a referendum and a recall election.; 4/4/11, 1:49 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @shouting thomas:

Therefore, we must have a referendum and a recall election.

Damn right. This is what FLS would no doubt say.

Obama campiagned against GTMO, he campaigned against wars undertaken without a clear a present threat and Congressional authorization, campaigned against the Patriot Act, campaigned against military trials of terrorists, and he has reneged on all these positions.

He has kept GTMO open, he has attacked Libya, he has signed the Patriot Act into law a second time, and he is now going back to military tribunals.

I eagerly look forward to FLS' denunciations, because certainly he's no opportunist hack who only applies his principles to his opponents.; 4/4/11, 2:03 PM
Alex said...: One side is in a 1000 year committed struggle to destroy Western civilization. The other side is eagerly salivating for the new iPad. Guess which side is going to win?; 4/4/11, 2:22 PM
2yellowdogs said...: ADDED: What would it take for Obama to say Bush was right... or anything close to that... just a decent amount of respect for his predecessor?

Better question. What would it take for someone in the press corps to ask him if his reversal means that Bush was right? Not sure which one is more (un)likely.; 4/4/11, 2:23 PM
The Drill SGT said...: 2yellowdogs said...
Better question. What would it take for someone in the press corps to ask him if his reversal means that Bush was right? Not sure which one is more (un)likely.

The NYT tries to fly cover for him by blaming Congress for Obama's inability to do the right and moral thing.

The Follow-up question would be, 'If it is an imperative to avoid losing the "moral authority that is America's strongest currency", why did he roll over and go back to Military Commissions without a fight?; 4/4/11, 2:49 PM
former law student said...: After the first WTC bombing, Sheik Abdel Rahman, Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, and a dozen others were tried and convicted in federal court. No military commissions or any other ad hoc tribunals needed to be set up to see justice done.; 4/4/11, 3:11 PM
Robin said...: The Empty Suit(tm) Attorney General of the Empty Suit(tm) Administration.; 4/4/11, 3:26 PM
Robin said...: The attempt to blame George W. Bush for not being able to try KSM is pretty hilarious.

If it wasn't about a serious topic that is.

But that's what Obama's defenders are reduced to - standup comedy.; 4/4/11, 3:29 PM
former law student said...: This is not what Obama explicitly promised to do during his presidential campaign.

Therefore, we must have a referendum and a recall election.

Obama tried yet failed to change the status quo in the way he had promised.

"A man's reach should exceed his grasp...

Walker tried (but not yet succeeded) to change the status quo in the way he had never even hinted at.; 4/4/11, 3:31 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @FLS:

Obama tried yet failed to change the status quo in the way he had promised.

That's a flat out lie.

He didn't FAIL to do what he promised, he did the OPPOSITE of what he promised.

Because hs has a D after his name, you do not hold him accountable.; 4/4/11, 3:41 PM
RuyDiaz said...: Pastafarian wrote:

No one can be stupid enough to think that a $1.4 trillion deficit is a positive; and that the coming spiral of an unsustainable interest on the debt can be averted by a sudden, dramatic upward movement of the economy doubling revenues.

Pastafarian, I have great news--sort of. People can be that stupid.

You can go to sleep soundly tonight. There is no conspiracy. There is only ideological fervor, and stubborness.; 4/4/11, 3:41 PM
former law student said...: The attempt to blame George W. Bush for not being able to try KSM is pretty hilarious.

Yes, Bush's putting the Bill of Rights through the shredder was so amusing. In the trial of Ahmed Ghailani, a US Federal judge propery excluded evidence obtained through torture, and the likelihood of a judge doing the same thing in the case of the 183-times-waterboarded KSM was too great to ignore.

But Bush had to destroy our values in order to preserve them, I suppose.; 4/4/11, 3:42 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @FLS:

Yes, Bush's putting the Bill of Rights through the shredder was so amusing.

And Obama is continuing and extending those policies despite an explicit promise to reverse them.

And you have NOTHING to say about it. Foru legs bad, two legs better.; 4/4/11, 3:45 PM
Bob said...: FLS, so you're okay with Obama doing a Bush then? As for "destroying our values", how do you reconcile "our values" and the Obama administration signing an assasination order on a US citizen? Even Bush didn't do that. And of course isn't the decision to continued imprisonment of KSM simply "destroying our values" recycled?; 4/4/11, 3:48 PM
Anonymous said...: fls,

I'm laughing my ass off.

This is industrial strength hypocrisy.

You don't have any values. Which we now know.

Well, you do have one value:

Dems does it = good. Repub does it = bad.; 4/4/11, 4:35 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: Holder's the kind of guy that, if this country was true to itself, people would be outside the White House with pitchforks until he was gone.; 4/4/11, 4:48 PM
mockmook said...: Last time I checked Congress doesn't set policy without passing a bill and having Presidential concurrence (or over-riding his veto).

A bill must be signed by the President (or vetoed).

Q: When did Obama try to veto this policy?

A: He didn't. He approved it.; 4/4/11, 5:01 PM
Anonymous said...: I put my sunglasses on because any minute now FLS is going to really start to scintillate and then....well you'll see.

Go ahead FLS.; 4/4/11, 5:05 PM
former law student said...: And Obama is continuing and extending those policies despite an explicit promise to reverse them.

Which policies?
Extraordinary rendition? Waterboarding?

You can't take an omelet and turn it back into two uncracked eggs.

The honorable alternative would be to let KSM walk despite his guilt. Is that what you would like?; 4/4/11, 5:45 PM
former law student said...: the Obama administration signing an assasination order on a US citizen?

Are you speaking of Anwar al-Awlaki? Let me break it down for you:

1. We are at war with al-Qaeda because of their 9/11 attacks on this country.
2. Anwar al-Awlaki is an al-Qaeda leader.
3. We can kill members of al-Qaeda because we are at war with them.
4. We can kill Anwar al-Awlaki because he is a member of al-Qaeda with whom we are at war.; 4/4/11, 5:53 PM
Brad said...: Maybe Congress shut down Holder/Obama's "civilian trial" idiocy because it was ... I dunno ... IDIOCY?????

No, that couldn't be it ...; 4/4/11, 6:08 PM
Phil 314 said...: FLS;
I don't like to pile on but I'm getting really confused by your arguments. So we're at war with Al Queda and that why we SHOULD? have civilian trials.

We're at war with Al Queda and that's why we should assassinate our enemies.

I'm not understanding your cohesive war policy as pertains to our war with Al Queda.; 4/4/11, 6:11 PM
Phil 314 said...: But it does seem consistent with AG Holder's; 4/4/11, 6:12 PM
Paul said...: Oh come on, we all now know Obama is a pussy Bush.

That is he is a wimp version of Dubya. I think secretly he wishes people would view him as a strong president, even as he wimps out (and that is why he blames Bush every time something goes wrong.)

Yes a pussy Bush he is.; 4/4/11, 6:30 PM
Jeremy said...: * Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, convicted, 1996, U.S. District Court (before then-U.S. District Judge Michael Mukasey) -- plotting terrorist attacks on the U.S. (currently: U.S. prison, Butler, North Carolina);

* Zacarias Moussaoui, convicted, 2006, U.S. Federal Court -- conspiracy to commit the 9/11 attacks (currently: U.S. prison, Florence, Colorado);

* Richard Reid, convicted, 2003, U.S. Federal Court -- attempting to blow up U.S.-bound jetliner over the Atlantic Ocean (currently: U.S. prison, Florence, Colorado);

* Jose Padilla, convicted, 2007, U.S. Federal Court -- conspiracy to commit terrorism (currently: U.S. prison, Florence, Colorado);

* Iyman Faris a/k/a/ Mohammad Rauf, convicted, 2003, U.S. Federal Court -- providing material support and resources to Al-Qaeda, conspiracy to commit terrorist acts on behalf of Al Qaeda (currently: U.S. prison, Florence, Colorado);
*
* Ali Saleh al-Marri, accused Al Qaeda operative -- not yet tried, held as "unlawful enemy combatant" (currently: U.S. Naval Brig, Hanahan, South Carolina);

* Masoud Khan, convicted, 2004, U.S. Federal Court -- conspiracy to commit terrorism as part of Lashkar-e-Taiba and Islamic jihad (currently: U.S. prison, Terre Haute, Indiana);

* John Walker Lindh, convicted, 2002, U.S. Federal Court -- providing material support to the Taliban (currently: U.S. prison, Florence, Colorado).; 4/4/11, 6:36 PM
Jeremy said...: Paul - YOu seem to know quite a bit abbout what it takes to be a pussy.

Pussy.; 4/4/11, 6:37 PM
Jeremy said...: And the bitching and whining about anything and everything Obama continues.

YOu people really need to get yourselves a life.

And you should think about reading more and posting teabagger drivel less.; 4/4/11, 6:39 PM
David said...: Holder is a bully. Call the police.; 4/4/11, 6:59 PM
former law student said...: So we're at war with Al Queda and that why we SHOULD? have civilian trials.

We have two alternatives regarding KSM: treat him humanely as a prisoner of war and detain him till the end of hostilities.

OR give him a "fair and regular" trial as one detained as a saboteur.

So, try him or detain him?

We're at war with Al Queda and that's why we should assassinate our enemies.

Candidate Obama repeated this message for over a year, remember?

“If the United States has Al Qaeda, bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights,” said Obama, “and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out.”

People criticized Obama for being willing to enter a sovereign nation to take out al-Qaeda leaders -- no one complained that we should not "take them out."; 4/4/11, 7:52 PM
Cedarford said...: Bob said...
I won't hold my breath for his apologies to Bush for completely demagoguing this issue in 2007-8.

============
Don't expect one from McCain or his toady-boy Lindsey Graham, who led the "close Gitmo!!" demagoguery that Obama just opportunistically followed.

Don't expect McCain, a Man of Total Honor (just ask him) to admit he was both stupid and treacherous for undercutting his Party's guy. McCain has made a 40 year effort at treachery, starting in the Hanoi Hilton.; 4/4/11, 8:50 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @FLS:

Candidate Obama repeated this message too:

As president, Barack Obama would revisit the PATRIOT Act to ensure that there is real and robust oversight of tools like National Security Letters, sneak-and-peek searches, and the use of the material witness provision.

but he signed it without revision in 2010.

Where's that fierce moral urgency of change, FLS?

He campaigned against deficits and doubled down on deficits. He campaigned against GTMO and keeps it open. He campaigned against military tribunals, he campaigned against unilateral military attacks by the President against nations that don't imminently threaten us.

I voted for McCain expecting Bush's third term. I got what I expected. But we now what you are--the D after the name is infinite absolution.

Four legs good, two legs better. That's all you got.; 4/4/11, 8:51 PM
Fen said...: FLS: In the trial of Ahmed Ghailani, a US Federal judge propery excluded evidence obtained through torture, and the likelihood of a judge doing the same thing in the case of the 183-times-waterboarded KSM was too great to ignore.

But Bush had to destroy our values in order to preserve them, I suppose.

FLS reveals the ignorance of the Left on this one. Bush was gathering intelligence to prevent another 9-11, he was not gathering evidence for a trial.

Republicans act to prevent another attack. Democrats prefer to react after such an attack.

Its why Clinton let OBL slip through the first time: he was worried there was not enough evidence to convict.; 4/5/11, 1:15 AM
Fen said...: But I guess Obama is a War Criminal now too, eh Libtards?; 4/5/11, 1:15 AM
Fen said...: Walker tried (but not yet succeeded) to change the status quo in the way he had never even hinted at.

To believe that, you have to completely ignore Walker's 8 year history as county executive.

And of course, all the Union pamphlets during the election hyperventilating on how Walker would "bust" the Unions.

But yah, other than that...; 4/5/11, 1:25 AM
Beldar said...: It would be easier to pass a camel through the eye of a needle than to get Obama to give Dubya due credit on anything.; 4/5/11, 4:38 AM
former law student said...: He campaigned against deficits

Oh, really? When and where?

and doubled down on deficits.

Goppers wouldn't let the tax break for the highest-income earners expire.; 4/5/11, 10:30 AM
Gabriel Hanna said...: @FLS:

Oh, so besides "four legs good, two legs better" you have "cite please"?

OBAMA: Every dollar I’ve proposed, I’ve proposed an additional cut hat it matches. To give an example, we spend $15 billion a year on subsidies to insurance companies. It doesn’t help seniors get better. It’s a giveaway. I want to go through the federal budget line by line, programs that don’t work, we cut. Programs we need, we should make them work better. Once we get through this economic crisis, we’re going to have to embrace a culture of responsibility, all of us, corporations, the federal government, & individuals who may be living beyond their means.

...I understand your frustration and your cynicism. Most of the people here, you’ve got a family budget. If less money is coming in, you end up making cuts. Maybe you don’t go out to dinner as much. Maybe you put off buying a new car. That’s not what happens in Washington. And you’re right. There is a lot of blame to go around.

But I think it’s important just to remember a little bit of history. When George Bush came into office, we had surpluses. And now we have half-a-trillion-dollar deficit annually. When George Bush came into office, our national debt was around $5 trillion. It’s now over $10 trillion. We’ve almost doubled it.

And so while it’s true that nobody’s completely innocent here, we have had over the last 8 years the biggest increases in deficit spending and national debt in our history. And Sen. McCain voted for 4 out of 5 of those George Bush budgets.

FLS, making excuses again:

Goppers wouldn't let the tax break for the highest-income earners expire.

Obama wouldn't request trillions in tax hikes to pay for his spending, and when his party had supermajorities in both houses they made no attempt to cut spending and they did not raise taxes either.

Just this last week Reid said $30 billion in cuts was unacceptable! Do you think nobody noticed that he said that?

You know that perfectly well. Again, the D provides infinte absolution, as everyone here knows.; 4/5/11, 5:49 PM