« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The Terrorists Will Plead Not Guilty

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  November 22nd, 2009 at 08:05 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

It should not be surprising to learn, though it may make your blood pressure go up. The terrorists who orchestrated 9/11 and masterminded the deaths of thousands of Americans will plead not guilty. They will use their case to try American foreign policy.

Fox News has the details.

Scott Fenstermaker, the lawyer for accused terrorist Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, said the men would not deny their role in the 2001 attacks but “would explain what happened and why they did it.”

The trial of Zacarius Moussaoui tied up the federal courts for six years and he had pled guilty. How long will the American court system be tied up with pleas of not guilty and claims that America made them do it?

Tags: , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    yet this is the warped LIBERAL mindset that is to be put on display with the continued BLAME AMERICA policy of Democrats! Everyone was warned, this was obvious it would come, yet so many will still attempt to FEIGN SURPRISE!

  • George Neitz

    Until the next President is sworn in and remands the guilty $%^$tards to the nearest execution squad.

  • http://www.meetup.com/dcworksforus Kenny Solomon

    Mr. Scott L. Fenstermaker, Esq. (New York) is the lead attorney for defendant Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali and is representing his client pro bono (NY Times article).

    Mr. Fenstermaker’s firm’s website: http://www.fenstermakerlaw.com

    A Wikipedia page (as usual there, full vetting of information is not guaranteed): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_L._Fenstermaker

    Mr. Fenstermaker seems to have a bit of an interesting history challenging things vis-a-vie the government. Take a trip through the official public documents and you’ll see.

    ————-

    Ask yourself the following questions regarding this trial:

    1. Who are the defendant’s attorneys and their firms ?

    2. What (if any) are the attorney’s firm’s, partner’s, individual attorney’s and other staff’s connections to the current administration and people within the government ?

    3. What are the firm’s, partner’s, individual attorney’s and other staff’s contributions to the current administration – financial and other methods (like overtly campaigning and/or lobbying) ?

    4. Where are the firm’s and attorney’s retainers and all fees coming from ?

    —————-

    Pro bono my arse. The legal eagle part of this trial is going to cost millions of dollars at minimum, even if they move for (and receive) a mistrial on day one.

    On question 4, my gut instinct says the answer is C.A.I.R.

    ——————-

    I’m a member of a group called ‘DC Works For Us’ and part of our internet setup is a message board. I’ve asked some of our members to help me research all attorneys working this case and post their findings to the board (Obviously, all info posted must be vetted-to-accurate and verifiable.).

  • raydawggie

    (Well, a New Jerseyan who went to school in NY) this is a defense attorney’s dream. You can’t throw a stone in NY without hitting a “truther” or some overeducated America-hating granola liberal. And the defense attorneys will make sure that’s who compose the jury. The death penalty will never happen – there’ll be at least one person who thinks “we should be better”. And a mistrial is a definite possibility. This will drag out until the first mistrial, when hopefully the new Republican President will kick this back to the tribunals and end this farce.

  • samdallas

    intrade.com which is one of the coolest sites ever has odds on trial being cancelled.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    (not advocating, just analyzing) once the Show-Trials begin they will not be able to go back the other way. Others can and will be prevented from going this route, and the Democrats know/understand that, but they will have already had what they wanted – precedence, a blame-America Show-Trial, etc… Remember, Liberals base everything not on CONSTITUTIONALITY but precedence and will do anything to set one that fits their Politics rather than what is best for the Nation. Doesn’t matter to them that the new precedence they want to set ignores all other prior precedence, they just want a new one for Liberal Activist Judges to hang their hats on going forward!

    As I pointed out above…. flying planes into buildings is, however, never going to get “allowed” as Self-Defense – no matter how they wish to DogAndPony this thing.

  • raydawggie

    I wish I could be optimistic, but Captain Obama seems like the type to keep on chasing that white whale named “World Opinion” to the bitter end.

    Of course, that could help Senator Giuliani become a reality, so there are some pluses.

  • samdallas
  • http://www.laborunionreport.blogspot.com LaborUnionReport

    If these terrorists are to be tried as though they are U.S. citizens (the same rights conferred), what happens when their defense attorneys raise the fact that they were not given their “Miranda Rights”?

    If they were Mirandized, it is assumed that their confessions are null and void.

    And, since their hands were not on the controls of any of the planes, the government BETTER have some strong evidence other than their confessions. If not, it is possible that they could go free, is it not?

    Pathetic.

  • http://www.laborunionreport.blogspot.com LaborUnionReport

    sorry.

  • Tim

    Yeah. They can claim whatever the hell they like.

    They’ll be shown to be wrong and put to death. Might take a little longer than other ways, but it’ll happen.

    I don’t mind this is happening in civillian courts. They’re still going to be proved wrong, hell, let’s do it in public, open to the scrutiny of the world ans show them again for the deluded fools they are.

    Bring it on.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    That would be either “being Oswald-ed” or “pulling a Ruby” for proper phrasing.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I hope they’re gunned down like the dogs they are. I’ll buy the shooter a pizza.

  • http://www.redstate.com/tnjim TNJim
  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    but I will certainly cheer about it within the confines of my Home. Not something to openly advocate, I suppose – which is why I was trying to be careful in my phrasing. Again, not advocating, just provided as analysis of a potential. Though, it isn’t necessarily over the line for one to want ENEMIES FIGHTING US IN WAR to be KILLED IN THAT WAR no matter the Theater (war terms) they are hiding within.

  • ciscoguy

    What kind of precedent does this set? Enemy combatants we pick up off the battlefield in foreign countries get protection under the US Constitution? Have you lost your mind?

    These guys are enemy combatants in civilan clothing – the only thing they are entitled to under the Geneva is a bullet in the head.

    If I didn’t want KSM dead so much, I’d almost wish he walked out like OJ to teach this arrogant, rookie president what happens when you gamble with national security for the sake political gain and pleasing Europe. Since when in the blue F are we beholden to them?! At what point can this be considered treachery?

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    anything that hopefully helps get through the clutter and into people’s heads and further hopefully bypasses the Liberal knee-jerk reaction to spout Democrat Talking Points is always my goal. Gotta catch them off-guard in order to get through their Indoctrination. I’m always looking for oddball analogies (as I call them – MetaSixes, since I’m too clever to bother with Metaphores ;-) lol) and quotes to those ends.

    That “The new LA Purchase” that Dan Perrin started is a good one.

  • throwback59

    the C.I.A. and American foreign policy on trial. Is that any different than what the Obama administration wants to do?

  • Achance

    That’s the whole point. Either that, or both Comrade Obama and AG Holder got more Affirmative Action help with their law degrees than I had imagined and maybe really don’t understand that they can’t convict these guys; you can’t put the due process toothpaste back in the tube.

  • ciscoguy

    So this is his way of doing it without the humiliation of actually losing the case – national security be damned.

  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit
  • http://www.ssce.net/Web-Articles/Web-articles-indexed-authors.html#authors-l JLenardDetroit

    as I pointed out above (more here).

  • ciscoguy

    besides the fact he was already on record saying KSM would be convicted and executed.

    What “ideals” are we holding ourselves to if our chief executive has already decided KSM is guilty and has a contingency plan if he’s actually acquitted?

    This is nothing more than a show trial for political gain, but it’s already begun to backfire. You know when Lindsey Graham of all people makes Eric Holder look like a first year law student last week, the administration is in touble.

    You know, I used to hate this president politically, but now it’s personal. I hope he gets his comeuppance, whatever way he gets it.

  • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

    This trial alone will overwhelm the system. People used to say, wow, Obama is doing huge things at lightning speed. Each of his moves from day one has overwhelmed the system. The massive pile up now is unspeakable. While people are up in arms about this trial, other frauds are going on. Money goes to non-existent towns, and instead of that being on the front pages for a year, it’s this trial which Obama and Soros planned long ago. (Not that the media would report on Obama fraud anyway).

  • TokyoNose

    One irony in this whole sordid business is that Obama and Holder, true believers in the concept of a “living constitution”, legislating from the bench and every other progressive liberal notion of “justice” aimed at undermining the rule of law in the United States, are now counting on this case landing in the courtroom of a strict, unsympathetic and objective judge, lest this thing become a greater farce than it already has. This judge may be all that stands between these scum and an acquittal.

    “Failure is not an option”, we are told (a statement which will become point #1 in the defense’s motion for a mistrial), but failure is a real possibility. This administration has gravely misjudged the American public if it believes that “failure” will be tolerated. They are way out over their skis on this thing; their misjudgment could bring them down.

    None of this is surprising. Candidate, and now President Obama, has again and again displayed a cynical contempt for the opinions of his fellow countrymen, the great unwashed masses that we are, and can hardly conceal his sense of shame for the country which he was chosen to lead. He is more concerned with placating the objections of the “world community” than representing the interests of the people who voted for him. Serving two masters led him to create this mess; satisfying neither could hasten his end.

  • nateleyswhore

    We should start a fund to start buying billboard space in Manhattan publicizing the names of the attorneys who represent these murderers. I know that’s what they want, but I think it could backfire on them.

  • skorrent1

    The truly scary thing is the precedent that would be set by a series of convictions, upheld by SCOTUS, of defendants so clearly denied so much of what we accept as “due process” in civilian courts. If they could do it to them, could they do it to the rest of Homeland Security’s “terror suspects”?

  • bk

    Even if you get by the no Miranda warning issue, everything the government got from them will get tossed: torture = coerced confession = violation of 5th amendment that they’re now protected by. Violation of 4th amendment also possible. Violation of 6th amendment if the gov’t doesn’t turn over all sorts of secret info. And of course KSM’s new 8th amendment rights were violated 182 times along the way.

  • RedBeard

    It was Holder. Obama had NOTHING to do with the decision. I know, because he said so. And we all know that Obama is running the Most Transparent Administration ever in the history of the country.

    Right?

  • mschmitt
  • clowngirl

    So the terrorists admitted to planning the murders of over 3000 people but want to use the “trial” as a megaphone to spew their hate for America and try and recruit terrorists? And Obama and Holder are allowing this?

    This is stupid, disgusting and disgraceful beyond words. Obama is undermining our security and endagering our country with his warped ideas and lack of judgement. Is there no way of stopping this?

  • jr72

    I still think that Obama is a closet Muslim. He does not consider the attack at Fort Hood as a terrorist attack and does not believe that it is a war against terrorism. He will go out of his way to apologise for us and bow to our enemies(past and present) but not to our allies. His should be a one term presidency but the damage will have been done.

  • solvoreor

    Is there a way to tie this up in court until after the next election.
    I realize we may not get a majority but if we did, committee chairmen could take action against him specifically and replace him or render him harmless before any more damage could be done.

  • http://www.laborunionreport.blogspot.com LaborUnionReport

    …or the case gets tossed, right?

    Besides the Left using it to humiliate Bush, if KSM walks free (for about 10 minutes before Obama detains him…LOL!…or he gets “Rubied” as suggested elsewhere), does that not spell disaster for Obama?

  • rivahmitch

    I learned a long time ago that you should never allow your enemies to control your semantic or your thoughts. … I’d not cheer but I’d quietly raise a celebratory drink at their execution…. Now, if Fenstermaker, the more dangerous enemy, were to suffer an accident (as described in “The Godfather”),THAT would call for a public celebration.
    Neil: If you wind up buying a pizza, I’ll chip in for a beer.