It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Graham moves to block Obama from trying 9/11 suspects in U.S.

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is trying to prevent the Obama administration from holding criminal trials in civilian courts for the alleged Sept. 11 plotters instead of bringing them before military commissions.

Graham, who helped craft the 2006 law that established the military commissions, said Friday that he'd attached an amendment to an appropriations bill that would prohibit the Obama administration from spending money on the prosecution and trial of the accused terrorists before U.S. civilian federal judges.

"Khalid Sheik Mohammed needs to be tried in a military tribunal," Graham said. "He's not a common criminal. He took up arms against the United States."


Read more at Source

SOURCE

[edit on 9-10-2009 by TrainDispatcher]



Mod Edit: to apply external quote code, please review this link
Mod Edit: Posting work written by others, please review this link



[edit on 20/10/09 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Train
I really don't get the conspiracy angle here but I am glad to see even a glimmer of possible legal action concerning the Tragedies.
I started a thread a while ago---- Where are the Tort [liars) lawyers of 911.
It would be nice if you posted your link on that thread.
donny



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Doesn't the fact that the attacks where against a civilian target, in a City, decide where the trial will take place?

I would have hoped that the People of NYC, and the American people would have the right to see justice being done, with open and public access to all the information.

If it is done before a Military tribunal, then surely there are different rules, and not all the details are available for scrutiny by those effected by these events, which is the whole reason for a trial in the first place I would have thought.

The people responsible for this, did so before America was at War, I just don't understand why it has to be done by the Military, unless there is a deliberate attempt to keep some aspects out of the public eye, which is not in any way Fair, just, or Moral for the people effected and hurt in so many ways IMO.



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 01:56 AM
link   
This is an odd precaution to take on a bill,perhaps Senator Graham is worried about what might be revealed during the discovery phase of a 9/11 trail.Also he has vested interest in keeping those military commissions going they are apart of his legacy so he does not want anything that can undermine his standing in history.



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 06:29 AM
link   
reply to post by TrainDispatcher
 


Then try them in a neutral country where kangeroo show trials are illegal, and where the US Government cannot hide behind corrupt bought judges.

True justice in America is a complete joke anymore.

Obama is just as corrupt as the presidents preceding him. The US Military has to be protected from their political crimes and lying under oath to the 9-11 Whitewash Commission. High ranking Generals need to be protected from their dereliction of duty and incompetence and treason and lying under oath. There is nothing just with controlled military tribunals. They are used to protect the aggressor nations and punish the defeated.

No more banana republic political show trials for political gain. Let us try an actual investigation into 9-11 first, and perhaps that too should be done by a neutral country.

Canada; would you like to volunteer for your totally corrupt war loving southern neighbor?




posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by azzllin
Doesn't the fact that the attacks where against a civilian target, in a City, decide where the trial will take place?



I think the staus of the accused makes the difference.

Not where it took place.

If what you're saying has merit, then I would expect that if someone would to suicide boat-bomb another warship while in Yemen, then he/she should be tried there.....

Kinda doubt it would happen that way.



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli

Originally posted by azzllin
Doesn't the fact that the attacks where against a civilian target, in a City, decide where the trial will take place?



I think the staus of the accused makes the difference.

Not where it took place.

If what you're saying has merit, then I would expect that if someone would to suicide boat-bomb another warship while in Yemen, then he/she should be tried there.....

Kinda doubt it would happen that way.


joke canoli

First off--- who, whom are the accused you refer to?
Who is or are the accusers?
What the hell does Yemen have to do with 911?



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


Joey, you are doing an amazing job of displaying your ignorance of American law. Please take a trip to your local library and look into a few things including what decides the location of a trial.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join