Scott Fenstermaker attorney for the 9/11 terrorists on O'reilly

[Adam-12]

That's good, because he got a fair trial, where he was found guilty in a civilian court in 2007.

After being held without charges, and subjected to enhanced interrogation, for almost two years. Can I get a "Hell Yeah!"? That's what I'm talking about: putting the trial first is ass-backwards. I'm glad the scumbag wasn't allowed to hide behind his citizenship.

[Adam-12]

More importantly, how will evidence be introduced?

Evidence is too good for these murdering scum. A government official should swear on the Bible, take the stand, and say, "These men are guilty. I've seen lots of proof, which is secret. Take my word for it." Then the jury should break for lunch, and come back with a guilty verdict.

But since you can't trust juries to do the right thing, I think these vermin should be executed before the trial anyway. The point of a trial is just to give the American people closure; we already know they're guilty.

[NikeBauer21]

How could anyone defend those pricks?! Some of these lawyers are the shit of the earth. to stoop to that level, is just amazing. Burn in hell you moral-less bastard.. along with your upstanding clients...

[unloved]

How could anyone defend those pricks?! Some of these lawyers are the shit of the earth.

Yeah, we'd all be much better off if defense attorneys weren't allowed.

[ehidle]

You're taking a weak-kneed liberal stance here. What if they weren't apprehended by our military, and they weren't on the field of battle? The scumbags getting fair trials they don't deserve weren't caught by our military, and they weren't caught on the field of battle:

• Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - Arrested by Pakistani intelligence officers
• Ammar al Baluchi - Arrested in Karachi, Pakistan, by Pakistani authorities
• Walid bin Attash - Arrested in Karachi along with al Baluchi by Pakistani authorities
• Ahmed Ghailani - Arrested by by Pakistani authorities
• Ramzi Binalshibh - Arrested by Pakistani intelligence
• Mustafa al-Hawsawi - Arrested by Pakistani authorities

I hope you won't advocate fair trials for them just because they were arrested by the Pakistani authorities far away from any field of battle? Murdering foreign scum aren't entitled to any of our American justice, and the fact that they managed not to be caught by American soldiers shouldn't change that.

I am not in favor of giving these people fluffy media circus trials in cream-puff civilian courts in the US. I am in favor of them going through an expedient and efficient military system that will (hopefully) not have to account to the media and the ACLU. They still get their due process, but it's a process that will be executed based upon a ruleset that is more appropriate to their situation.

Tell me please: what would be wrong with conferring the Bill of Rights upon every living human being on the planet? Should not every person in the world enjoy the right to disagree with their government, defend themselves against attack, confront their accusers in a court of law in front of an impartial jury, be free of unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and so on?

I think it's despicable what these people have done and they are the lowest form of life there is, but just the same, I would sleep better at night knowing that they were convicted by court of law and deprived of their lives after due process, than if we just took them out back and stoned them to death in a vat of boiling acid.

Maybe I'm doing a 180 to some degree here, but I think the world would be a very different place if people everywhere enjoyed the same freedoms that we do.

[adymond]

Evidence is too good for these murdering scum. A government official should swear on the Bible, take the stand, and say, "These men are guilty. I've seen lots of proof, which is secret. Take my word for it." Then the jury should break for lunch, and come back with a guilty verdict.

But since you can't trust juries to do the right thing, I think these vermin should be executed before the trial anyway. The point of a trial is just to give the American people closure; we already know they're guilty.

Adam-12, please cut the shit. You aren't addressing what is a legitimate issue. I don't know if you are getting your rocks off trying to be funny, but it's getting old.

Assume all the evidence is ruled to be non-admissable. Did they get a fair trial? Is justice served by releasing them? Where do they get released to? Who's responsibility is it to ensure their safety in tranist?

Let's flip that around and assume there is evidence that is admissable. Can it be cross examined? Can the method of gaining that evidence be brought into question and examined? How does that impact future trials for suspected terrorists? If a CIA agent is able to procure evidence and then not be placed upon the stand to discuss the method of procurment or the details surrounding the evidence collection in effect that evidence can not really be challenged effectively. If evidence can be submitted that was supplied before they were Mirandized how does that impact us in the future?

[NikeBauer21]

Yeah, we'd all be much better off if defense attorneys weren't allowed.

Did I say that? Show me exaclty where I said that??

Man, we can always count on you to jump in with your worthless one-timers cant we... Seriously dude, it's getting really old...

[Adam-12]

Assume all the evidence is ruled to be non-admissable. Did they get a fair trial? Is justice served by releasing them?

Yes to both. I'd rather see Judas Iscariot go free, than punish an innocent man. The founders agreed. Anyone who disagrees is not an American and deserves to be stripped of his citizenship and deported. If they're afraid their evidence will be excluded because it was extracted with torture, then stop fucking torturing people.

[unloved]

Man, we can always count on you to jump in with your worthless one-timers cant we... Seriously dude, it's getting really old...

If you don't like what I have to say, don't read my posts. Seriously, dude.

[adymond]

Yes to both. I'd rather see Judas Iscariot go free, than punish an innocent man. The founders agreed. Anyone who disagrees is not an American and deserves to be stripped of his citizenship and deported. If they're afraid their evidence will be excluded because it was extracted with torture, then stop fucking torturing people.

Pot meet kettle. I guess we are done here.

There is legitimate evidence that had been collected as well as a confession given freely prior to enhanced interrogation that should also be thrown out because he was never Mirandized and evidence collected by covert operatives will never meet the standards of our criminal courts. Not to mention some of the evidence had been collected by foreign covert operatives further obscuring the ability to effectively present/challenge it in a criminal court of law.

You can sit there and type away all self rightious and pretend you are at one with the Founders, but that's just a bunch of bullshit as none of us know what the Founders would have said. Hell I would bet many of them would have said KSM should have been sumarilly executed. I believe we didn't tolerate pirates very well, and I don't see today's terrorists as being that different. Because I don't agree that it would be best to have KSM tried in a US criminal court is the appropriate venue to fully vet and examine the evidence before declaring that it is all bogus and KSM be set free I am somehow not worthy of citizenship? Well fuck you. You are no different than the idiots who you condemn that have held positions of power. If anyone disagrees with you they should be deported and stripped of their citizenship. I think you have lost your way when it comes to what our Founders intended. It was not a land of zombies that refused to allow dissent and differing views. Even on the degree of Liberty afforded to citizens of this nation.