President Obama's administration is taking a radically new approach toward suspects in the 9/11 attacks.  Some trials will be in the civilian courts.

Is anyone shocked? This should do wonders for Obama's popularity polls.

So..let's get this straight...the alledged master-mind of the worst attack on America soil by outside forces in the history of our nation, Kahlid Sheikh Muhammed will get a federal civil trial...and of course the waterboarding issue will arise during the trial and perhaps allow the scumbag's lawyers to let him walk....it's feasible

Holder will also announce that a major suspect in the bombing of the USS Cole, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, will face justice before a military commission,

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/13/self-proclaimed-sept-mastermind-face-trial-ny/

gary

>> So..let's get this straight...the alledged master-mind of the worst attack on America soil by outside forces in the history of our nation, Kahlid Sheikh Muhammed will get a federal civil trial. <<

I expect it'll be a federal criminal trial, Gary.

A federal criminal trial tried in a civil court.

Self-proclaimed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other Guantanamo Bay detainees will be sent to New York to face trial in a civilian federal court. An official announcement is expected later today.

http://www.newser.com/story/73968/mastermind-of-911-to-face-trial-in-nyc.html

gary

The normal federal jury pools will suffice.

I've got a problem with that.  It seems to me that at this point, it would take little to make a valid argument for contamination of the jury pool.  This guy's picture --and assumed guilt-- have been splashed all over the news media without pause for several years now.  It would be like the infamous Sam Sheppard case (the one the show "The Fugitive" was based on).  There would inevitably be a circus atomosphere around the whole thing.

Is the terminology confusing you?

 It will be a federal trial...in a civilian court. Yes Michael..it will be a criminal trial. Those 9-11 perps are criminals..allegedly. They'll probably have excellent lawyers..and why not? Some of them may even walk...we'll have to wait and see.

It isn't the terminology that confuses me...it's the current administration and those who support every move they make that confounds me..

gary

gordon>>This may be Obama's worst decision yet.

This guy appears to be incredibly out of touch and idealistic; only Jimmy Carter comes close.

I can already forsee him calling up a Justice Summit after the trials hopelessly gets boged down. All Sheriffs, boy scouts, Judges, civil rights activists are called to a major Justice Summit in DC by Obama to discuss how to get terrorists back in jail where they belong.

gordon>> These five terrorists will be provided with all of the Constitutional protections that American citizens have. It's easy to imagine the following exchange:

Q: Mr. Mohammed, were the Miranda Rights read to you before any questioning took place?
A:  No

Defense Attorney: Your Honor, we move for the exclusion of any evidence obtained as a direct or indirect result of anything my client might have said or implied during any questioning or conversation.

Judge: So ordered.<<

Right now Obama is trying to blame his incompetence in Afghanistan on Karzai. That is not surprising. Obama and co are hoping that the Courts will oblige them by not doing their duties and setting Mr Mohammad free; soon the messiah will start grumbling about not having a partner in the court system <g>

gordon>>This is just another, and the most egregious, example that Obama is completely unqualified for the job. He's permanently locked in campaign mode because that's all his handlers know how to do.<<

He cannot believe that the crowds that thronged to his campaign rallies may not be still there.

So..let's get this straight...the alledged master-mind of the worst attack on America soil by outside forces in the history of our nation, Kahlid Sheikh Muhammed will get a federal civil trial...and of course the waterboarding issue will arise during the trial and perhaps allow the scumbag's lawyers to let him walk....it's feasible

It's not a civil trial, and yes you are right about the dangers, in law, of waterboarding.

The answer, of course, was not to go against the law like that in the first place.

However, FWIW, I have more confidence in the due process of law than you do.

After all, it is one of the things that makes America better than these terrorists.  Isn't it?

-David C.

Under what theory (other than a political campaign) are terrorists entitled to the full protection of the US Constitution?

I have no idea.

I was talking about the law. In fact, didn't I use that word  -    'law'?

I have a question now.  Under what theory does it say that it's illegal to commit murder, or computer fraud, or cycling on the wrong side of the road, in the US Constitution?

-David C.