Key '9/11 plotter' due in court

[Stealhead]

I take it know one has yet heard:

I know it is Al Jazeera English by the way it was the only video news link I could find

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/n...,6952315.story

The defense attorneys should feel ashamed of themselves for their actions.

I take it know one has yet heard:

Did you expect any different?
this is only another small chapter in the fiasco, the actual trial isn't going to start for another year and even then will probably drag on for years.

The defense attorneys should feel ashamed of themselves for their actions.

All parties who have made a mess of this process from start to finish should be ashamed of themselves.

[Jimbuna]

Simply playing to the nedia/stage whilst trying to buy time.

The minute glass has been turned and their sands of time will eventually run out.

[BossMark]

I just can not understand how anyone can defend garbage like this (the lawyers). I could not represent vermin like this no matter how much I was offered.

[Sailor Steve]

"Every defendant deserves good counsel."
-John Adams, on why he agreed to defend the accused in the 'Boston Massacre' trial. He won the case, but destroyed his legal career in the process.

[Oberon]

Indeed, the rule of law, you start skipping little bits and eventually you end up in Freisler territory.

[mapuc]

What do you say about this?

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/gua...5/07/id/438251


Markus

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by mapuc

What do you say about this?

I say it's a blatant attempt to control the proceedings under the guise of protecting their rights. It's a simple matter of trying to be in charge. The accused have rights, under the "innocent until proven guilty" mandate. Among those is not the right to subvert the law for their own use. It's too bad they don't grant others those same rights.

Indeed, the rule of law, you start skipping little bits and eventually you end up in Freisler territory.

To which you should include the attempts at skipping which have led to fiasco.

What do you say about this?

So is she saying her clients are a bunch of wonkers who can't control themselves?

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I say it's a blatant attempt to control the proceedings under the guise of protecting their rights. It's a simple matter of trying to be in charge. The accused have rights, under the "innocent until proven guilty" mandate. Among those is not the right to subvert the law for their own use. It's too bad they don't grant others those same rights.

Of course, the accused have certain rights. But to go so far as to demand that all women who are in that court, must be complete covered, is to go to its knees to their religion.

This comes as no surprise. Even our our Danish politician is pandering to this religion.

Markus

[u crank]

Originally Posted by mapuc

Of course, the accused have certain rights. But to go so far as to demand that all women who are in that court, must be complete covered, is to go to its knees to their religion.

This comes as no surprise. Even our our Danish politician is pandering to this religion.

Give in on this point and what's next? No none Muslims on bench or jury. No Jews in the courtroom. It's ridiculous.

[Takeda Shingen]

Should have tried this in NYC right in the shadow of Ground Zero. Most New Yorkers I know would have drooled over the chance to get him. Instead, we're dragging this out in the military system. He's been in custody since 2003, we're only starting this thing now and things won't get rolling again for another year. These people don't have to make a mockery of the system, we are doing a fine enough job of it ourselves.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by mapuc

Of course, the accused have certain rights. But to go so far as to demand that all women who are in that court, must be complete covered, is to go to its knees to their religion.

This comes as no surprise. Even our our Danish politician is pandering to this religion.

Markus

Originally Posted by u crank

Give in on this point and what's next? No none Muslims on bench or jury. No Jews in the courtroom. It's ridiculous.

Did you both miss the whole point of what I said? I didn't defend them, but agreed with you. Geez, you're as bad as Skybird!

Of course it's ridiculous.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Did you both miss the whole point of what I said? I didn't defend them, but agreed with you. Geez, you're as bad as Skybird!

Of course it's ridiculous.

Sorry Steve, I wasn't responding to your post. I read the link that Markus posted and was agreeing with his comment about the religious aspect of it.

I think that this lawyer is pulling a publicity stunt, perhaps looking to the future. Book deal, maybe.

[CaptainHaplo]

When found guilty (when, not if) - all 5 should be locked into the same room together, nude. They should be told that only one of them has been given a death sentence, but not told which one. They should be given less than enough food needed for them all, so as to make them fight to survive. When the first dies, leave the body and cut off the food. Make the body an attractive food option for the rest. *guards speculating what human flesh tasts like, etc. LWhen they eat the first, and are starving, they will kill another. When the the first 4 die and are consumed, then take the last one out, throw him into a full septic tank and watch him drown. Video it all for the Islamic masses to see their martys great "victory".

Let them see the wonder and glory of crossing the US. Let them get the image burned into their brain of how holy and celebratoryand glorious it is for these "martyrs" to make their way to allah.

If your going to do something - do it right....
Just sayin.....