U.S. To seek death penalty for Guantanamo prisoners with 9-11 ties

WASHINGTON —  The Defense Department is planning to charge six detainees at Guantanamo Bay with the Sept. 11 terror attacks on the United States and seek the death penalty.

Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman said an announcement of the charges could come Monday.

Military prosecutors also will ask for the death penalty for the attacks that killed nearly 3,000 Americans, according to a second official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the charges had not been announced.

www.foxnews.com...

I thought that the only prisoner they we're holding for the events related to 9-11 was KSM. It would be nice to see what kind of evidence they U.S. has against this guys.



[edit on 11-2-2008 by Bunch]

Wow! Before this comment, only the OP had posted. And yet "Because of member demand", this thread is under "close scrutiny".

Someone remind me again how the DHS adverts got on ATS?

On topic, the FBI still refuses to put Osama Bin Laden (neither the fat-nosed, nor the skinny-nosed one) on it's "10 Most Wanted" list, for lack of evidence in involvement in 9/11.

reply to post by Bunch


This has been an ongoing fight by defense attorneys, who many times are refused access to their clients. There is no proof the people being detained are guilty of anything.

All that is being allowed are private military tribunals with no media coverage allowed. All we have gotten so far is hearsay as put out by the White House PR spokespersons. It is unconstitutional for such indefensible actions to be taking place.

All the general public is fed are lies about detainees. They remain lies until those allegations are publicly proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Due process is a cornerstone of US constitutional law. Simply because biased people, in power, chose to call the US Constitution a gd piece of worthless paper does not make it so.

This has got to be stopped before any further deaths of innocents take place, in the name of lies by those in financial and political power to cover it up.

Originally posted by sir_chancealot
Wow! Before this comment, only the OP had posted. And yet "Because of member demand", this thread is under "close scrutiny".

Someone remind me again how the DHS adverts got on ATS?

That appears on all 9/11 Threads.

reply to post by Bunch


Can someone tell me why this isn't bigger news or being discussed in greater detail on here?

I'm perplexed by this.



[edit on 11-2-2008 by pmexplorer]

reply to post by pmexplorer


I think because this is not a thread about some exotic or extravagant complex CT and it doesnt involved hollograms, DEW, CD and any of that stuff.

Sadly this forum has come to that.

the cia planes with the suposed suspects of terrorists land on a island of my country(portugal) to refuel illegaly , still i dont know why international media doesnt care about this , even the leaders of my country are trying to swep this under the carpet

[Mod Edit]


Terms And Conditions Of Use

1h.) Spamming: You will not post identical content, or snippets of identical content, to multiple threads in the discussion forums. You will also not create more than one thread for your topic, or create multiple "slightly different" threads for a single topic.


[edit on 11/2/2008 by Sauron]

reply to post by Marquesa


Please read the forum rules and stop needlessly spamming
important threads like this with your off topic posts.

I too am shocked that this topic is not running wild, especially here on ATS. I saw it on the MSM news and was sure that I had missed out on the ground floor of this discussion.

So anyway, here are my thoughts directly on topic. My first observation was that they do not even have accurate pictures of the detainees in question. In fact, at least one was just one of those generic black profile shots over a name. Reminds me of the eight or nine 9/11 hijackers that turned up alive.

Now we have the question of evidence, and a fair trial. From what I saw, the military basically came right out and said that they gurantee a fair trial before they execute them. And even if they were to be acquitted at trial, that they could still be held "indefinately."

Then there is the whole death penalty thing itself. You can bet if these detainees were of any intelligence value, they would not be executed. So if these "top dogs" are of no intelligence value, then what are all the other prisoners being held for?

Our civilian criminal law usually prescribes the death penalty as a deterrent to crime. But in this arena, the death penalty serves no such purpose. In fact, the contrary is true. These prisoners will become martyrs to people who are already willing to blow themselves to kingdom come. So what possible value could the military place on executing these prisoners. You're never going to be able to kill them 3000+ times, so there will never be revenge. The only logical answer is that they intend to silence these prisoners from revealing things to the world that could prove detrimental to US politics.

"They didn't think the buildings would collapse..."

I just read the topic article in my own newspaper. I find this to be quite puzzling. It states Mohamed al-Kahtani is considered the 20th hijacker. Exactly, how was it he was caught hijacking, but ended up still being alive, and plans are to execute him via a kangeroo court type of secret military tribunal?

First there were 18. Then it was 19. Now there are 20, with one proved to still be alive, by the US bureaucrats.

How many more people are going to be labeled "9/11 hijackers and planners", of no proof, before something is done to seek the truth in a full objective independent hearing on 9/11/2001?

Any death sentences need to be delayed. In addition, detainees deserve to be given speedy due process per our US Constitution. They are given no right to face or question their accusers. The public has a right to know anything the detainees can tell us in their testimony.

It took me forever to refind this thread after logging in! This site's interface is simply not "user-friendly". Anyway ...

When I first saw this on mainstream news I wondered if Bush was going to expedite their trial and execution to "shred the evidence". Then, the article said the trial would last 6 months or so and then appeals after that, so, that was a relief to me. I'm afraid these guys have a LOT of our missing information, and, Bush was known as "The Hanging Governor". He was expediting deathrow killings so fast that one local black guy was accused one day and lethally injected within three months.

Also, are these guys political prisoners? Prisoners of War? If they are prisoners of war, do we have a right to execute prisoners of war under Geneva Conventions? This nebulous "military tribunal" thing is confusing. They are to be tried under the same laws as our own military soldiers? If so, does that mean they were ours to start with?

signed,
Confused (as usual)

reply to post by Trexter Ziam


They are considered "enemy combatants not entitled to human rights under the Geneva Convention". The part covering "enemy combatants", under the Geneva Convention, was never ratified by the US. Jimmy Carter tried to have it ratified, and the Congress refused to agree with Jimmy Carter.

hnn.us...

Additional protocols have been issued including two in 1977 extending the 1949 articles to cover guerrilla combatants and to soldiers in wars of "self-determination." The United States signed the 1977 Protocols, but Congress refused to ratify them.

reply to post by OrionStars


I personally think that the process is a sham. If they have so much proof to the extent that they have said. Why keep the proceedings secret? There is no reason that I can think of that would validate the secrecy of this process if indeed they want to give this guys a fair trial.

Not even the Nuremberg trails, Milosevic's trial and others were handle this way.

Originally posted by Bunch
reply to post by OrionStars

 

I personally think that the process is a sham. If they have so much proof to the extent that they have said. Why keep the proceedings secret? There is no reason that I can think of that would validate the secrecy of this process if indeed they want to give this guys a fair trial.

Not even the Nuremberg trails, Milosevic's trial and others were handle this way.

Since we don't know how the evidence was obtained, it's difficult to comment on whether it should be public knowledge. If sensitive means/methods/techniques, or intel is involved, then there's no way that'll be ok'd for public release.

Originally posted by BlueRaja

Since we don't know how the evidence was obtained, it's difficult to comment on whether it should be public knowledge. If sensitive means/methods/techniques, or intel is involved, then there's no way that'll be ok'd for public release.

And are you ok with that? Are you ok to have your government taking 6 foreign national citizens, accusing them of crimes for which the same government can execute them and take the word of your government that they are guilty without even let us see what the information was?

I mean is the same government that has got it wrong so many times, Iraq, Iran, the economy, judging foreign citizens in a system that we see people day to day being wrongfully accused and convicted..... and you will take your Government word for it.?!

I mean I'm as much GO GET'EM as they come... but even I draw lines sometimes.

Originally posted by Bunch

Originally posted by BlueRaja

Since we don't know how the evidence was obtained, it's difficult to comment on whether it should be public knowledge. If sensitive means/methods/techniques, or intel is involved, then there's no way that'll be ok'd for public release.

And are you ok with that? Are you ok to have your government taking 6 foreign national citizens, accusing them of crimes for which the same government can execute them and take the word of your government that they are guilty without even let us see what the information was?

I mean is the same government that has got it wrong so many times, Iraq, Iran, the economy, judging foreign citizens in a system that we see people day to day being wrongfully accused and convicted..... and you will take your Government word for it.?!

I mean I'm as much GO GET'EM as they come... but even I draw lines sometimes.

I'm ok with not disclosing intel techniques to the public, that would make them no longer useable(or putting sources in danger).

reply to post by BlueRaja


And I agree with that, still there should be at least some info that should be disclosed in order for we the public feel certain that these guys had a fair trial, I mean thats what we preach to the world that America its all about after all.



[edit on 12-2-2008 by Bunch]

Short of granting them USA citizenship or having a country claim them as part of their militia engaged in a declared war against the USA; this seems to be the best we do for them:

In the military commissions process, every defendant has the following rights: The right to remain silent and to have no adverse inference drawn from it; the right to be represented by detailed military counsel, as well as civilian counsel of his own selection and at no expense to the government; the right to examine all evidence used against him by the prosecution; the right to obtain evidence and to call witnesses on his own behalf including expert witnesses; the right to cross-examine every witness called by the prosecution; the right to be present during the presentation of evidence; the right to have a military commission panel of at least five military members determine his guilt by a 2/3 majority, or in the case of a capital offense, a unanimous decision of a military commission composed of at least 12 members; and the right to an appeal to the Court of Military Commission Review, then through the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals to the United States Supreme Court.

These rights are guaranteed to the defendant under the Military Commissions Act, and are specifically designed to ensure that every defendant receives a fair trial, consistent with American and international standards of justice and the rule of law.

This is snipped from the DOD website news release:
www.defenselink.mil...

Perhaps if the appeals process gets to the US Supreme Court we will then have access to more of the evidence.

If any of them has secured private legal counsel possibly some of that discovery will be allowed public or "leaked".

Though on a lot of topics here I seem to be a little to the right of Attila the Hun, I would like to see full disclosure of these proceedings from detainment forward.

Originally posted by Bunch
reply to post by BlueRaja

 

And I agree with that, still thereshould be at least some info that should be disclosed in order for we the public feel certain that these guys had a fair trial, I mean thats what we preach to the world that America its all about after all.

If evidence can be released without compromising techniques/sources, then I'm ok with that too.