PDA

View Full Version : Death Penalty to be Sought for 09-11 Conspirators.



Daquan13
November 13th, 2009, 07:04 PM
http://www.thehill.com

Finally, some justice will be served!

Federal Court prosecuters in the USA are planning to seek the death penalty for the 5 conspirators who are responsible for the 09-11 terror attacks that have occured just over 8 years ago, says Attourney General Eric Holder.

And at the top of the list is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was probably the main orchestrator of the attacks, working with and under Osama BinLaden.

The Obama Administration also wants to see justice done in THIS country because this is where the attacks occured and it wants America, especially the 09-11 relatives to see some satisfaction with justice and punishment dealt out to to the ones who helped plan and orchestrate the terror attacks.

Taz
November 13th, 2009, 08:18 PM
Someone should shoot them when they're brought here and save us all some money. I know I wouldn't be upset.

lofter1
November 13th, 2009, 08:51 PM
Although such an outcome might satisfy an understandable blood lust it wouldn't do NYC or the country any good whatsoever.

Various right wingnuts are going ballistic about bringing the suspects back to downtown for trial & incarceration. I live 15 blocks away and I see no problem with it whatsoever.

Daquan13
November 13th, 2009, 08:52 PM
At least not until they catch the cowardly turban wearing wimp at the top of all this, Binladen, as well as his top henchmen who helped him do his bidding.

Sad as it seems, they are all innocent until proven guilty.

But I'm sure that enough substantial evidence has been compiled against them to officially & successfully prosecute and execute them.

Taz, I think that they are already here, but still held in captivity. The gov't isn't revealing just exactly where though, probably for security reasons. I think that it wants to be the one to dish out whatever punishment the court decides on.

You'd probably have civilians gunning for them, trying to shoot them down or something, and it seems the gov't wants them punished just as bad as the whole country does. :)

OmegaNYC
November 13th, 2009, 09:32 PM
^^^ Bin Laden, is most likely in Pakistan. I know a lot of people want him, so do I, but this is most likely what we have to settle for. I know a lot of people are upset, but I personally think it is a good idea to bring them to NYC, for trial. What better way to show these terrorist that you will never run from American Justice. I know many of them hate the thought of being caught, prosecuted, tried, and punished, by the American Judicial system.

Daquan13
November 13th, 2009, 09:33 PM
In case, for anyone who can't remember who Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is or what he looks like, here are a few pics of him.

One of them is when he reigned and ruled with an iron fist, under the tutalege of and looking much like Osama BinLaden with the turban, long beard and mustache. The other two are of him after he was captured and humbled down to nothing, looking much like a disgraced dirty bum.

It might take years though, before we hear that this cowardly wimp and the others are put to death. I think they'll all be tried one at a time.

Taz
November 13th, 2009, 09:53 PM
You mean aside from the confession? ;)


But I'm sure that enough substantial evidence has been compiled against them to officially & successfully prosecute and execute them

Daquan13
November 13th, 2009, 10:08 PM
Yes I believe so, but also, maybe before that.

This could no doubt be a long slow dragged out process because there are five men who are about to be prosecuted separately for helping to conspire and being involved in the most deadly act of terrorism that has ever occured on American soil to date.

It could be quick and it coould be slow. No one knows for sure. But one thing IS for sure; Some serious consequenses will result from this and their days are definitely numbered.

lofter1
November 13th, 2009, 10:53 PM
Taz, I think that they are already here, but still held in captivity. The gov't isn't revealing just exactly where ...


As a preliminary punishment, this (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=284577&postcount=308) could be a start.

hbcat
November 13th, 2009, 11:08 PM
Life in prison is enough. I understand the anger, but capital punishment won't undo the harm these people caused. Killing is wrong, even by the state -- perhaps especially by the state -- even as a punishment for a clear-cut case of mass murder. And it doesn't get more high-profile than this.

That said, I know I am in the minority here, and I won't lose much sleep worrying about anyone convicted in this case. I work (as a volunteer) for Amnesty International and routinely refuse to work on capital punishment cases which do not involve torture or what appear to be gross miscarriages of justice.

lofter1
November 13th, 2009, 11:33 PM
Trial Venue Leaves 9/11 Families Angry or Satisfied

NY TIMES (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/nyregion/14york.html?ref=nyregion)
By N. R. KLEINFIELD and JACK HEALY
November 13, 2009

To many, it felt exquisitely right: This is where it began. This is where it must end.

Others wished the actuality of it pushed far away, to a setting much less tormented by that one indelible date.

This sharp duality of reactions greeted the news on Friday that the government would have the accused plotters of the Sept. 11 attack stand trial in New York, in a solemn federal courthouse a few brisk blocks from where two tall towers once stood and then fell.

The decision got people asking, Does the city want this? Can it possibly bear it?

“Let them come to New York,” said Jim Riches, a retired deputy chief of the New York Fire Department, whose son, Jimmy, also a firefighter, died in the attack. “Let them get on trial. Let’s do it the right way, for all the world to see what they’re like. Let’s go. It’s been too long. Let’s get some justice.”

A trial will mean a forced public reattachment to a terrorist act that took almost 3,000 lives and singed the city’s soul and tested its resilience. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the professed mastermind of the attack, along with four others accused in the plot, will be ferried to the city’s own jail cells and put on trial almost in sight of the flattened crime scene. And everyone will be watching.

New York’s public officials, for the most part, lined up in support of a trial here. And many others accepted the development as poetic justice, an appropriate circling to an endpoint.

“I welcome anything that would bring these terrorists to trial,” said Sally Regenhard, whose son, Christian, was killed in the attack, his remains never recovered. “After eight long years there has been no justice on this on any level, and we want these people brought to justice.”

The lingering wash of emotions of Sept. 11, however, runs strong, and they run differently. To many others, the prospect of the trial was both unfair and too repulsive to entertain.

“It’s absolutely disgusting,” said Joan Molinaro, whose son, Carl, a firefighter, also died in the attack. She said of Mr. Mohammed, “He was willing to plead guilty in a military court. Now he comes to New York and gets all the rights of an American citizen, which he isn’t. He’s going to be, what, two blocks from ground zero, where he can see his handiwork and mock those he murdered.”

She used to live on Staten Island, but has moved to a small town in Pennsylvania. She couldn’t take hearing the wailing sirens of fire trucks.

She started crying. “Every day I get up and know I’ll never see my son again,” she said. “This is just a smack in his face.”

Margit Arias-Kastell lost her husband, Adam Arias, in Tower 2. She, too, could not countenance the prospect of the suspects being defended by lawyers in a court in her city. She was among scores of relatives who had signed a letter opposing regular criminal trials for them.

"It’s totally unfair," she said. "Why do we have to constantly relive this? When do we get to be at peace? They should be hung."

The divergent reactions of victims’ relatives very much echoed a similar split vote among the full universe of New Yorkers.

Many of the city’s elected officials endorsed the decision. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said in a statement, “It is fitting that 9/11 suspects face justice near the World Trade Center site, where so many New Yorkers were murdered.” He pointed out that the city had been the setting for other terrorism trials, including that of Omar Abdel Rahman, who was convicted in 1995 in a plot to blow up New York landmarks.

Representative Jerrold Nadler, whose district includes Lower Manhattan, said in a statement, “New York is not afraid of terrorists, we want to confront them, we want to bring them to justice and we want to hold them accountable for their despicable actions.”

Yet there has been widespread public opposition to allowing any American city to accept for trial, or detention, detainees being held at the military prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Various legislators have argued that their entry would be dangerous and put populations in peril.

“I fear trying them in our country,” said Mike Low, whose daughter, Sara Elizabeth Low, died on one of the planes that struck the towers. He worries that “the defense will have so many tools.” He worries that “we’re giving these monsters a forum to spew their garbage once more. They’ll make a circus out of it and just play it to the hilt.”

Ronald L. Kuby, a New York lawyer who has represented defendants in terrorism investigations, took the position that it was important that the attack’s victims, which he counted as most people in the city, could “walk downtown and see if justice is being done,” adding, “The citizenry of New York has a right to bear witness to this proceeding.”

But to what extent do New Yorkers, especially victims’ relatives, want to see the faces of the accused plotters and listen to lawyers argue in their defense?

"If you had a child who’s murdered, do you avoid going to a trial?" asked Maureen Bosco, whose son, Richard E. Bosco, died in the towers. "That’s where we stand. My son was killed by these people. It’s out of respect to him and to get closure for us."

“My son died,” Mr. Riches said. “I want to speak for him. I’ll go wherever I have to go. I want to see these guys convicted.”

Others said they would not go. “There’s never going to be any closure for me," said Elaine Leuning, who lost her son, Paul Battaglia. “I don’t want to be involved in the trial. It’s not going to do it for me, it’s just not. It’s not going to make me feel any better. This is my son. This is a piece of me that’s gone."

Those who live and work in the downtown neighborhoods near ground zero had apprehensions of their own about the coming trial. They have long grudgingly endured flocks of tourists and souvenir peddlers. Now they face a mass migration that will likely descend on the court: demonstrators, curiosity seekers, media crews and the souvenir vendors.

Mike McCalman, 42, who lives in a 25-story building called Chatham Towers, next to the courthouse, said that he and his neighbors were resigned to the disruption that was likely to accompany the trial. “We heard about it this morning and said, ‘Here we go,’ ” he said., adding: “They have to be tried somewhere.”

Anthony Maruffi, a parking lot attendant, had no problem with the decision. “If they are going to be tried, they should be tried here,” he said. “This is where they committed their crimes.”

Yet George Zouvelos, who owns Spartan Bail Bonds, which has an office near the courthouse, worried about security. His solution? “Send them to Washington.” Domingo Nunez, who works at Spartan, said, “This community is going to raise hell,” predicting that “it’s going to be very rough on some people. I’m getting goose bumps just thinking about it.”

Reporting was contributed by David W. Chen, Glenn Collins, Alain Delaquérière, Colin Moynihan and Benjamin Weiser.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

lofter1
November 13th, 2009, 11:39 PM
How New York May Tighten Security Vise

NY TIMES (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/nyregion/14security.html?_r=1&hpw)
By CARA BUCKLEY and BENJAMIN WEISER
November 14, 2009

Convoys of heavily armed officers, fields of barricades and additional checkpoints are likely to sprout in and around the jail where the accused will be housed and the courthouse where they will be tried. Access to nearby streets and areas may be sealed off. And bands of plainclothes officers — “people in civilian clothes with earplugs,” as one former law enforcement official put it — will probably be scanning the crowds to spot anyone with ill intent.

Those security efforts will probably be rolled out, former law enforcement officials and security experts said Friday, for the trial (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/us/14terror.html) of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/khalid_shaikh_mohammed/index.html?inline=nyt-per), accused as the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, and four other 9/11 detainees in the federal courthouse in Lower Manhattan, blocks from where the Trade Center towers once stood.

New York has been home to trials of high-profile terrorists before, among them Ramzi Ahmed Yousef (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/y/ramzi_ahmed_yousef/index.html?inline=nyt-per), who helped plan the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/a/omar_abdel_rahman/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the blind cleric convicted in 1995 of plotting to blow up the United Nations and other New York landmarks.

But those trials happened in a different era.

Anthony L. Ricco, a lawyer who represented defendants in two major terror trials before 9/11, said that today, courthouse security is more stringent, both in the building and on its perimeter, as are the restrictions on what people can carry in.

United States marshals will be in charge of securing the inside of the courthouse and the transport of the five suspects. The suspects are most likely to be held on a high floor in the Metropolitan Correctional Center (http://www.bop.gov/locations/institutions/nym/index.jsp), a federal jail adjacent to two federal court buildings in Lower Manhattan, and the pretrial home to almost every notorious defendant who has been prosecuted in recent decades by the United States government in Manhattan, including mobsters and terrorists.

The New York police will provide support for the marshals as needed, said the chief police spokesman, Paul J. Browne. But he declined to detail the extra measures that the police would take.

“We are also prepared to address any security issues that may arise because of the special notoriety of the defendants, including the anticipated augmentation of police presence downtown,” Mr. Browne said in an e-mail message.

One former law enforcement official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity lest he lose his former colleagues’ trust, said high-ranking police officials would probably be convening soon with security directors for New York buildings, landmarks and sensitive diplomatic sites, like the Israeli Consulate, as well as with leaders of synagogues and mosques.

Increased communication between federal intelligence agencies and the New York police, forged partly by the intelligence failures of Sept. 11, should also help security efforts, the former official said.

Representative Peter T. King, a Long Island Republican, is bitterly opposed (http://wcbstv.com/topstories/911.trial.al.2.1311252.html) to trying the Sept. 11 defendants in New York, saying it would make the city even more vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

“We’re already the No. 1 terrorist target in the world, certainly the U.S.,” said Mr. King, who wrote a letter to Attorney General Eric H. Holder in April urging him not to transfer any terror suspect from Guantánamo Bay, where the five suspects are now being held, to New York.

As with most of the high-profile prisoners, the five 9/11 detainees will most likely be placed in the jail’s high-security wing, called 10-South (http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2009/03/19/2009-03-19_bernie_madoffs_hellhole_ponzi_schemer_is.html), a fortresslike unit with a small number of cells that are reserved for prisoners awaiting trial for the most violent crimes.

They will most likely be held under strict rules that confine them to their cells virtually around the clock and bar them from communicating with outsiders other than lawyers and family members.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

Daquan13
November 14th, 2009, 04:17 AM
Life in prison is enough. I understand the anger, but capital punishment won't undo the harm these people caused. Killing is wrong, even by the state -- perhaps especially by the state -- even as a punishment for a clear-cut case of mass murder. And it doesn't get more high-profile than this.

That said, I know I am in the minority here, and I won't lose much sleep worrying about anyone convicted in this case. I work (as a volunteer) for Amnesty International and routinely refuse to work on capital punishment cases which do not involve torture or what appear to be gross miscarriages of justice.



Two drawbaks come to mind here;

1. If the conspirators are allowed to live and spend the rest of their lives in prison, then your tax dollars & mine will help pay for their lodging, meals and anything else that they might be handsomely rewarded with for the privelidge of them being kept alive and until the day they die. And, like you said, people will be outraged that the gov't didn't execute them.

2. If they are put to death, then, like yourself, there will be lots of people screaming bloody murder & mayhem for the country killing them.

So in these two decisions it's like "Pick your poison", I would assume.

There ARE two conspirators already doing life; the shoebomber Richard Reid and Zarcarius Mousoaui, or whatever his name is. Was plannig to be the 20th hijacker (with the 4 on Flight 93) in the attack

hbcat
November 14th, 2009, 07:09 AM
Two drawbaks come to mind here;

1. If the conspirators are allowed to live and spend the rest of their lives in prison, then your tax dollars & mine will pay the their lodging, meals and anything else that they might be handsomely rewarded with for the privelidge of them being kept alive and until the day they die. And, like you said, people will be outraged that the gov't didn't execute them.

Hmmmm. I think the your-tax-dollars-at-work argument in support of the death penalty vs costs accrued through imprisonment has been pretty much shot down long ago. It's incredibly expensive to execute someone. And even if weren't, is this really a matter of money? Really?



2. If they are put to death, then, like yourself, there will be lots of people screaming bloody murder & mayhem for the country killing them.

Was I screaming bloody murder? I don't follow. I won't be campaigning against their execution, if that's what you mean. I've got better things to do with my time. In principle, I am against capital punishment: It is not an effective deterrent, and it is not much of a punishment in this case either, since "martyrdom," (as defined in someone's twisted world view) is what some of these guys probably long for.

Daquan13
November 14th, 2009, 07:44 AM
Well, you might be right, but in either case, justice has to be served.

And BTW, some states are trying to pass a bill where prison immates would be paying for more of their share of the load for the neccsities in life while there.

They ARE given jobs there though so that they have money to buy cigarettes, clothing and personal belongings such as deodorant, toothpaste and shaving supplies, things of that nature.

In a nutshell, it's almost as though they are at a hotel enjoying the lap of luxury and WE are paying their tab. :(

User Name
November 14th, 2009, 01:01 PM
Just drop them into General Population instead of the segregation ward.

They won't last long.

Daquan13
November 14th, 2009, 01:42 PM
Give them to the 09-11 relatives and to all who miss the Twin Towers. There either wouldn't be much of anything left of them, or they'd WISH that they were never born!

But I'm pretty certain that they'll all be put to death like Saddam Husain and his 2 sons were.

Daquan13
November 14th, 2009, 02:04 PM
Here's another pic of KSM. This is the main one that I was trying to find earlier. It used to be posted on Wikipedia.com, but only the other three are there now.

This was when he actually became an even closer friend and protege under Osama Binladen. He looked cleaner there, with a trimmed and darker beard, mustache and he wore glasses back them.

Also, it was him who had first thought about the idea of the terror attacks on America. He had then discussed it with BinLaden, and from then on, they had tweaked and worked out several plans that would would involve the hijackings of Western-built commercial airliners to fly them into famous tall buildings or symbols of freedom, wiping out scores upon scores of innocent people.

scumonkey
November 14th, 2009, 02:14 PM
...they are at a hotel enjoying the lap of luxury...From that to thishttp://wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7864&d=1258165930

Guess That hotel isn't so luxurious after all;)

Daquan13
November 14th, 2009, 02:20 PM
You found a larger one.

From the background, I'd say that that "hotel" might look quite similar to the makeshift dirt-built hellhole one where Sadam was found and captured. I'd also say that he went from sugar to shit.

Also, I stand corrected;

The detainees are still overseas, but make no mistake about it - they ARE in captivity. There still isn't a jury panel in place, nor has one been selected, so before the trials can begin, we won't know much for a while.

But even if or when these men are brought to justice, however it's done, then sadly, there will be MORE to replace them, so, in essence, they are just like Bebe's Kids. They don't die, they multiply!!

nick-taylor
November 15th, 2009, 11:02 AM
What if this backfires and he walks away as a 'free' man?

Daquan13
November 15th, 2009, 12:36 PM
No way. He's busted. It won't happen.

They got true evidence that he conspired this tragic event, and that he consulted with Binladen about it. And Binladen agreed with it.

They'll be punished either by LIP or death. All of them.

nick-taylor
November 15th, 2009, 03:24 PM
No way. He's busted. It won't happen.

They got true evidence that he conspired this tragic event, and that he consulted with Binladen about it. And Binladen agreed with it.

They'll be punished either by LIP or death. All of them.Wasn't information extracted under several dozen attempts of waterboarding?

Hence the problem; any evidence is going to be automatically tainted because the CIA went awol on him and his partners. Why then bother with a jury trial which will in no way be impartial?

It would be far better to build a specially constructed jail (possibly on a military base) where he would spend the rest of his life.

Daquan13
November 16th, 2009, 07:48 AM
Circumstancial evidence has him as having boldly admitting his guilt to CIA agents after being captured.

Without a jury, his attourney(s) can successfully declare a mistrial, which means that he could be let go, and should or if that happens, he can almost never be retried for that crime.

Almost like what happened in the OJ double-murder trial, only, except that the prosecution didn't have enough circumstancial evidence to successfully win a conviction, so OJ was let go then.

There is really no place for terrorists here or abroad! Let the punishment fit the crime! They plotted and successfully had thousaunds of people killed. Those evil madmen NEED to die!! I'm sorry, but I just can't see them being allowed to walk and breath after the diabolical plan that they were able to pull off!

BrooklynRider
November 17th, 2009, 05:25 PM
I oppose the death penalty.

I'd like to know what the evidence is against them. If it came from someone being waterboarded at Gitmo, it is suspect.

lofter1
November 17th, 2009, 07:19 PM
Can anyone really believe that Holder is stupid enough to bring the suspects to trial in a civilian court if there isn't incredibly good evidence that has nothing to do with anything that was obtained due to or after waterboarding (or gathered via other Cheney-Bush judicial practices)? If the DOJ is that stupid and careless then, well ... wow, we'd be f***ed, eh?

Would they then have to release them into the general population? If so there's little doubt that The Post and others would be there to cover it. Wouldn't be surprised if the detainees were greeted by some NYers outside the jail who want to give them a special NYC goodbye.

Andrew Sullivan recently posted an article about a number of "converts" to Jihad who have now recanted. I'd not be surprised if there are a few of those types of folks who know alot about these fellows and are brought into the court to talk about it.

The Jihadists Who Have Recanted II (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/11/the-jihadists-who-have-recanted-ii.html)

hbcat
November 17th, 2009, 11:12 PM
"Guantanamo Bay was the biggest victory for Jihadism since 9/11. In fact, Cheney's war crimes have endangered our civilization more profoundly than 9/11."

This is the point. We torture, terrorists win. This is f****d up in so many, many, ways. If I follow this line of thought, I'll be depressed all day, and nothing will come of it, so I'll stop here.

Daquan13
November 17th, 2009, 11:23 PM
Former NYC mayor Guiliani is opposing the idea of having any of the mastermind terrorists brought to NY for their trials. Says that it is not good publicity to do that, I think.

BrooklynRider
November 17th, 2009, 11:50 PM
Can anyone really believe that Holder is stupid enough...

...If the DOJ is that stupid and careless then, well ... wow, we'd be f***ed, eh?

Considering the couple of written documents submitted to courts supporting DOMA, yes, I do think DOJ is that stupid and careless. DOJ has morphed from an impartial executor of law and justice into a politically driven machine. It gets my vote of "no confidence."

Daquan13
November 18th, 2009, 07:27 AM
Republicans plan to grill Holder about his announcement that the dangerous detainees would not be released while here in the United States.

The Obama Admistration says that it is backing Holder's decision and is confident with the results of the pending trials of Mohommed and the others.

Daquan13
November 18th, 2009, 01:11 PM
Lawmakers again, are said to be pushing for the death penalty in Massacusetts. The last time that this came up was when Mitt Romney was in office as governer in '05.

Merry
January 19th, 2010, 12:13 AM
Trial by Ferry

By JULIE MENIN

There is nothing wrong with holding the trial of the man who has described himself as the mastermind of 9/11, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, in federal court in New York. But there is something wrong with spending upward of $200 million per year on security for a multiyear trial and disrupting the lives of people who have homes and jobs in Lower Manhattan, where the trial is to be held. Fortunately, there is a relatively easy solution to this problem: Governors Island.

Conducting the Mohammed trial there would not be the first time the 172-acre island, situated in the East River off Lower Manhattan, has been used for law enforcement. Before the federal government sold the island to New York State in 2003, it had long been a military installation. During the Civil War, enlisted Confederate soldiers were imprisoned in its fortress-like Castle Williams; officers were held in Fort Jay (at the time called Fort Columbus). After the Civil War, Castle Williams was a military stockade.

British and American forces used the island for more than 200 years precisely because it was so easy to secure.

Residents of Lower Manhattan who live close to the federal courthouse where the trial is to be held have rightly expressed concern about the safety measures that will be needed. They argue persuasively that a community that has already dealt with some of the worst aspects of the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks — years of rebuilding, environmental hazards and security checkpoints — should not have to face additional burdens.

This epic courtroom drama, they say, should not be played out in the midst of a dense residential and office neighborhood.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg and elected officials like Senator Charles Schumer correctly insist that the federal government pay for the entire cost of the trials. However, they have not addressed the central question of whether, in the midst of an economic recession, it makes sense for anyone to spend more than $200 million on security.

Enough questions have been raised that it is worth urging Attorney General Eric Holder to vet other locations for the federal trial — beyond the courthouse — and to reassess costs and security issues with the police.

As part of that vetting, Governors Island should be given serious consideration. The island has no residents and few office workers. Access is by ferry only, which should enhance security and thus potentially reduce costs.

Though a trial date has not yet been set, Mr. Holder needs to move swiftly to ensure that the Governors Island option receives thorough consideration.

Preserving the values of democracy and the rule of law are of the utmost importance, and a federal trial in New York, which I fully support, certainly accomplishes that. Let us show the world that these values are of paramount importance not by imposing an extravagant ring of steel around a community that is still rebounding from 9/11, but rather by selecting a far safer, less expensive and arguably more appropriately historic location.

Julie Menin is the chairwoman of Community Board 1, which covers Lower Manhattan and Governors Island.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/17/opinion/17menin.html?th&emc=th

Merry
January 22nd, 2010, 03:21 AM
Mayor calls island trial move 'dumb'

By Josh Rogers

Mayor Bloomberg this morning called moving the 9/11 terror trials to Governors Island “one of the dumber ideas” he’s ever heard, but the idea picked up steam Thursday anyway.

The mayor made the explosive comment Thursday morning at a Gracie Mansion meeting with about two dozen newspaper publishers including John W. Sutter, publisher of Downtown Express and other Community Media newspapers. The mayor’s comment was not immediately reported, and Thursday’s momentum probably proceeded without knowledge of his views.

Bloomberg also said the trials in Lower Manhattan would bring more hardship to the Park Row area and that he has asked Police Commissioner Ray Kelly repeatedly about the feasibility of reopening the street. Kelly has kept the street closed to protect One Police Plaza. The federal courthouse and detention center where the 9/11 terror suspects will be held and tried are across the street from police headquarters.

There may have been a change of heart about the island later in the day. Kelly said he’s “certainly open to that suggestion” of moving the island to Governors Island, according to NY1.com. The Associated Press reported this afternoon that Kelly has ordered an assessment of the feasibility of the island to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the admitted 9/11 mastermind, and some of his accused accomplices.

Both the mayor and Kelly have emphasized the high costs of holding the trial Downtown, putting the first year security measures at $250 million.

Council Speaker Christine Quinn, Councilmember Margaret Chin of Lower Manhattan and Councilmember Peter Vallone Jr. released a statement today saying the trials should not be held Downtown and that the island should be studied as an option.

Julie Menin, chairperson of Community Board 1 is spearheading the effort to move the trial to the island. Alan Gerson, who left his City Council seat Jan. 1, may have been the first to give public voice to the idea at community meeting in early December.

C.B. 1’s Executive Committee endorsed the move at a meeting Wednesday night and the full board will take up the issue Tuesday.

“Governors Island is a reasonable alternative solution to the federal courthouse at 500 Pearl St. which is situated in the middle of the fourth largest commercial business district in the country and a dense residential neighborhood,” Menin said Wednesday night, prior to Bloomberg’s comment.

Jan Lee, a resident of Mott St., said he supported the Governors Island move because “the different layers of security for the trial would do us in.”

http://downtownexpress.com/de_352/govisland.html

Ninjahedge
January 22nd, 2010, 10:15 AM
Christ. Just try them in NJ.

Exit 13, over by Ikea. At least the terrorists would have to pay tolls to try and attack them. Hold it during rush hour and they will get caught in traffic!

ZippyTheChimp
January 22nd, 2010, 11:06 AM
Bloomberg is going to wind up trying to explain why he thinks the idea is "one of the dumber" he's heard.

Actually, very viable. Governors Island is part of New York County, so within the jurisdiction of New York Southern District.

lofter1
January 22nd, 2010, 12:17 PM
There's a great Civil War era prison on GI.

http://www.correctionhistory.org/civilwar/govisletour/govisletour31.html

http://www.correctionhistory.org/civilwar/govisletour/govisletour38.html

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/53/187074181_cfc7fe6ab8.jpg?v=0

gundam00
January 23rd, 2010, 04:32 PM
This is all cleverly crafted government BS. Hire foreign terrorists to fly planes into buildings, use the disaster to start a war for private interests, then eliminate the evidence. Bin Laden and your leaders are great friends, that's the reason bin laden is on the loose.

lofter1
January 24th, 2010, 12:44 AM
Please expand and back up this declaration:




Hire foreign terrorists to fly planes into buildings...

Daquan13
January 24th, 2010, 04:18 PM
There's a great Civil War era prison on GI.

http://www.correctionhistory.org/civilwar/govisletour/govisletour31.html

http://www.correctionhistory.org/civilwar/govisletour/govisletour38.html

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/53/187074181_cfc7fe6ab8.jpg?v=0



Looks like the Relic from the Dinosaur Age!

scumonkey
January 24th, 2010, 05:38 PM
I didn't know there were man made buildings in the age of Dinosaurs?!

OmegaNYC
January 25th, 2010, 12:38 AM
Awww, C'mon Scu:


http://stuhasic.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/flintstones.jpg

:)

Ninjahedge
January 25th, 2010, 11:32 AM
Please expand and back up this declaration:

The only thing I can see is the possibility of select and deliberate ignorance of the planned acts.

"oh, the people we want to declare war on are going to attack us... well lets let them and use that as a reason to declare war!"

I don't think, however, that anyone ever imagined the loss and destrustion that would be realized from that ignorance.

Look at the last time they tried. They set of a bomb in the parking lot, the buildings still stood, and not many were killed or seriously injured. If that was what was envisioned by the powers that be in deliberately turning their back on the provided intelligence, you can see the reasoning.

But hiring a group to come here, train for 2 years and then smack 4 planes into things (1 failed, 1 pentagon, 2 WTC??!?). I don't think so.

lofter1
January 27th, 2010, 04:08 PM
Is there any possiblity that the title of this thread could be altered to include the words "Trial" and "Terrorist" (or "Terror Trials") :confused:

Currently, given the words in the title, a Search is somewhat problematic.

lofter1
January 27th, 2010, 04:12 PM
Bloomberg Wants Terror Trial Moved

NY TIMES (http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/27/a-growing-cry-to-move-a-terror-trial/?hp)
By AL BAKER
January 27, 2010

City Room Blog

For the first time, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has spoken out against plans to stage the trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, accused mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, at the federal courthouse in Lower Manhattan, joining a growing chorus of people who believe the epic trial will be too disruptive and expensive for the city.

“It would be great if the federal government could find a site that didn’t cost a billion dollars, which using downtown will,” he told reporters on Wednesday.

“It’s going to cost an awful lot of money and disturb an awful lot of people,” he said. “Can we provide security? Yes. Could you provide security elsewhere? Yeah, and I mean — the suggestion of a military base is probably a reasonably good one. Relatively easy to supply — to provide security. They tend to be outside of cities so that they don’t disrupt other people.”

It was a marked change from Mr. Bloomberg’s initial reaction to the news, just two months ago, that the trial would be held in Manhattan. ”It is fitting that 9/11 suspects face justice near the World Trade Center site where so many New Yorkers were murdered,” he said at the time.

The mayor is not the only one pondering a military base as the place for a trial. Leaders of Community Board 1 in Lower Manhattan also want the government to study the feasibility of holding the trial elsewhere within the Southern District of New York.

On Tuesday evening, the group’s full board voted 42-to-0 to ask Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to consider a list of alternative sites. They include the Unites States Military Academy at West Point, the National Guard base at Stewart International Airport near Newburgh and a federal prison in Otisville.

The Southern District of the federal court system covers Manhattan, the Bronx, Westchester and five other downstate counties.

Julie Menin, chairwoman of Community Board 1, said she wanted the federal government to seriously study the costs, security implications and the overall impact to the communities in each of those areas, to “start a dialogue” about moving the trial out of Lower Manhattan.

“We are looking at military installations because they provide a political compromise between those who favor a less public setting, i.e., a military tribunal and those who favor a federal court trial, so what we are recommending is that a federal judge would preside in one of these military settings,” Ms. Menin said on Wednesday. “I’m trying to think outside-the-box solutions that are still jurisdictionally within the Southern District and may provide additional security if they are on a military installation.”

Community Board 1 represents the seaport and financial districts of Lower Manhattan and TriBeCa, Battery Park City and parts of Chinatown, as well as ground zero.

Of plans to hold the trial at the federal courthouse in Foley Square, Ms Menin said that the site “is next to the financial district, which is the financial capital of our country.”

She added, “Why on earth would we have the trial in the heart of the financial district when it has already been attacked twice by terrorists and when our country is on the verge of trying to recover from the economic recession?”

Ms. Menin said the board’s resolution would be sent to elected officials, including Senator Charles S. Schumer and others.

Adding to the chorus of opposition, the city’s oldest real estate trade association said on Wednesday that the trial would “wreak havoc” on Lower Manhattan and the commercial and residential property owners there. After working behind the scenes for more than two months to urge state and federal officials to consider other locations for the trial, the group, the Real Estate Board of New York, has started a Web site, MoveTheTrial.com, to urge the public to become involved.

Last week, in a joint statement, a list of politicians, including Representative Jerrold L. Nadler, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, State Senator Daniel L. Squadron and Councilwoman Margaret Chin, urged an alternate site, one less harmful to “our already overburdened Lower Manhattan neighborhoods.”

Copyright 2010 The New York Times Company

ZippyTheChimp
January 27th, 2010, 06:26 PM
Currently, given the words in the title, a Search is somewhat problematic.Added tags. Best way to search.

Feel free to add your own.

lofter1
January 27th, 2010, 08:32 PM
thanks ^

Lindsey
January 27th, 2010, 11:07 PM
Bloomberg Wants Terror Trial Moved

NY TIMES (http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/27/a-growing-cry-to-move-a-terror-trial/?hp)
By AL BAKER
January 27, 2010

City Room Blog

For the first time, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has spoken out against plans to stage the trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, accused mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, at the federal courthouse in Lower Manhattan, joining a growing chorus of people who believe the epic trial will be too disruptive and expensive for the city.

“It would be great if the federal government could find a site that didn’t cost a billion dollars, which using downtown will,” he told reporters on Wednesday.

“It’s going to cost an awful lot of money and disturb an awful lot of people,” he said. “Can we provide security? Yes. Could you provide security elsewhere? Yeah, and I mean — the suggestion of a military base is probably a reasonably good one. Relatively easy to supply — to provide security. They tend to be outside of cities so that they don’t disrupt other people.”
Copyright 2010 The New York Times Company

I can see Bloomberg's point. I wonder whether the trials will be moved, though - I can also see the poetic justice in having them tried near the site of the destruction.

ablarc
January 29th, 2010, 12:32 PM
“It’s going to cost an awful lot of money and disturb an awful lot of people,” he said. “Can we provide security? Yes. Could you provide security elsewhere? Yeah, and I mean — the suggestion of a military base is probably a reasonably good one. Relatively easy to supply — to provide security. They tend to be outside of cities so that they don’t disrupt other people.”
After his rash and hasty dismissal of Governors Island (a former military base), Mike seems to be positioning himself eventually to discover the ideal venue for this trial ... and it's ... (surprise ! ) ... Governors Island.

Ninjahedge
January 29th, 2010, 12:38 PM
I think he means an active military installation.

Does GI have an active penal facility?

I think it is a decent idea, but it would cost $$ to do it. With a deficit and a shortage of people like cops, I think Bloomie just wants someone else to take care of it.

ablarc
January 29th, 2010, 01:09 PM
Does GI have an active penile facility?
Not right this minute, I believe.


pe·nile (pē'nīl', -nəl)
adj. Of or relating to the penis.
But give it time; anything is possible.

Ninjahedge
January 29th, 2010, 02:27 PM
I had a feeling... but spellcheck does not pick up on Cigars.

Merry
January 30th, 2010, 03:56 AM
^ That's given me my LOL moment of the week, thanks :D.

Merry
January 30th, 2010, 04:01 AM
Being serious now.


U.S. Drops Plan for a 9/11 Trial in New York City

By SCOTT SHANE and BENJAMIN WEISER

The Obama administration on Friday gave up on its plan to try the Sept. 11 plotters in Lower Manhattan, bowing to almost unanimous pressure from New York officials and business leaders to move the terrorism trial elsewhere.

“I think I can acknowledge the obvious,” an administration official said. “We’re considering other options.”

The reversal on whether to try the alleged 9/11 terrorists blocks from the former World Trade Center site seemed to come suddenly this week, after Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg abandoned his strong support for the plan and said the cost and disruption would be too great.

But behind the brave face that many New Yorkers had put on for weeks, resistance had been gathering steam.

After a dinner in New York on Dec. 14, Steven Spinola, president of the Real Estate Board of New York, pulled aside David Axelrod, President Obama’s closest adviser, to convey an urgent plea: move the 9/11 trial out of Manhattan.

More recently, in a series of presentations to business leaders, local elected officials and community representatives of Chinatown, Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly laid out his plan for securing the trial: blanketing a swath of Lower Manhattan with police checkpoints, vehicle searches, rooftop snipers and canine patrols.

“They were not received well,” said one city official.

And on Tuesday, in a meeting Mr. Bloomberg had with at least two dozen federal judges on the eighth floor of their Manhattan courthouse, one judge raised the question of security. The mayor, according to several people present, said he was sure the courthouse could be made safe, but that it would be costly and difficult.

The next day, the mayor, who back in November had hailed the idea of trying Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four other accused Sept. 11 plotters in the heart of downtown Manhattan, made clear he’d changed his mind.
The Obama administration official said the decision to back out of plans for a New York trial had broad support but had not yet been made public.

Jason Post, a spokesman for Mr. Bloomberg, said Friday night that the mayor would have no comment until the Obama administration had made an official announcement of its intentions.

Told of the administration’s decision, a spokesman for Mr. Kelly said, “We were not aware of that.”

But the spokesman, Paul J. Browne, said of Mr. Kelly: “He is of the mind that such a decision would give us some breathing room, but that New York has to remain vigilant because it remains at the top of the terrorist target list.”

“It is obvious that they can't have the trials in New York,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, New York's Democratic senior senator.

Mr. Bloomberg’s remarks on Wednesday set off a stampede of New York City officials, most of them Democrats well-disposed toward President Obama, who suddenly declared that a civilian trial for the 9/11 suspects was a great idea — as long as it didn’t happen in their city.

By Friday, Justice Department officials were studying other locations, focusing especially on military bases and prison complexes, and no obvious new choice had emerged.

The story of how prominent New York officials seemed to have so quickly moved from a kind of “bring it on” bravado to an “anywhere but here” involves many factors, including a new anxiety about terrorism after the attempted airliner bombing on Christmas Day.

Ultimately, it appears, New York officials could not tolerate ceding much of the city to a set of trials that could last for years.

“The administration is in a tricky political and legal position,” Julie Menin, a lawyer who is chairwoman of the 50-member Community Board 1 that represents Lower Manhattan, including the federal courthouse and ground zero, said of President Obama and his Justice Department. “But it means shutting down our financial district. It could cost $1 billion. It’s absolutely crazy.”

Ms. Menin said the turning point for her came when she heard Mr. Kelly’s security plan and cost estimates: hundreds of millions of dollars a year. “It was an absolute game-changer,” she said. She wrote a Jan. 17 op-ed article for The New York Times proposing moving the trial to Governors Island off Manhattan; that idea did not catch hold, but the article escalated the outcry against a Manhattan trial.

When the Justice Department announced in November its plans to try Mr. Mohammed and four alleged accomplices blocks from where the World Trade Center stood, Mr. Bloomberg hailed the location as not only workable but as a powerful symbol.

“It is fitting that 9/11 suspects face justice near the World Trade Center site where so many New Yorkers were murdered,” the mayor said at the time. The federal courthouse had hosted major terror trials previously, he noted, and the police were more than up to the security challenge.

And so it is possible that the reversal will call into question the calibrated effort of Mr. Obama and his attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr., to bring the handling of suspected terrorists out of the realm of military emergency and into the halls of civilian justice.

If the message to Al Qaeda and its supporters in November was that New York City was able, even eager, to bring justice to those who plotted mass murder, the message of January is far less confident.

“This will be one more stroke for Al Qaeda’s propaganda,” said Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert at Georgetown University.

The breakdown of support for the trials in New York might have actually been assisted by the way New York officials were first notified by the Obama administration.

Mr. Holder called Mr. Bloomberg and Gov. David A. Paterson only a few hours before his public announcement on Nov. 13; and Mr. Kelly got a similar call that morning from Preet Bharara, the United States attorney in Manhattan, whose office had been picked to prosecute the cases.

But by the time those calls were made, the decision had already been reported in the news media, which was how Mr. Bloomberg learned about it, according to mayoral aides.

One senior Bloomberg official, speaking on condition of anonymity so as not to antagonize the White House, said: “When Holder was making the decision he didn’t call Ray Kelly and say, ‘What do you think?’ He didn’t call the mayor and say, ‘What would your position be?’ They didn’t reach out until it got out there.”

Soon, though, New York real estate executives were raising concerns with the Obama administration, according to Mr. Spinola, president of the Real Estate Board of New York.

Mr. Spinola said he had received calls and e-mail messages from the board’s members. Residential real estate brokers were “going berserk,” as he put it, worried that they would no longer be able to sell apartments downtown.
Commercial brokers feared they would not be able to lease office space.

On Nov. 20, the Friday before Thanksgiving, the real estate executive William C. Rudin held a meeting at his office to talk about issues with Jim Messina, a deputy White House chief of staff, according to Mr. Spinola.
The meeting was not on the topic of the trials, but the executives pressed their case anyway.

Mr. Spinola said that he told Mr. Messina, “I hope that the White House was going to put a ton of money into it.”

A turning point came when Mr. Kelly spoke before a large business crowd at a New York Police Foundation breakfast on Jan. 13.

After addressing the year’s highlights in crime reduction, he turned to the 9/11 trials, offering a presentation that was direct and graphic.

“Whatever the merits of holding the trial in Lower Manhattan,” he said, “it will certainly raise the level of threat.” He said that “securing this area and the entire city for the duration of this event promises to be an extremely demanding undertaking.”

He offered a detailed account of his department’s security plan, with inner and outer perimeters, unannounced vehicle checkpoints, countersniper teams on rooftops, and hazardous-materials and bomb squad personnel ready to respond. And he cited the hundreds of millions it would cost to protect the city.

“The entire audience issued a collective gasp when it became clear that this was an event that could go on for years,” said one guest, Kathryn S. Wylde, president and chief executive of the Partnership for New York City.

The unhappiness grew. During the Real Estate Board of New York’s annual gala, held on Jan. 21, Mr. Bloomberg dropped by, and Bloomberg officials said they got “an earful on that” from real estate executives, all of whom were angry about the plan.

A week later, his public opinion had changed, and so, it seems, had the ultimate destination of the trials.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/30/nyregion/30trial.html?ref=nyregion

infoshare
February 1st, 2010, 08:39 AM
Finally: someone who can (and will) "acknowledge the obvious" - you gotta give the Obama administration credit for that (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=314781&postcount=53), at the very least.