So what are people thinking about Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani?

Personally, I don't have much of an opinion about what happened. I mean I laughed, but I don't feel any serious way about it one way or the other.

http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/ref...ani/index.html

Basically, this guy was caught in 2004 and thought to be involved in some bombings in 1998 that killed 224 people. He was the very first Guantanamo Bay prisoner to get a trial. Obama wanted him to be tried in Civilian Federal Court, instead of a military tribunal. A lot of people flipped out about the decision, then New York was a mess with all kinds of added security or something. Obama said, "Don't worry, this will work, this guy will get what's coming to him." When people asked Eric Holder (Attorney General) "What if he gets acquitted in Federal court?" Eric said, "We'll just have to make sure we do it right" or something along those lines. Essentially he was really saying, 'Don't worry about it, because it's never going to happen.'

Well, this guy was charged with 280 different things, over 200 counts of murder. He was acquitted of 279 charges, and only charged with "Conspiracy to damage government property."

So far, I've heard people say that the NSA is saying that there was a very good chance that this would have happened in a military tribunal as well, especially since there is a good chance that any information obtained from the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" couldn't be used in court, etc. I've also heard people defending this saying, "Well, this guy is still going to spend the rest of his life in prison, his life is changed, blah blah blah."

So like I was saying, I find this interesting, but aside from what all I just typed about, I don't really know anything else. Not enough to know if I should be upset or not.

So nothing on this? Is it a total non-issue?

I don't have feelings one way or another about it

He should be tried and sentenced following the laws of the shit hole country he came from.
FUCK OBAMA.

It is total BS that a military combatant is allowed to be tried in a civilian court of law. Oboingo and his Administration knew damn well this type of ruling would be the norm for these cases.
"Rendering aid and Comfort to the Enemy"
I believe that this would fall under the above description.
That is also one of the criteria for being tried for treason.


Maybe we are trying the wrong people.....



I could not agree with Bellavite 1 more on his closing statement.

To me it says the justice system works...

What do you think, the jurors were like, "Hey, all this evidence says he did it, but lets be funny and acquit him!"

Obviously the evidence was not there. If anything, that one charge was "forced" upon him due to the high profile of the case.

It still carries a minimum 20 years, possible life sentence.

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1...ies/hangum.gif

fly a plane full of pork up his ass and detonate!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart

So nothing on this? Is it a total non-issue?

---

not that its a non-issue
nothing to debate.

Should have never been tried in civilian court. There is nothing in our law or international law that even hints at the fact that he should have been tried in civil court. Captured on the battlefield during a battle in a foreign country and he's not a US Citizen not to mention he killed over 200 people. Military tribunal and hang his ass. But no, Obama, Holder and Co decide to "do the right thing" and he get conspiracy to destroy a building. WTF is that?

He is a mass murderer and should be tried in a military tribunal and summarily executed immediately after sentencing.

The current resident of the oval office thinks that fighting terrorism is some sort of police action or maybe less than that. The messiah and his staff are subverting military justice just like they inhibit military operations overseas.

I would love to see Barack Hussien Obama and Eric Holder tried for aiding and abetting the enemy during time of war, then hang these sons-of-a-bitches high and in public, leave them hanging for few days. I am certain there are pigeons in DC that would love to shit on their heads.

But how do you know he is?

If the government said "that guy is bad and he's Muslim" you would believe it?

Worked real well for Germany.

The key sentence in the article

Quote:

---

Because of the unusual circumstances of Mr. Ghailani’s case, the prosecution faced significant legal hurdles even getting his case to trial. On the eve of the start of his trial in October, month, the government lost a key ruling that may have seriously damaged its chances of winning convictions. In the ruling, the judge, Lewis A. Kaplan of Federal District Court in Manhattan, barred prosecutors from using an important witness against Mr. Ghailani because the government had learned about the man through Mr. Ghailani’s interrogation while he was in C.I.A. custody, where his lawyers say he was tortured.

---

The judge took the side of the defendant and that was the end of the case. IMO the judge was biased for the defense which is not surprising.

In any case, Ghailani should not have been tried in civilian court.

I would further argue that the result of this trial is exactly what obama/holder were looking for. obama/holder being typical liberals who carry the water for criminal rights and ignore the plight of the victims.

He never should have been detained at gitmo, or gone to civilian court. They should have killed him right where they found him. Shoot, shovel, and shutup. One less terrorist asshole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmg8550

He never should have been detained at gitmo, or gone to civilian court. They should have killed him right where they found him. Shoot, shovel, and shutup. One less terrorist asshole.

---

Agreed.