Here’s some lovely news I just spotted:

The five men facing trial in the Sept. 11 attacks will plead not guilty so that they can air their criticisms of U.S. foreign policy, the lawyer for one of the defendants said Sunday.

Scott Fenstermaker, the lawyer for accused terrorist Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, said the men would not deny their role in the 2001 attacks but “would explain what happened and why they did it.”

I really don’t care why they took part in the 9/11 attacks that lead to the deaths of 3,000 people. They have no justification for what they have admittedly done, so there is no reason to grant them a courtroom soapbox to air their grievances against the U.S. And the administration isn’t doing anything to help the trials of these terrorists.

Defence lawyers were sure to apply to have the charges dismissed after Mr Obama made an overarching effort to reassure Americans that the decision to put [Khalid Sheikh] Mohammed on trial at a federal court in New York was sound.

“I don’t think it will be offensive at all when he’s convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him,” the president said in an NBC interview on his tour of Asia, which ended late on Thursday.

Seeming to realise the potential for trouble in his answer, the president – a lawyer and former law professor – added: “What I said was, people will not be offended if that’s the outcome. I’m not pre-judging, I’m not going to be in that courtroom, that’s the job of prosecutors, the judge and the jury.”

Nice back peddling, but President Obama really put his foot in his legal mouth when he said, “when he’s convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him.” Obama pre-judged KSM guilty by saying “when” rather than “if,” and he succeeded in polluting the jury pool with this comment. I thought the man in the Oval Office was the smartest man in the world and a lawyer to boot. How did such a brainless gaff tumble from his lips? Was he talking off the cuff again and not via the teleprompter?

Leave a Reply