Families of USS Cole victims outraged at Obama's decision

Status
Not open for further replies.
jillio said:
More than enough time.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought.

Granted, It may take time to collect all these information but surely, the intelligence community could have get into more of that.

It is obvious that they know more than what they are actually telling.
 
If dismissed without prejudice it could mean they will get better evidence and then recharge the terrorist.
 
Their pain can never be healed fully in this life. But does that mean we should allow the knife of injustice to be thrust and twisted again and again in their hearts?

If bringing terrorists to justice never satisfies victims and families, then why do we even bother to have courts and prisons? Why not just ignore all killing and "move on?" Because justice is about more than satisfying families. Even if none of the victims had relatives, we can't allow terrorists to get away with their crimes.
 
Jolie77 said:
That's what I thought.

Granted, It may take time to collect all these information but surely, the intelligence community could have get into more of that.

It is obvious that they know more than what they are actually telling.
Click to expand...

Agreed. We don't have access to all the details. Nor do the family members.
 
Reba said:
Their pain can never be healed fully in this life. But does that mean we should allow the knife of injustice to be thrust and twisted again and again in their hearts?

If bringing terrorists to justice never satisfies victims and families, then why do we even bother to have courts and prisons? Why not just ignore all killing and "move on?" Because justice is about more than satisfying families. Even if none of the victims had relatives, we can't allow terrorists to get away with their crimes.
Click to expand...

Because justice has nothing to do with satisfying the need for revenge.

Nor can we deny them, under our justice system, due process.
 
Reba said:
Their pain can never be healed fully in this life. But does that mean we should allow the knife of injustice to be thrust and twisted again and again in their hearts?

If bringing terrorists to justice never satisfies victims and families, then why do we even bother to have courts and prisons? Why not just ignore all killing and "move on?" Because justice is about more than satisfying families. Even if none of the victims had relatives, we can't allow terrorists to get away with their crimes.
Click to expand...

You're right - We can't allow these terrorists to get away with their crimes.

Justice may be part of having the closure for these victim families but sadly, it won't bring their loved ones back.

Although, I've got to say that Obama may thought he was doing what was right but we all don't really know why or what he is trying to do. There's always a hidden agenda to everything.
 
I wish that everyone here was so understanding and supporting "innocent until proven guilty" when it came to charging Americans with crimes, or wanting to punish them. What a bunch of hypocrites.

All kinds of sympathy and support for accused terrorists. But no waiting for proof before accusing American soldiers of torture or war crimes. Oh, no, that's a different story. American military are always guilty, lying, mean, and covering up. Foreign terrorists are always tortured, abused, treated unfairly, falsely accused, and patriotic.
 
Reba said:
I wish that everyone here was so understanding and supporting "innocent until proven guilty" when it came to charging Americans with crimes, or wanting to punish them. What a bunch of hypocrites.

All kinds of sympathy and support for accused terrorists. But no waiting for proof before accusing American soldiers of torture or war crimes. Oh, no, that's a different story. American military are always guilty, lying, mean, and covering up. Foreign terrorists are always tortured, abused, treated unfairly, falsely accused, and patriotic.
Click to expand...

Guess we are going to have to agree to disagree here. I apply the same standards of the American justice system to Americans as I do to non-Americans being prosecuted under the American justice system. Due process is a right guaranteed to all under our justice system. To refuse to apply it to non-Americans is what is hypocritical.

And your second paragraph contains the word "always" which completely invalidates it.
 
Reba said:
I wish that everyone here was so understanding and supporting "innocent until proven guilty" when it came to charging Americans with crimes, or wanting to punish them. What a bunch of hypocrites.

All kinds of sympathy and support for accused terrorists. But no waiting for proof before accusing American soldiers of torture or war crimes. Oh, no, that's a different story. American military are always guilty, lying, mean, and covering up. Foreign terrorists are always tortured, abused, treated unfairly, falsely accused, and patriotic.
Click to expand...

I am understanding - but you have to realize that there are steps that people have to take. If the steps are messed up for whatever reason, then it's that person fault. Unfortunately, that's how people become free or innocent people are jailed.

We have NO idea WHY Obama dropped the charges. In a legal system, there is limitations on how long you can hold someone on a charge without sufficient evidence (am I right?)....9 years is WAY more than enough time, and yet...maybe the evidence is not enough. That lies in the fault of the legal system.

The problem I have is how people react to situations like these. If the whole story has been released all at once, people are going to analyze every single word and have the words twisted around.

I rather hear the ENTIRE story before being "outraged". Obama will not do that "just for the hell of it".

I'm just sick and tired of having America revolving their world around trying to take down every terrorist. Funny, because I absolutely blame the parents and teachers for raising the child of a terrorist. The child must get their hatred from somewhere.

I can call myself a terrorist if I want to KILL every single person (specific targets) that commit animal abuse. But...I would be put to jail. There's no justice in that.
 
Reba said:
Their pain can never be healed fully in this life. But does that mean we should allow the knife of injustice to be thrust and twisted again and again in their hearts?

If bringing terrorists to justice never satisfies victims and families, then why do we even bother to have courts and prisons? Why not just ignore all killing and "move on?" Because justice is about more than satisfying families. Even if none of the victims had relatives, we can't allow terrorists to get away with their crimes.
Click to expand...

How can we go over the terrorists if America doesn't know where their at?

We been supposedly chasing Osama bin Laden for the last 8 years with no such luck.

Secondly Reba--how do you prosecute a suicide bomber if they are already dead?
 
Reba said:
I wish that everyone here was so understanding and supporting "innocent until proven guilty" when it came to charging Americans with crimes, or wanting to punish them. What a bunch of hypocrites.

All kinds of sympathy and support for accused terrorists. But no waiting for proof before accusing American soldiers of torture or war crimes. Oh, no, that's a different story. American military are always guilty, lying, mean, and covering up. Foreign terrorists are always tortured, abused, treated unfairly, falsely accused, and patriotic.
Click to expand...
I want to make it clear.

The reason I said this,

"American military are always guilty, lying, mean, and covering up. Foreign terrorists are always tortured, abused, treated unfairly, falsely accused, and patriotic,"

is to point out that some people make posts with that viewpoint. I don't support that viewpoint. But there are posters who do, and they relish posting anything that even hints at putting American service men and women in a negative light or putting terrorists in a sympathetic light.
 
We have some of them in custody now. We know where they are--they're in GITMO. The trial process had begun. It was stopped by Obama.

The suicide bombers themselves can't be tried, of course. But their trainers, leaders, and supporters can be tried. The persons who trained them how to use the explosives, gave them the explosives, and gave them the plan are just as guilty.
 
I think maybe what is driving the Obama agenda here is pushing a greater worry about fixing our image with the Muslims. That seems to me to be more of a concern than securing this nation from Islamic terrorists who want to sneak in and harm us. Hopefully new charges will be brought forth.
 
Reba said:
We have some of them in custody now. We know where they are--they're in GITMO. The trial process had begun. It was stopped by Obama.

The suicide bombers themselves can't be tried, of course. But their trainers, leaders, and supporters can be tried. The persons who trained them how to use the explosives, gave them the explosives, and gave them the plan are just as guilty.
Click to expand...

The trial JUST had begun? I didn't see that ANYWHERE. Fact of the matter is, it was a trial hanging in dead air for 9 years. Obama simply did something about it. If he did not do anything about it, wouldn't they just be in jail indefinitely without trial? Yea, that's real American.
 
Charges dropped in USS Cole trial
Man accused in 2000 bombing; Obama to meet with victims' families
The Associated Press
updated 9:06 p.m. ET, Thurs., Feb. 5, 2009

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon's senior judge overseeing terror trials at Guantanamo Bay dropped charges Thursday against an al-Qaida suspect in the 2000 USS Cole bombing, upholding President Barak Obama's order to freeze military tribunals there. The charges against suspected al-Qaida bomber Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri marked the last active Guantanamo war crimes case.

The legal move by Susan J. Crawford, the top legal authority for military trials at Guantanamo, brings all cases into compliance with Obama's Jan. 22 executive order to halt terrorist court proceedings at the U.S. Navy base in Cuba.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said Crawford dismissed the charges against al-Nashiri without prejudice. That means new charges can be brought again later. He will remain in prison for the time being.

"It was her decision, but it reflects the fact that the president has issued an executive order which mandates that the military commissions be halted, pending the outcome of several reviews of our operations down at Guantanamo," Morrell said late Thursday night.

More time to review cases
The ruling also gives the White House time to review the legal cases of all 245 terror suspects held there and decide whether they should be prosecuted in the U.S. or released to other nations.

Obama was expected to meet with families of Cole and 9/11 victims at the White House on Friday afternoon to announce the move.

Seventeen U.S. sailors died on Oct. 12, 2000, when al-Qaida suicide bombers steered an explosives-laden boat into the Cole, a guided-missile destroyer, as it sat in a Yemen port.

The Pentagon last summer charged al-Nashiri, a Saudi Arabian, with "organizing and directing" the bombing and planned to seek the death penalty in the case.

In his Jan. 22 order, Obama promised to shut down the Guantanamo prison within a year. The order also froze all Guantanamo detainee legal cases pending a three-month review as the Obama administration decides where — or whether — to prosecute the suspects who have been held there for years, most without charges.

Two military judges granted Obama's request for a delay in other cases.

But a third military judge, Army Col. James Pohl, defied Obama's order by scheduling a Feb. 9 arraignment for al-Nashiri at Guantanamo. That left the decision on whether to continue to Crawford, whose delay on announcing what she would do prompted widespread concern at the Pentagon that she would refuse to follow orders and allow the court process to continue.

Some angered by Obama's order
Retired Navy Cmdr. Kirk S. Lippold, the commanding officer of the Cole when it was bombed in Yemen in October 2000, said he will be among family members of Cole and 9/11 victims who are meeting with Obama at the White House on Friday afternoon.

Groups representing victims' families were angered by Obama's order, charging they had waited too long already to see the alleged attackers brought to court.

"I was certainly disappointed with the decision to delay the military commissions process," Lippold, now a defense adviser to Military Families United, said in an interview Thursday night. "We have already waited eight years. Justice delayed is justice denied. We must allow the military commission process to go forward."

Crawford was appointed to her post in 2007 by then-President George W. Bush. She was in the news last month when she said interrogation methods used on one suspect at Guantanamo amounted to torture. The Bush administration had maintained it did not torture.

Last year, al-Nashiri said during a Guantanamo hearing that he confessed to helping plot the Cole bombing only because he was tortured by U.S. interrogators. The CIA has admitted he was among terrorist suspects subjected to waterboarding, which simulates drowning, in 2002 and 2003 while being interrogated in secret CIA prisons.
Click to expand...
URL: Charges dropped in USS Cole trial - Guantanamo- msnbc.com
 
Daredevel7 said:
The trial JUST had begun? I didn't see that ANYWHERE. Fact of the matter is, it was a trial hanging in dead air for 9 years. Obama simply did something about it. If he did not do anything about it, wouldn't they just be in jail indefinitely without trial? Yea, that's real American.
Click to expand...

The reason why you don't see that anywhere is because it's secret. Correct me if I'm wrong, Reba - most of these kind of proceedings are done at secret military tribunal courts and/or FISA court.
 
Unclassified portion:
PRESIDENT: Recorder, please read the unclassified summary of evidence for the record. But before you proceed, let me remind Al Nashiri that he must not comment on the evidence at this time. The Detainee will be provided with an opportunity shortly to provide any comments. Recorder, please proceed.

TRANSLATOR: (TRANSLATION OF ABOVE).

RECORDER: The following facts support the determination that the Detainee is an enemy combatant.

a. The Detainee was experienced in military and explosives training, having participated in such activities during his travels to Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Chechnya.

b. On 7 August 1998, near simultaneous truck bombs were detonated at the United States embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. The explosions at the United States embassies resulted in the deaths of 224 people, including 12 Americans. More than 4,585 people were wounded.

c. Mohammad Rashid Daoud Al-Owhali (Al-Owhali), confessed and was later convicted in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, for his role in the al Qaida bombings of the United States embassies in East Africa, which occurred on 7 August 1998. Al-Owhali obtained a Yemeni passport in the name of Khalid Salim Saleh Bin Rashid. Al-Owhali identified the individual who facilitated Al-Owhali's obtaining a Yemeni passport as Bilal, Bilal is known to Federal Bureau of Investigation investigators as Abdul Rahim al Nashiri, the Detainee. Al-Owhali used this same Yemeni passport to travel to Nairobi, Kenya, arriving on 2 August 1998.

d. On 12 October 2000, the USS COLE was attacked by a small bomb-laden boat. The small boat pulled along side the USS COLE and detonated. The explosion opened a 40 foot hole in the USS COLE, killing 17 sailors and injuring approximately 40 personnel.

e. A Federal Bureau of Investigation source identified the Detainee as an important person in al Qaida and the source stated he heard the Detainee helped arrange the USS COLE bombing.

f. Jamal Ahmed Mohammed Ali Al-Badawi (Al-Badawi) stated he met the Detainee in Aden, Yemen in the summer of 1999. Al-Badawi stated he purchased a boat for the Detainee upon a request from the Detainee.

g. Jamal Ahmed Mohammed Ali Al-Badawi stated the Detainee bought explosives in Sadah, Yemen and transported the explosives concealed in fishing coolers.

h. Approximately one and a half months prior to the USS COLE bombing the Detainee explained the details of an operation in the port of Aden, Yemen against a United States Naval ship. The Detainee discussed this operation with Jamal Ahmed Mohammed Ali Al-Badawi (Al-Badawi). The Detainee asked Al-Badawi for assistance videotaping the operation.

i. Jamal Ahmed Mohammed Al-Badawi claimed the Detainee personally funded the USS COLE operation from the Detainee's own sources.

j. Jamal Ahmed Mohammed Al-Badawi was tried and convicted in Yemen for his involvement in the USS COLE bombing. The Detainee was tried in absentia in Yemen, convicted and sentenced to death. The Detainee's conviction was later upheld following appeal.

k. An alias used by the Detainee was found on a contract for the purchase of a vehicle in Yemen, which was used in support of the USS COLE attack. An individual identified the Detainee from a photograph as the person who purchased the vehicle.

l. The Detainee was one of the main suspects for masterminding the attacks on the USS COLE and on the French oil tanker Merchant Vessel Limburg in October 2002.

m. The Detainee was identified on a leadership list for a scientific laboratory in Karachi, Pakistan, which was sponsored by Harakan Desturia Islamia, a Kuwaiti-based Islamic extremist group that raised funds for al Qaida.

n. The Detainee was arrested at the end of October 2002 in the United Arab Emirates. When the Detainee was arrested, he was holding several forged passports from several countries. The passports contained several different identities.

PRESIDENT: Translate.

TRANSLATOR: (TRANSLATION OF UNCLASSIFIED SUMMARY).

RECORDER: Sir, this concludes the summary of unclassified evidence.
Click to expand...
The rest can be read at:

Verbatim Transcript of Combatant Status Review Tribunal Hearing for ISN 10015, Al Nashiri, Abd Al Rahim Hussein Mohammed
 
Why do they keep suspects (terrorists and such) in jail for years before they proceed with the trial? What if they are innocent but cannot get a trial for years? I've been aware for a long time that they do this with a lot of foreign prisoners.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top