A death knell for terror trials in civilian courts?

DailyCaller ^ | 11-19-2010 | Miles Taylor

[JohnHuang2]

In a May 2009 speech, President Barack Obama announced that Ahmed Ghailani, a Guantanamo detainee suspected of involvement in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, would be transferred to the United States for trial in federal court. The president assured his audience that civilian courts were “tough enough” to prosecute terrorists like Ghailani and that justice would be served.

[JohnHuang2]

Boy, I betcha Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is quaking in his bloody boots right now, terrified of facing one of these fierce New York juries in a civilian trial!

He'll be acquitted of 3,000 murders, but they'll nail him with one count of conspiracy to remodel buildings in New York City without a permit. He's toast.

The first and only Gitmo war criminal brought to the U.S. to face a ferocious and menacing jury, Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani got acquitted of 284 charges of conspiracy and murder. But government property was harmed during the process of Ghailani's murdering 224 people, so the liberal jury didn't want to let him off scot-free. The jury sat in the same room with a brutal, savage demolisher of government property -- give him 20 years for that!

Jurors: Why didn't he just poison his victims to death and left the poor buildings alone?

Justice Department prosecutors congratulated themselves that Ghailani won only 284 acquittals, but one count stuck!

The White House painted the thin one-count conviction as a devastating setback for Ghailani and a victory for Obama's imbecility of treating war crimes like a bank robbery. After the tough-as-nails jury announced its verdict, Ghailani embraced his lawyers, celebrating his devastating setback.

DOJ honcho Matthew Miller said that they were "pleased" that "Ghailani now faces a minimum of 20 years in prison and a potential life sentence for his role" in blowing up jam-packed embassies while mysteriously not hurting a fly.

Fresh off his triumphant 'Recovery Summer' tour which showcased a flood of no new jobs, Joe Biden hailed the single-count conviction as a clean sweep. Stand up, stand up, Joe! Biden told Larry King that the verdict is stiffer than if Ghailani had been tried under any of those notoriously permissive, lenient, namby-pamby sissy military tribunals of George Bush's. (Biden also announced plans to turn this winter into 'Single-Conviction Winter'.)

The New York Times also hailed the verdict by attacking Rep. Peter King for being dismayed that Ghailani got off on all murder charges -- apparently closing his eyes to the lone property damage conviction. "This clearly was not enough for [Rep. King]," the editorial complained. Then, a few paragraphs later, the crazy editors blamed the prosecutors' less than "robust" prosecution on Bush, citing the "years of abuse" the poor little darling Ghailani tragically underwent, which "tainted" the case that Bush would not have brought before a civilian court in the first place. That's what the military tribunals are for, but libbies don't think terrorism is that big a deal. (The Times does seem horrified that John Boehner isn't patted down at airports, though.)

Obama-Holder managed to find the one venue that could lose a case like this. If this trial was a test of Obama's vision of bringing all the Gitmo terrorists to America for trial and letting juries fight the War on Terror -- Epic Fail.

Anyway, that's...
My Two Cents...
"JohnHuang2"

[Upstate NY Guy]

It seems to me the outcome in this case is exactly what Obama wanted. Actually not guilty on all charges would be preferable to the Kenyan.

In "The Audacity of Hope" Obama clearly states he will stand with the Muslims: "should the political winds shift in an ugly direction." page 261. The Muslim terrorists are simply following the commands of their religion. And Obama states he will stand with the Muslims when things get ugly. It is really no more complicated than that.

This is what happens when the electorate, and the press, chose to ignore a candidate's record and past and chose instead to follow an idiot based on his abilities to blather about "hope and change".